politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sign In Register

Categories

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Harriet Harman’s comments today have been interpreted as op

SystemSystem Posts: 12,218
edited July 2015 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Harriet Harman’s comments today have been interpreted as opposing Burnham as leader and endorsing Kendall

Harriet Harman’s comments on today’s Sunday Politics (in the video above) have been interpreted as coming out against Andy Burnham and endorsing Liz Kenall as leader. She warned the party not to choose “somebody who we can feel comfortable with” but who can “command the confidence of the country.”

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,036
    edited July 2015
    Her comments on the Budget welfare reforms won't go down well in some quarters either.
    Labour will not oppose Conservative plans in the Budget to limit child tax credits to the first two children, its acting leader Harriet Harman has said.

    She told the BBC Labour's big defeats in the last two elections meant it could not adopt "blanket opposition".

    She said the party must listen to the views of those who had put off having "bigger families" for financial reasons as well as those getting state support.
    Edit: Ohh, and first!
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited July 2015
    Job lot of commas
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,156
    "Sell out!"
    "Scabs!"

    :lol:
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Erm, surely Ed Miliband was censured for *not* boycotting the Sun, and for taking part in Sun publicity stunts?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,156
    "Continuity Miliband"

    They haven't gone away, you know!
  • frpenkridgefrpenkridge Posts: 670
    1. Jarvis Cocker is looking fine for his age.
    2. In the documentary on "Common People" he said he didn't know the name of the Greek girl, nor the course she was on at St Marten's College.
    3. His background in Sheffield was a slight cut above the proletariat, despite what the Guardian says. He did not involve himself in the miners' strike protests.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,156
    Djokovic wins first set on the tie-break (7-1)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    edited July 2015
    Disagree on both counts. Firstly Burnham has not committed to oppose the £23,000 benefits cap, and was indeed booed at a union meeting for doing so, just the £20,000 limit outside of London which was not in the Tory manifesto. Kendall has also opposed the public sector pay freeze. In any case Corbyn is now more of a rival to Burnham than Kendall at the moment, and Corbyn is the real 'comfort zone +' candidate

    Second, the Sun's influence is now far less than it was. It is not even in the top 2 papers read online, it trails both the MailOnline and the Guardian, and in print copies it is losing circulation to free papers like the Metro. Its readership is now more rightleaning than the average voter. In 1997 30% of the nation voted Tory, 30% of Sun readers, by 2015 37% of the nation voted Tory, 47% of Sun readers while 19% of Sun readers voted UKIP compared to 13% of the nation as a whole. Only 24% of Sun readers voted Labour compared to 30% of the nation as a whole.
    https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/06/08/general-election-2015-how-britain-really-voted/

    As a result Labour could win 37% and a small majority, yet win only 31% of Sun readers on a UNS and even trail the Tories amongst Sun readers despite winning the election!
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    frpenkridge said:

    1. Jarvis Cocker is looking fine for his age.
    2. In the documentary on "Common People" he said he didn't know the name of the Greek girl, nor the course she was on at St Marten's College.
    3. His background in Sheffield was a slight cut above the proletariat, despite what the Guardian says. He did not involve himself in the miners' strike protests.

    2. Although he said he thought she was studying sculpture.

    Separately Yanis has said that Danae was the only female Greek sculpture student at St. Martin's College during the relevant years
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,156
    The Sunil on Sunday is wot will win it! :)
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    It is possible, of course, that the Sun's readership leans right precisely because the Sun is so influential, and that if the Sun's editorial were neutral, its readers would be card-carrying communists, or at least LibDems.
  • nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800
    frpenkridge said:

    1. Jarvis Cocker is looking fine for his age.
    2. In the documentary on "Common People" he said he didn't know the name of the Greek girl, nor the course she was on at St Marten's College.
    3. His background in Sheffield was a slight cut above the proletariat, despite what the Guardian says. He did not involve himself in the miners' strike protests.

    I did.
  • john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @HYUFD

    'Firstly Burnham has not committed to oppose the £23,000 benefits cap'

    Of course not,he's waiting to see what the polls say.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,952
    Loving how the EU is happily putting the boot into Greece for all the horror practices that need reforming....yet is happy to have its own EU accounts not signed off for 20 years.

    Hypocrisy? Surely not....
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,156
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    It is possible, of course, that the Sun's readership leans right precisely because the Sun is so influential, and that if the Sun's editorial were neutral, its readers would be card-carrying communists, or at least LibDems.

    "And Sun readers don't mind who's running the country, as long as she has big tits"
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    It is possible, of course, that the Sun's readership leans right precisely because the Sun is so influential, and that if the Sun's editorial were neutral, its readers would be card-carrying communists, or at least LibDems.

    :D

    Not neccessarily communists or LDs, but maybe Sun readers wouldn't view the world in a black and white way, of simple goodies vs badies, and realise that shades of grey exist.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987

    The Sun also has a daily circulation of just over 2 million and readership of 5 million, less than half the 12 million you suggest, indeed the Mail is set to overtake the Sun as the biggest selling daily by the end of 2016
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sun_(United_Kingdom)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    It is possible, of course, that the Sun's readership leans right precisely because the Sun is so influential, and that if the Sun's editorial were neutral, its readers would be card-carrying communists, or at least LibDems.

    "And Sun readers don't mind who's running the country, as long as she has big tits"
    Exactly, I doubt one Sun reader gets the paper for its editorials!
  • nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800
    So where has this sensible Harriet been hiding all this time? It seems that as there is no party line to tow at the moment she is displaying her true self.

    If she had done that a long time ago she may have won the leadership.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    john_zims said:

    @HYUFD

    'Firstly Burnham has not committed to oppose the £23,000 benefits cap'

    Of course not,he's waiting to see what the polls say.

    Or the leadership election to end, as most Labour voters polled oppose the benefits cap while voters as a whole support it!
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    It is possible, of course, that the Sun's readership leans right precisely because the Sun is so influential, and that if the Sun's editorial were neutral, its readers would be card-carrying communists, or at least LibDems.

    "And Sun readers don't mind who's running the country, as long as she has big tits"
    Tbh given how much the paper takes the piss out of the page 3 girl, I'd suggest they want women as far away from thinking and running countries as possible.
  • nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800
    The_Apocalypse said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    It is possible, of course, that the Sun's readership leans right precisely because the Sun is so influential, and that if the Sun's editorial were neutral, its readers would be card-carrying communists, or at least LibDems.

    :D

    Not neccessarily communists or LDs, but maybe Sun readers wouldn't view the world in a black and white way, of simple goodies vs badies, and realise that shades of grey exist.
    They've read that as well.
  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    edited July 2015
    HYUFD said:


    The Sun also has a daily circulation of just over 2 million and readership of 5 million, less than half the 12 million you suggest, indeed the Mail is set to overtake the Sun as the biggest selling daily by the end of 2016
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sun_(United_Kingdom)

    I recollect that was the the Daily Mail and its readership a Leftie on here called despicable just the other day. This seems to be systemic within Labour itself.

    By the time they finish the only interviews they give will be to the Socialist worker or the Beano.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,981
    HYUFD said:


    The Sun also has a daily circulation of just over 2 million and readership of 5 million, less than half the 12 million you suggest, indeed the Mail is set to overtake the Sun as the biggest selling daily by the end of 2016
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sun_(United_Kingdom)

    The 12 million figure is the monthly figure, and comes from the Press Gazette.

    http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/nrs-uk-monthly-readership-sun-falls-behind-independent-amid-mobile-traffic-surge

    But even on your wrong figures, 5 million voters is an awful lot of voters to ignore.
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830
    nigel4england said:

    The_Apocalypse said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    It is possible, of course, that the Sun's readership leans right precisely because the Sun is so influential, and that if the Sun's editorial were neutral, its readers would be card-carrying communists, or at least LibDems.

    :D

    Not neccessarily communists or LDs, but maybe Sun readers wouldn't view the world in a black and white way, of simple goodies vs badies, and realise that shades of grey exist.
    They've read that as well.
    LOL.

    Well that's a turn up for the books!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    The_Apocalypse said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    It is possible, of course, that the Sun's readership leans right precisely because the Sun is so influential, and that if the Sun's editorial were neutral, its readers would be card-carrying communists, or at least LibDems.

    "And Sun readers don't mind who's running the country, as long as she has big tits"
    Tbh given how much the paper takes the piss out of the page 3 girl, I'd suggest they want women as far away from thinking and running countries as possible.
    Except if their surname is Thatcher!
  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    HYUFD said:


    The Sun also has a daily circulation of just over 2 million and readership of 5 million, less than half the 12 million you suggest, indeed the Mail is set to overtake the Sun as the biggest selling daily by the end of 2016
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sun_(United_Kingdom)

    The 12 million figure is the monthly figure, and comes from the Press Gazette.

    http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/nrs-uk-monthly-readership-sun-falls-behind-independent-amid-mobile-traffic-surge

    But even on your wrong figures, 5 million voters is an awful lot of voters to ignore.
    Interesting mathematical quirk that left wingers always seem to halve the number of supporters of their opponents yet on the other hand always manage to at least double the number of people at one of their own protest marches?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    Moses_ said:

    HYUFD said:


    The Sun also has a daily circulation of just over 2 million and readership of 5 million, less than half the 12 million you suggest, indeed the Mail is set to overtake the Sun as the biggest selling daily by the end of 2016
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sun_(United_Kingdom)

    I recollect that was the the Daily Mail and its readership a Leftie on here called despicable just the other day. This seems to be systemic within Labour itself.

    By the time they finish the only interviews they give will be to the Socialist worker or the Beano.
    Although the Guardian is narrowly ahead of MailOnline amongst online readers only with 8.2 million visitors to the Mail's 7.6 million
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guardian#Online_media
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,952
    edited July 2015
    beaten to it...
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830
    I wonder how much of the Mail's online readership is a result of its Showbiz section, and infamous sidebar of shame.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    HYUFD said:


    The Sun also has a daily circulation of just over 2 million and readership of 5 million, less than half the 12 million you suggest, indeed the Mail is set to overtake the Sun as the biggest selling daily by the end of 2016
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sun_(United_Kingdom)

    The 12 million figure is the monthly figure, and comes from the Press Gazette.

    http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/nrs-uk-monthly-readership-sun-falls-behind-independent-amid-mobile-traffic-surge

    But even on your wrong figures, 5 million voters is an awful lot of voters to ignore.
    My figures were daily figures, your figures were monthly, but I really doubt a reader who glances at the Sun once a month will be swung by their editorials.

    Interestingly on combined print + online (PC +Mobile) totals from the Press Gazette the Sun is now only the 7th most widely read paper, behind the Mail, the Mirror, the Guardian, the Telegraph, the Metro and the Independent. That confirms its influence is really a shadow of what it once was!
    http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/nrs-uk-monthly-readership-sun-falls-behind-independent-amid-mobile-traffic-surge
  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    edited July 2015
    HYUFD said:

    Moses_ said:

    HYUFD said:


    The Sun also has a daily circulation of just over 2 million and readership of 5 million, less than half the 12 million you suggest, indeed the Mail is set to overtake the Sun as the biggest selling daily by the end of 2016
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sun_(United_Kingdom)

    I recollect that was the the Daily Mail and its readership a Leftie on here called despicable just the other day. This seems to be systemic within Labour itself.

    By the time they finish the only interviews they give will be to the Socialist worker or the Beano.
    Although the Guardian is narrowly ahead of MailOnline amongst online readers only with 8.2 million visitors to the Mail's 7.6 million
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guardian#Online_media
    Yeah.... I mentioned the Beano .......

    Just didn't know the online readership was 8.2 million.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,932
    Moses_ said:

    HYUFD said:

    Moses_ said:

    HYUFD said:


    The Sun also has a daily circulation of just over 2 million and readership of 5 million, less than half the 12 million you suggest, indeed the Mail is set to overtake the Sun as the biggest selling daily by the end of 2016
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sun_(United_Kingdom)

    I recollect that was the the Daily Mail and its readership a Leftie on here called despicable just the other day. This seems to be systemic within Labour itself.

    By the time they finish the only interviews they give will be to the Socialist worker or the Beano.
    Although the Guardian is narrowly ahead of MailOnline amongst online readers only with 8.2 million visitors to the Mail's 7.6 million
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guardian#Online_media
    Yeah.... I mentioned the Beano .......

    Just didn't know the online readership was 8.2 million.
    During the week they had someone from The Guardian on a business programme on Radio 4. They said that the online readership was split about 1/3 each to the UK, US and the Rest of the World.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    The_Apocalypse said:

    I wonder how much of the Mail's online readership is a result of its Showbiz section, and infamous sidebar of shame.

    Probably at least 50% and more for its overseas readers
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    Moses_ said:

    HYUFD said:

    Moses_ said:

    HYUFD said:


    The Sun also has a daily circulation of just over 2 million and readership of 5 million, less than half the 12 million you suggest, indeed the Mail is set to overtake the Sun as the biggest selling daily by the end of 2016
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sun_(United_Kingdom)

    I recollect that was the the Daily Mail and its readership a Leftie on here called despicable just the other day. This seems to be systemic within Labour itself.

    By the time they finish the only interviews they give will be to the Socialist worker or the Beano.
    Although the Guardian is narrowly ahead of MailOnline amongst online readers only with 8.2 million visitors to the Mail's 7.6 million
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guardian#Online_media
    Yeah.... I mentioned the Beano .......

    Just didn't know the online readership was 8.2 million.
    Indeed, Polly the Minx and Owen the Menace are quite popular with their fanbase!
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,981
    edited July 2015
    Oops, the Sun have exposed Andy Burnham for the vacuous hypocrite he is

    https://twitter.com/SunNation/status/620226192910618624
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,981
    https://twitter.com/SunNation/status/620229066906431488
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    https://twitter.com/SunNation/status/620229066906431488

    Well Ed Miliband speaking to the Sun got him fewer votes amongst its readership than he did nationally, so speaking to the Sun could even have a negative impact it would seem!
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,064
    This whole business with the Sun just goes to show that Burnham is going to be Red Ed mk.II, during the election campaign Ed banned the Sun and other right wing press from his events and the Sun had to sneak into the side entrance. Ed had a knack for preaching to the converted and it looks very much like Burnham will be the same. He is a joke and of he becomes leader Dave, Osborne, Boris and others will make mincemeat of him.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,064
    HYUFD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    https://twitter.com/SunNation/status/620229066906431488

    Well Ed Miliband speaking to the Sun got him fewer votes amongst its readership than he did nationally, so speaking to the Sun could even have a negative impact it would seem!
    That's he most stupid logic I have seen on this website for a while and given the quality of some of the posts we get that is really going some. You have a massive hard on for Burnham, do you have your house staked on him or something?
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,238
    *** Hustings Report ***

    Part 1 - Leader

    Well I'm back home from today's hustings in Newcastle. I won't do into detail, but stick with general perceptions. I thought that Burnham and Corbyn performed as I had anticipated. I agree with most of what Corbyn says, so voting with my heart, he will be getting my first pref. Kendall didn't impress me - as with the TV hustings she gave the impression that she was putting on a persona, rather than being genuine. She is offering Blairism without the charisma of Blair. That leaves Cooper - to me the star of the morning. Right from the start she spoke with passion and dynamism, seeming genuine and in command; she has gone up considerably in my estimation - a view shared by the Corbyn supporter I was sitting next to.

    So, my revised voiting intention:

    1. Corbyn
    2. Cooper
    3 Burnham
    4. Kendall

    It will now take a dramatic turn of events to get me to change.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,328
    I would like to respond to Nick Palmer's thoughtful response on the previous thread (re Mr Corbyn and the company he keeps):-

    Nick: you wrote - "Essentially they come down to the question: "Should you refuse to speak at an event where someone you strongly disagree with is speaking?"

    Surely the question is this: "Should you accept an invitation to speak at such an event?"

    First, you are not obliged to accept every invitation you receive. So those you do accept tell you something about the person accepting it. Second, in the case of one of those events, the speaker was not merely someone with whom Corbyn (and you and I, no doubt) disagreed but someone who can properly be described as a "hate preacher". Now why would you want to speak at an event organised by such a person?

    If what you were doing was going there to disagree, to put the counter-argument, to show up these hate preachers for the disgusting people they are, then there might be some value. But is that what Corbyn is doing? Or is he - by being there - giving some sort of cover of respectability to what is the Islamist version of the Klu Klux Klan.

    There are too many instances of some Labour MPs (Corbyn is one, Andy Slaughter another, Livingstone) who associate with these people and do nothing to condemn or criticise or argue vigorously against their ideology and who, by their attendance, are giving (whether they intend to or not) some sort of respectability or cover for people to spread poisonous views. And we have seen - and are seeing - the consequences of these poisonous views being spread. People who talk about the Jew being filth; and people who go to Jewish schools and shoot 7 year old girls dead in front of their parents.

    So the question for Corbyn is "why" of all the people you can associate with in these days, do you choose to associate with these? It is not enough to say, IMO, well I'm not an anti-Semite and therefore it does not matter who I break bread with. If you're a public person, if you're someone who wants to lead the official Opposition, who wants - therefore - to be Prime Minister of this country, I think you have the obligation - at the very least - to think about what you are doing a bit more carefully and to have an answer to questions like mine.

    I'm not a Labour party member so I don't count. However, I do note that no-one has raised this issue and what it says about Corbyn's judgment and at a time when we are struggling with the spread of extremist and disgustingly illiberal ideas and the consequences of people so radicalised by such ideas that they go out and kill people I find it troubling that so many in the Labour party seem to think that this does not matter. Fellow travellers and useful idiots (in Lenin's phrase) and the naive are not excused explaining their actions and their judgment.

    At best Corbyn is displaying a stunning naivety. I don't think this is the quality one wants in a leader of a major political party.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,156
    edited July 2015
    Federer wins the second set against Djokovic on another tie-break (12-10)

    One set all - Game on!
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,238
    *** Hustings Report ***

    Part 2 - Deputy Leader

    I though all five candidates came over very well. They all need to have prominant roles in the Shad Cab to take the fight to the Tories. One of the questions was on voting reform (hurray!) and Stella came out as a fan of AV+. I'm not sure how that differs from AV - perhaps we can have a thread?

    Anyway, I felt that Flint came out on top. No nonsense, fiery, up for the fight. She swayed my vote, so I am now planning:

    1. Flint
    2. Creasy
    3. Watson
    4. Bradshaw
    5. Eagle
  • nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800
    SandyRentool said:

    *** Hustings Report ***

    Part 2 - Deputy Leader

    I though all five candidates came over very well. They all need to have prominant roles in the Shad Cab to take the fight to the Tories. One of the questions was on voting reform (hurray!) and Stella came out as a fan of AV+. I'm not sure how that differs from AV - perhaps we can have a thread?

    Anyway, I felt that Flint came out on top. No nonsense, fiery, up for the fight. She swayed my vote, so I am now planning:

    1. Flint
    2. Creasy
    3. Watson
    4. Bradshaw
    5. Eagle

    Having read part 1&2 I don't think the Tories have much to worry about for at least ten years.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    SandyRentool said:

    *** Hustings Report ***

    Part 1 - Leader

    Well I'm back home from today's hustings in Newcastle. I won't do into detail, but stick with general perceptions. I thought that Burnham and Corbyn performed as I had anticipated. I agree with most of what Corbyn says, so voting with my heart, he will be getting my first pref. Kendall didn't impress me - as with the TV hustings she gave the impression that she was putting on a persona, rather than being genuine. She is offering Blairism without the charisma of Blair. That leaves Cooper - to me the star of the morning. Right from the start she spoke with passion and dynamism, seeming genuine and in command; she has gone up considerably in my estimation - a view shared by the Corbyn supporter I was sitting next to.

    So, my revised voiting intention:

    1. Corbyn
    2. Cooper
    3 Burnham
    4. Kendall

    It will now take a dramatic turn of events to get me to change.

    In terms of electability I go Burnham, Kendall, Cooper, Corbyn so almost the reverse of what you have! If Corbyn were to win I think even Osborne could beat him in 2020
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,871
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    HYUFD said:


    The Sun also has a daily circulation of just over 2 million and readership of 5 million, less than half the 12 million you suggest, indeed the Mail is set to overtake the Sun as the biggest selling daily by the end of 2016
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sun_(United_Kingdom)

    The 12 million figure is the monthly figure, and comes from the Press Gazette.

    http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/nrs-uk-monthly-readership-sun-falls-behind-independent-amid-mobile-traffic-surge

    But even on your wrong figures, 5 million voters is an awful lot of voters to ignore.
    He isn't ignoring 5 million voters, he's ignoring The Sun as a means of reaching them. Presumably Sun readers are exposed to other forms of media during their daily lives. I'm not saying it's the right decision, but let's get it in perspective.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,952
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Oops, the Sun have exposed Andy Burnham for the vacuous hypocrite he is

    https://twitter.com/SunNation/status/620226192910618624

    That is seriously damaging image for Burnham.... Fool!
  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    frpenkridge said:

    1. Jarvis Cocker is looking fine for his age.
    2. In the documentary on "Common People" he said he didn't know the name of the Greek girl, nor the course she was on at St Marten's College.
    3. His background in Sheffield was a slight cut above the proletariat, despite what the Guardian says. He did not involve himself in the miners' strike protests.

    Cocker had a youthful aversion to miners since they tended to beat him and his Sheffield art ghetto set up back in the day.
  • dugarbandierdugarbandier Posts: 2,596
    MaxPB said:

    This whole business with the Sun just goes to show that Burnham is going to be Red Ed mk.II, during the election campaign Ed banned the Sun and other right wing press from his events and the Sun had to sneak into the side entrance. Ed had a knack for preaching to the converted and it looks very much like Burnham will be the same. He is a joke and of he becomes leader Dave, Osborne, Boris and others will make mincemeat of him.

    not at all. Ed despises the Sun but posed with it anyway. Burnham has done a lot related to Hillsborough. There's no way he coud easily deal with the Sun without being seen as betraying constituents. He might manage if th Sun made some kind of (extra?) apology.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    MaxPB said:

    This whole business with the Sun just goes to show that Burnham is going to be Red Ed mk.II, during the election campaign Ed banned the Sun and other right wing press from his events and the Sun had to sneak into the side entrance. Ed had a knack for preaching to the converted and it looks very much like Burnham will be the same. He is a joke and of he becomes leader Dave, Osborne, Boris and others will make mincemeat of him.

    Yet the only net favourability poll we have of the candidates amongst the public had Burnham on +14%, Kendall +6%, Cooper -6%, Corbyn -15% so Burnham actually has most appeal amongst those who really need to be converted, the voters!

    In any case given Sun readers voted 24% Labour while the nation voted 30% Labour in 2015 they are less likely to be converted to Labour than the average voter
    https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/06/08/general-election-2015-how-britain-really-voted/
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    MaxPB said:

    HYUFD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    https://twitter.com/SunNation/status/620229066906431488

    Well Ed Miliband speaking to the Sun got him fewer votes amongst its readership than he did nationally, so speaking to the Sun could even have a negative impact it would seem!
    That's he most stupid logic I have seen on this website for a while and given the quality of some of the posts we get that is really going some. You have a massive hard on for Burnham, do you have your house staked on him or something?
    Well you may dislike the statement but it is factually correct, Miliband won 24% with Sun readers, he got 30% across the UK
  • dugarbandierdugarbandier Posts: 2,596
    MarqueeMark said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Oops, the Sun have exposed Andy Burnham for the vacuous hypocrite he is

    https://twitter.com/SunNation/status/620226192910618624

    That is seriously damaging image for Burnham.... Fool!
    that might blow my argument oot the watter
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,156
    Andy Spurn'em :)
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,175
    HYUFD said:


    The Sun also has a daily circulation of just over 2 million and readership of 5 million, less than half the 12 million you suggest, indeed the Mail is set to overtake the Sun as the biggest selling daily by the end of 2016
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sun_(United_Kingdom)

    Lol - so readers are deserting to the Sun for the Mail - that well known friend to the Labour Party. Really, your obsession for all things Burnham gets ever more bizarre as you try to think up new reasons why he is the best thing ever...since.. err...Ed Miliband! :)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    Luckyguy1983 said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    HYUFD said:


    The Sun also has a daily circulation of just over 2 million and readership of 5 million, less than half the 12 million you suggest, indeed the Mail is set to overtake the Sun as the biggest selling daily by the end of 2016
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sun_(United_Kingdom)

    The 12 million figure is the monthly figure, and comes from the Press Gazette.

    http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/nrs-uk-monthly-readership-sun-falls-behind-independent-amid-mobile-traffic-surge

    But even on your wrong figures, 5 million voters is an awful lot of voters to ignore.
    He isn't ignoring 5 million voters, he's ignoring The Sun as a means of reaching them. Presumably Sun readers are exposed to other forms of media during their daily lives. I'm not saying it's the right decision, but let's get it in perspective.
    Indeed, in the internet age and with the rise of free papers like the Metro it would be laughable to claim 'It was the Sun Wot won it' in future elections
  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    MarqueeMark said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Oops, the Sun have exposed Andy Burnham for the vacuous hypocrite he is

    https://twitter.com/SunNation/status/620226192910618624

    That is seriously damaging image for Burnham.... Fool!
    That picture's a gotcha.
  • PaulyPauly Posts: 897
    As the scouser who defended him in the last thread he has just lost any little faith I had left in him.
    MonikerDiCanio said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Oops, the Sun have exposed Andy Burnham for the vacuous hypocrite he is

    https://twitter.com/SunNation/status/620226192910618624

    That is seriously damaging image for Burnham.... Fool!
    That picture's a gotcha.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    felix said:

    HYUFD said:


    The Sun also has a daily circulation of just over 2 million and readership of 5 million, less than half the 12 million you suggest, indeed the Mail is set to overtake the Sun as the biggest selling daily by the end of 2016
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sun_(United_Kingdom)

    Lol - so readers are deserting to the Sun for the Mail - that well known friend to the Labour Party. Really, your obsession for all things Burnham gets ever more bizarre as you try to think up new reasons why he is the best thing ever...since.. err...Ed Miliband! :)
    More relevant is the combined print + online (PC +Mobile) totals from the Press Gazette where the Sun is now only the 7th most widely read paper, behind the Mail, the Mirror, the Guardian, the Telegraph, the Metro and the Independent. Its readership overall is therefore nowhere near as influential as it used to be. In fact of the top 7 papers 3 have Labour readerships, the Mirror, the Guardian, the Independent, 3 Tory readerships the Mail, the Telegraph and the Sun. Metro readers I imagine swing with the national trend, in future the Metro may have more scope to say 'It was the Metro wot won it!' than the Sun!
    http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/nrs-uk-monthly-readership-sun-falls-behind-independent-amid-mobile-traffic-surge
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    Well, Kendall needs all the help she can get at this point, if reports are correct.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    Oh, Greece - if the only hold up at the moment is trust that the proposals will be delivered and not the proposals themselves, I think we all know even those lacking in trust will be prepared to make believe for another few months and years that they will be delivered.
  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    edited July 2015
    Pauly said:

    As the scouser who defended him in the last thread he has just lost any little faith I had left in him.

    MonikerDiCanio said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Oops, the Sun have exposed Andy Burnham for the vacuous hypocrite he is

    https://twitter.com/SunNation/status/620226192910618624

    That is seriously damaging image for Burnham.... Fool!
    That picture's a gotcha.
    As OGH said the man's a fool. Labour will have to look elsewhere now that Burnham has turned himself into a public laughing stock. I had hoped that Labour would elect him as leader but that's clearly impossible after this revelation.
  • DisraeliDisraeli Posts: 1,106
    Pauly said:

    As the scouser who defended him in the last thread he has just lost any little faith I had left in him.

    MonikerDiCanio said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Oops, the Sun have exposed Andy Burnham for the vacuous hypocrite he is

    https://twitter.com/SunNation/status/620226192910618624

    That is seriously damaging image for Burnham.... Fool!
    That picture's a gotcha.
    Gutsy call, Pauly!

    (I've a soft spot for Liverpool - I approve of it's choice of statues)
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,533
    Burnham again shows he is a total idiot...
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    MonikerDiCanio said:

    Pauly said:

    As the scouser who defended him in the last thread he has just lost any little faith I had left in him.

    MonikerDiCanio said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Oops, the Sun have exposed Andy Burnham for the vacuous hypocrite he is

    https://twitter.com/SunNation/status/620226192910618624

    That is seriously damaging image for Burnham.... Fool!
    That picture's a gotcha.
    As OGH said the man's a fool. Labour will have to look elsewhere now that Burnham has turned himself into a public laughing stock. I had hoped that Labour would elect him as leader but that's clearly impossible.
    Why? He polls best amongst the public, he has the highest favourability rating amongst the public, even better than Kendall. If Labour has some sense it will elect a leader who actually polls well, unlike 2010 when it elected Ed despite him trailing well behind David in public polls
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,175
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Burnham again shows he is a total idiot...

    Now wait a minute - give HYUFD a chance to rebut! :)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    edited July 2015
    MonikerDiCanio said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Oops, the Sun have exposed Andy Burnham for the vacuous hypocrite he is

    https://twitter.com/SunNation/status/620226192910618624

    That is seriously damaging image for Burnham.... Fool!
    That picture's a gotcha.
    The Hillsborough inquiry reported in 2012, well after that photo was taken
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,175
    HYUFD said:

    felix said:

    HYUFD said:


    The Sun also has a daily circulation of just over 2 million and readership of 5 million, less than half the 12 million you suggest, indeed the Mail is set to overtake the Sun as the biggest selling daily by the end of 2016
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sun_(United_Kingdom)

    Lol - so readers are deserting to the Sun for the Mail - that well known friend to the Labour Party. Really, your obsession for all things Burnham gets ever more bizarre as you try to think up new reasons why he is the best thing ever...since.. err...Ed Miliband! :)
    More relevant is the combined print + online (PC +Mobile) totals from the Press Gazette where the Sun is now only the 7th most widely read paper, behind the Mail, the Mirror, the Guardian, the Telegraph, the Metro and the Independent. Its readership overall is therefore nowhere near as influential as it used to be. In fact of the top 7 papers 3 have Labour readerships, the Mirror, the Guardian, the Independent, 3 Tory readerships the Mail, the Telegraph and the Sun. Metro readers I imagine swing with the national trend, in future the Metro may have more scope to say 'It was the Metro wot won it!' than the Sun!
    http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/nrs-uk-monthly-readership-sun-falls-behind-independent-amid-mobile-traffic-surge
    And yet again you miss the whole point - none of the papers should be subjected to the Burnham group sulk on-line, off-line or in the Cabs! FFS Grow up!
  • nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800
    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    This whole business with the Sun just goes to show that Burnham is going to be Red Ed mk.II, during the election campaign Ed banned the Sun and other right wing press from his events and the Sun had to sneak into the side entrance. Ed had a knack for preaching to the converted and it looks very much like Burnham will be the same. He is a joke and of he becomes leader Dave, Osborne, Boris and others will make mincemeat of him.

    Yet the only net favourability poll we have of the candidates amongst the public had Burnham on +14%, Kendall +6%, Cooper -6%, Corbyn -15% so Burnham actually has most appeal amongst those who really need to be converted, the voters!

    In any case given Sun readers voted 24% Labour while the nation voted 30% Labour in 2015 they are less likely to be converted to Labour than the average voter
    https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/06/08/general-election-2015-how-britain-really-voted/
    By those figures you could argue that the whole of Liverpool voted Labour.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,175
    HYUFD said:



    MonikerDiCanio said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Oops, the Sun have exposed Andy Burnham for the vacuous hypocrite he is

    https://twitter.com/SunNation/status/620226192910618624

    That is seriously damaging image for Burnham.... Fool!
    That picture's a gotcha.
    The Hillsborough inquiry reported in 2012, well after that photo was taken
    ROFLLMFAOWMTITA.
  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Oops, the Sun have exposed Andy Burnham for the vacuous hypocrite he is

    https://twitter.com/SunNation/status/620226192910618624

    Did he pay for that taxi or was the ride "a favour?"
  • DisraeliDisraeli Posts: 1,106
    HYUFD said:



    MonikerDiCanio said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Oops, the Sun have exposed Andy Burnham for the vacuous hypocrite he is

    https://twitter.com/SunNation/status/620226192910618624

    That is seriously damaging image for Burnham.... Fool!
    That picture's a gotcha.
    The Hillsborough inquiry reported in 2012, well after that photo was taken
    Weak, HYUFD, very weak.
    The Sun published its filth over 20 years before that, and the Hillsborough inquiry report did nothing to change attitudes,e.g.
    "Postal workers near Liverpool are threatening to walk out if they are made to deliver free promotional copies of the Sun later this week."
    http://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2014/jun/10/sun-hillsborough-disaster

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    felix said:

    HYUFD said:

    felix said:

    HYUFD said:


    The Sun also has a daily circulation of just over 2 million and readership of 5 million, less than half the 12 million you suggest, indeed the Mail is set to overtake the Sun as the biggest selling daily by the end of 2016
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sun_(United_Kingdom)

    Lol - so readers are deserting to the Sun for the Mail - that well known friend to the Labour Party. Really, your obsession for all things Burnham gets ever more bizarre as you try to think up new reasons why he is the best thing ever...since.. err...Ed Miliband! :)
    More relevant is the combined print + online (PC +Mobile) totals from the Press Gazette where the Sun is now only the 7th most widely read paper, behind the Mail, the Mirror, the Guardian, the Telegraph, the Metro and the Independent. Its readership overall is therefore nowhere near as influential as it used to be. In fact of the top 7 papers 3 have Labour readerships, the Mirror, the Guardian, the Independent, 3 Tory readerships the Mail, the Telegraph and the Sun. Metro readers I imagine swing with the national trend, in future the Metro may have more scope to say 'It was the Metro wot won it!' than the Sun!
    http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/nrs-uk-monthly-readership-sun-falls-behind-independent-amid-mobile-traffic-surge
    And yet again you miss the whole point - none of the papers should be subjected to the Burnham group sulk on-line, off-line or in the Cabs! FFS Grow up!
    As Dugarbandier states he cannot easily be associated with the Hillsborough victims campaign and the Sun at the same time until the Sun issues an apology
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    nigel4england said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    This whole business with the Sun just goes to show that Burnham is going to be Red Ed mk.II, during the election campaign Ed banned the Sun and other right wing press from his events and the Sun had to sneak into the side entrance. Ed had a knack for preaching to the converted and it looks very much like Burnham will be the same. He is a joke and of he becomes leader Dave, Osborne, Boris and others will make mincemeat of him.

    Yet the only net favourability poll we have of the candidates amongst the public had Burnham on +14%, Kendall +6%, Cooper -6%, Corbyn -15% so Burnham actually has most appeal amongst those who really need to be converted, the voters!

    In any case given Sun readers voted 24% Labour while the nation voted 30% Labour in 2015 they are less likely to be converted to Labour than the average voter
    https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/06/08/general-election-2015-how-britain-really-voted/
    By those figures you could argue that the whole of Liverpool voted Labour.
    Not sure how that follows, although of course Labour did win every seat in Liverpool!
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    felix said:

    HYUFD said:



    MonikerDiCanio said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Oops, the Sun have exposed Andy Burnham for the vacuous hypocrite he is

    https://twitter.com/SunNation/status/620226192910618624

    That is seriously damaging image for Burnham.... Fool!
    That picture's a gotcha.
    The Hillsborough inquiry reported in 2012, well after that photo was taken
    ROFLLMFAOWMTITA.
    Haven't seen WMTITA for a while

    Whatever happened to Seth and his cousin Avery?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    Disraeli said:

    HYUFD said:



    MonikerDiCanio said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Oops, the Sun have exposed Andy Burnham for the vacuous hypocrite he is

    https://twitter.com/SunNation/status/620226192910618624

    That is seriously damaging image for Burnham.... Fool!
    That picture's a gotcha.
    The Hillsborough inquiry reported in 2012, well after that photo was taken
    Weak, HYUFD, very weak.
    The Sun published its filth over 20 years before that, and the Hillsborough inquiry report did nothing to change attitudes,e.g.
    "Postal workers near Liverpool are threatening to walk out if they are made to deliver free promotional copies of the Sun later this week."
    http://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2014/jun/10/sun-hillsborough-disaster

    It was the Hillsbourough inquiry which first clearly confirmed the Sun had been wrong to put some of the blame for the deaths in the disaster on the victims themselves
  • DisraeliDisraeli Posts: 1,106
    This thread reminds me of this:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzhH2hlNSfs

    (2 minute extract from "12 Angry Men" - a great scene)
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,981
    HYUFD said:

    felix said:

    HYUFD said:

    felix said:

    HYUFD said:


    The Sun also has a daily circulation of just over 2 million and readership of 5 million, less than half the 12 million you suggest, indeed the Mail is set to overtake the Sun as the biggest selling daily by the end of 2016
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sun_(United_Kingdom)

    Lol - so readers are deserting to the Sun for the Mail - that well known friend to the Labour Party. Really, your obsession for all things Burnham gets ever more bizarre as you try to think up new reasons why he is the best thing ever...since.. err...Ed Miliband! :)
    More relevant is the combined print + online (PC +Mobile) totals from the Press Gazette where the Sun is now only the 7th most widely read paper, behind the Mail, the Mirror, the Guardian, the Telegraph, the Metro and the Independent. Its readership overall is therefore nowhere near as influential as it used to be. In fact of the top 7 papers 3 have Labour readerships, the Mirror, the Guardian, the Independent, 3 Tory readerships the Mail, the Telegraph and the Sun. Metro readers I imagine swing with the national trend, in future the Metro may have more scope to say 'It was the Metro wot won it!' than the Sun!
    http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/nrs-uk-monthly-readership-sun-falls-behind-independent-amid-mobile-traffic-surge
    And yet again you miss the whole point - none of the papers should be subjected to the Burnham group sulk on-line, off-line or in the Cabs! FFS Grow up!
    As Dugarbandier states he cannot easily be associated with the Hillsborough victims campaign and the Sun at the same time until the Sun issues an apology
    The Sun has issued several apologies. Including one in 2004. They also issued apologies in 2011 via the Murdochs then another one in 2012.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @BBCNormanS: Andy Burnham statement after @HarrietHarman backs Govt cuts to child tax credits - "Andy opposes cuts to chlld tax credits"
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,366

    The picture isn't damaging in the least. Virtually all politicians are hypocrites, and all the ones who make it to the top most definitely are.
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830
    kle4 said:

    Well, Kendall needs all the help she can get at this point, if reports are correct.

    All that Kendall needs to do is to stop being so dogmatic regarding her Blairism.

  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Harriet Harman pushing me closer to voting Corbyn. It seems these people aren't going to learn that their job is to OPPOSE until we send them a strong enough message.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Although I don't agree with Andy on the Sun (and I'm a Scouser). Can't turn down the chance to sell your message i n one of the most widely-read platforms.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,156
    edited July 2015
    Djokovic two sets up, takes third set 6-4.
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    HYUFD said:

    felix said:

    HYUFD said:

    felix said:

    HYUFD said:


    The Sun also has a daily circulation of just over 2 million and readership of 5 million, less than half the 12 million you suggest, indeed the Mail is set to overtake the Sun as the biggest selling daily by the end of 2016
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sun_(United_Kingdom)

    Lol - so readers are deserting to the Sun for the Mail - that well known friend to the Labour Party. Really, your obsession for all things Burnham gets ever more bizarre as you try to think up new reasons why he is the best thing ever...since.. err...Ed Miliband! :)
    More relevant is the combined print + online (PC +Mobile) totals from the Press Gazette where the Sun is now only the 7th most widely read paper, behind the Mail, the Mirror, the Guardian, the Telegraph, the Metro and the Independent. Its readership overall is therefore nowhere near as influential as it used to be. In fact of the top 7 papers 3 have Labour readerships, the Mirror, the Guardian, the Independent, 3 Tory readerships the Mail, the Telegraph and the Sun. Metro readers I imagine swing with the national trend, in future the Metro may have more scope to say 'It was the Metro wot won it!' than the Sun!
    http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/nrs-uk-monthly-readership-sun-falls-behind-independent-amid-mobile-traffic-surge
    And yet again you miss the whole point - none of the papers should be subjected to the Burnham group sulk on-line, off-line or in the Cabs! FFS Grow up!
    As Dugarbandier states he cannot easily be associated with the Hillsborough victims campaign and the Sun at the same time until the Sun issues an apology
    The Sun has issued several apologies. Including one in 2004. They also issued apologies in 2011 via the Murdochs then another one in 2012.
    Maybe The Sun should stop doing these kinds of things in the first place, and then they wouldn't have to shell out apologies.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    HYUFD said:

    felix said:

    HYUFD said:

    felix said:

    HYUFD said:


    The Sun also has a daily circulation of just over 2 million and readership of 5 million, less than half the 12 million you suggest, indeed the Mail is set to overtake the Sun as the biggest selling daily by the end of 2016
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sun_(United_Kingdom)

    Lol - so readers are deserting to the Sun for the Mail - that well known friend to the Labour Party. Really, your obsession for all things Burnham gets ever more bizarre as you try to think up new reasons why he is the best thing ever...since.. err...Ed Miliband! :)
    More relevant is the combined print + online (PC +Mobile) totals from the Press Gazette where the Sun is now only the 7th most widely read paper, behind the Mail, the Mirror, the Guardian, the Telegraph, the Metro and the Independent. Its readership overall is therefore nowhere near as influential as it used to be. In fact of the top 7 papers 3 have Labour readerships, the Mirror, the Guardian, the Independent, 3 Tory readerships the Mail, the Telegraph and the Sun. Metro readers I imagine swing with the national trend, in future the Metro may have more scope to say 'It was the Metro wot won it!' than the Sun!
    http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/nrs-uk-monthly-readership-sun-falls-behind-independent-amid-mobile-traffic-surge
    And yet again you miss the whole point - none of the papers should be subjected to the Burnham group sulk on-line, off-line or in the Cabs! FFS Grow up!
    As Dugarbandier states he cannot easily be associated with the Hillsborough victims campaign and the Sun at the same time until the Sun issues an apology
    The Sun has issued several apologies. Including one in 2004. They also issued apologies in 2011 via the Murdochs then another one in 2012.
    He has not said he will not go out of his way to do exclusive interviews with the Sun or court it, that is not the same as saying he will not do any interviews with it or that it cannot attend press conferences etc

    Mr Burnham told the BBC he had not forgiven the paper for its coverage of the 1989 Hillsborough disaster.
    He said he did not do "special favours" for papers "attacking" him or Labour.

    "I give interviews generally and people can REPORT my words. But I don't do special favours for newspapers that attack me and attack my party."
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33496931
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,064
    Danny565 said:

    Harriet Harman pushing me closer to voting Corbyn. It seems these people aren't going to learn that their job is to OPPOSE until we send them a strong enough message.

    No the job of the party is to win power. Kendall can do that, the others can't. Until Labour can come to terms with the fact that socialism doesn't play well in England then they will remain bereft of power. Foot, Kinnock, Brown and Miliband were out on the left and none of them even came close to the keys of No. 10, Burnham and Corbyn will have the same problem.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    Scott_P said:

    @BBCNormanS: Andy Burnham statement after @HarrietHarman backs Govt cuts to child tax credits - "Andy opposes cuts to chlld tax credits"

    He has not ruled out backing the £23,000 overall benefit cap, but he may well oppose some of the details, like the end to child tax credits, the public sector pay freeze and the exclusion of young people from housing benefit and the living wage
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @DPJHodges: If Labour shadow ministers want to oppose official party policy, that's fine. But they should resign from the shadow cabinet first.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,156
    Charles said:

    felix said:

    HYUFD said:



    MonikerDiCanio said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Oops, the Sun have exposed Andy Burnham for the vacuous hypocrite he is

    https://twitter.com/SunNation/status/620226192910618624

    That is seriously damaging image for Burnham.... Fool!
    That picture's a gotcha.
    The Hillsborough inquiry reported in 2012, well after that photo was taken
    ROFLLMFAOWMTITA.
    Haven't seen WMTITA for a while

    Whatever happened to Seth and his cousin Avery?
    Gone to the Yellow Box in the Sky?
  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    edited July 2015
    Scott_P said:

    @BBCNormanS: Andy Burnham statement after @HarrietHarman backs Govt cuts to child tax credits - "Andy opposes cuts to chlld tax credits"

    Like rats in a taxi emblazoned with Sun logos.

    The enquiry Hillsborough enquiry had nothing really to do with it so some need to go read the story again.

    Back to reality.......

    Despite that and whatever points anyone is trying to make it was a tragedy of monumental proportions.

    I have two girls now grown up but I very regularly think of the two sisters that were lost on that day when I look at my girls. I have never quite managed to see how the parents dealt with that unimaginable loss with the fortitude and bravery they did.

    The fathers account of going to the mortuary and then returning home to mum and telling her " the girls were gone" her incredulous reply being " what both of them? " is etched on my mind for ever. I can hear him him saying that even now... It was and remains heartbreaking. That's just one story of the 96. Of course .

    I am not a Scouse,
    I am not from Liverpool and
    I don't like football.

    I am first and foremost a Dad to two girls that very fortunately are still here. That is enough for me. It shouldn't have happened but it did and the legacy for all parties is to prevent another repeat.
  • DisraeliDisraeli Posts: 1,106
    Burnham is the new Blair...........(Lionel Blair, that is)
    Lionel Blair : "Give us a clue"
    Andy Burnham : "Hasn't got a clue"
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    MaxPB said:

    Danny565 said:

    Harriet Harman pushing me closer to voting Corbyn. It seems these people aren't going to learn that their job is to OPPOSE until we send them a strong enough message.

    No the job of the party is to win power. Kendall can do that, the others can't. Until Labour can come to terms with the fact that socialism doesn't play well in England then they will remain bereft of power. Foot, Kinnock, Brown and Miliband were out on the left and none of them even came close to the keys of No. 10, Burnham and Corbyn will have the same problem.
    Attlee and Wilson both won 6 elections between them, Blair won 3. Kinnock may well have beaten Thatcher in 1992 had she remained Tory leader, Brown could well have led the largest party in 2007 had he not bottled out and called an election then.

    You also ignore the fact Burnham has even higher net favourables than Kendall. Kendall may be more electable than Cooper and certainly Corbyn, but for me Burnham is actually better for Labour than Kendall, in part because he is likely to keep the core from defecting to the Greens and do better in Scotland while also having the same appeal she has to floaters (and that is not Tories but those who backed Blair in 2005 then switched to Cameron)
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-leadership-andy-burnham-considered-the-contender-most-likely-to-improve-partys-general-election-chances-10340208.html
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    edited July 2015
    The recent victories of Obama, Hollande, Syriza etc also suggests that once a centre-right party has been in power for a reasonable time its opponents do not necessarily have to be Clinton/Blair/Schroder New Democrats to win. That does not mean Kendall would not also win, but it does mean they do not necessarily have to elect her alone to win. Although Corbyn may be a step too far for Middle England I agree
  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    CD13 said:


    The picture isn't damaging in the least. Virtually all politicians are hypocrites, and all the ones who make it to the top most definitely are.

    Death cab for Andy
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,156
    HYUFD - what does the acronym HYUFD stand for? Just curious!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    Scott_P said:

    @DPJHodges: If Labour shadow ministers want to oppose official party policy, that's fine. But they should resign from the shadow cabinet first.

    There is no official party policy at the moment as Harman is the acting leader, not the elected leader, that will have to wait until September
  • frpenkridgefrpenkridge Posts: 670
    Charles said:

    frpenkridge said:

    1. Jarvis Cocker is looking fine for his age.
    2. In the documentary on "Common People" he said he didn't know the name of the Greek girl, nor the course she was on at St Marten's College.
    3. His background in Sheffield was a slight cut above the proletariat, despite what the Guardian says. He did not involve himself in the miners' strike protests.

    2. Although he said he thought she was studying sculpture.

    Separately Yanis has said that Danae was the only female Greek sculpture student at St. Martin's College during the relevant years
    In the documentary Jarvis said the sculpture bit was "artistic licence". The documentary checked out the only sculpture student at the time and it was
    Klitsa Antoniou. Jarvis looked at her photo and said it wasn't her either.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,156
    Have a feeling Federer's lost this. Djokovic just broke his serve in the fourth set.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,036
    Okay, so Labour leadership candidates are tying themselves in knots this afternoon.
    I wonder if anyone talking about boycotting the Sun would be interested in boycotting the Guardian, given their dozens of 'corrections' about the Milly Dowler story?
Sign In or Register to comment.