Back from hols where I was planning on offering a bet that JC will indeed step aside at a late stage - he's not a leader and reminds me in some ways of a certain kipper / independent MP from the Thames Estuary area
Welcome back. I assume you had a pleasant tour of the newly-won constituencies.. a night in each one, was it?
He really WAS a lover-of-Irish-terrorists and a sucker-up to violent Islamists.
However "principled" he is, I reckon he'd get 23% at a General Election.
He lacks Miliband's "wonkiness" He is articulate, unlike Miliband You can see yourself talking over a pint with him, unlike Miliband.
You have become a joke. Talk over a pint? With that loon? I doubt anyone human would get past the Martin in McGuinness - never mind the General in Galtieri. Why would anyone want to risk wasting their money over him? As for voting?
Ken Livingstone came up with this claim the other day. One small problem with it. Corbyn's teetotal
I'm teetotal too - but that hasn't stopped me attending numerous PB bashes in London
Actually a Sergeant move would be yet another disaster for Labour. An undefeated Corbyn who thinks he has the right to set the policy agenda for the party would be calamitous. Even the perception that this was the case would make the 2020 election a walk in the park for the tories.
The sad truth, which Corbyn is so callously exposing, is that the gulf between what the average Labour member thinks and even those who vote Labour, let alone the rest of the country, has probably never been greater. The membership like him because he indulges their fantasies and supposed verities, verities that the public found to be disproven some time in the early 80s when Corbyn was first elected.
I can understand the desire, even desperation, for the sane in Labour to find some excuse to bring this chaos to an end. By the time it is finished the next election may already be over.
The pbCOM Tories really do not understand the Labour membership. If they were a bunch of militant lefties, they would have backed Abbott last time, or McDonnell the time before. Every constituency MP would be a lefty firebrand. The likes of Ed Jarvis, Starmer, Chuka would never get anywhere.
Corbyn is doing well because Burnham, Kendell and Cooper are unconvincing. And this is after the disaster that was Ed Miliband. A Chuka, a David Miliband, maybe Alan Johnson would be home and hosed by now. We want a good leader- and Corbyn, for all his baggage, is just a million times more authentic and convincing than the rest.
I'm not an expert here, but I'm beginning to wonder whether one problem many people are having with Corbyn is that he really comes over as an honest man. My word, we can't be having that, although, sad to say, it might matter here.
I also think Obama is an honest man as he busily tries to sort out some American tangles at the end of his two terms. Talk about a "lame duck".
I just threw up in my mouth after seeing the front page of tomorrow's Sun
precis?
I can't describe it, the only way I could describe it is, with dolls in a therapist's office. See the front page for yourself, once seen, it can never be unseen
Actually a Sergeant move would be yet another disaster for Labour. An undefeated Corbyn who thinks he has the right to set the policy agenda for the party would be calamitous. Even the perception that this was the case would make the 2020 election a walk in the park for the tories.
The sad truth, which Corbyn is so callously exposing, is that the gulf between what the average Labour member thinks and even those who vote Labour, let alone the rest of the country, has probably never been greater. The membership like him because he indulges their fantasies and supposed verities, verities that the public found to be disproven some time in the early 80s when Corbyn was first elected.
I can understand the desire, even desperation, for the sane in Labour to find some excuse to bring this chaos to an end. By the time it is finished the next election may already be over.
The pbCOM Tories really do not understand the Labour membership. If they were a bunch of militant lefties, they would have backed Abbott last time, or McDonnell the time before. Every constituency MP would be a lefty firebrand. The likes of Ed Jarvis, Starmer, Chuka would never get anywhere.
Corbyn is doing well because Burnham, Kendell and Cooper are unconvincing. And this is after the disaster that was Ed Miliband. A Chuka, a David Miliband, maybe Alan Johnson would be home and hosed by now. We want a good leader- and Corbyn, for all his baggage, is just a million times more authentic and convincing than the rest.
But the problem is that whilst he is authentic, and does a decent job of sounding convincing, there is absolutely zero evidence that he would be anything other than a disaster as a leader. And that's even without his past history of rebelling against the whip and the fact (as you seem to acknowledge, I think?) that his policy platform is vastly at odds with the majority of the Parliamentary Party. Apparently he doesn't even believe in whipping, and said today that he doesn't see it as the Leader's job to set policies.
The fact that the other candidates all seem pretty useless doesn't change that.
Actually a Sergeant move would be yet another disaster for Labour. An undefeated Corbyn who thinks he has the right to set the policy agenda for the party would be calamitous. Even the perception that this was the case would make the 2020 election a walk in the park for the tories.
The sad truth, which Corbyn is so callously exposing, is that the gulf between what the average Labour member thinks and even those who vote Labour, let alone the rest of the country, has probably never been greater. The membership like him because he indulges their fantasies and supposed verities, verities that the public found to be disproven some time in the early 80s when Corbyn was first elected.
I can understand the desire, even desperation, for the sane in Labour to find some excuse to bring this chaos to an end. By the time it is finished the next election may already be over.
The pbCOM Tories really do not understand the Labour membership. If they were a bunch of militant lefties, they would have backed Abbott last time, or McDonnell the time before. Every constituency MP would be a lefty firebrand. The likes of Ed Jarvis, Starmer, Chuka would never get anywhere.
Corbyn is doing well because Burnham, Kendell and Cooper are unconvincing. And this is after the disaster that was Ed Miliband. A Chuka, a David Miliband, maybe Alan Johnson would be home and hosed by now. We want a good leader- and Corbyn, for all his baggage, is just a million times more authentic and convincing than the rest.
I just threw up in my mouth after seeing the front page of tomorrow's Sun
precis?
I can't describe it, the only way I could describe it is, with dolls in a therapist's office. See the front page for yourself, once seen, it can never be unseen
There are few things that leave me lost for words. That Sun front page is one of them.
I understand he has been reported to the police. Is that because he appears to be smoking in what must be assumed to be "the workplace" of his companions?
Presumably everyone who sees it on the news stand will assume he's a Tory?
Yeah, if it were a Tory it would have been "Tory Lord" this, and "Tory Lord" that. To be fair it does have a certain ring to it that "Labour Lord" doesn't.
Actually a Sergeant move would be yet another disaster for Labour. An undefeated Corbyn who thinks he has the right to set the policy agenda for the party would be calamitous. Even the perception that this was the case would make the 2020 election a walk in the park for the tories.
The sad truth, which Corbyn is so callously exposing, is that the gulf between what the average Labour member thinks and even those who vote Labour, let alone the rest of the country, has probably never been greater. The membership like him because he indulges their fantasies and supposed verities, verities that the public found to be disproven some time in the early 80s when Corbyn was first elected.
I can understand the desire, even desperation, for the sane in Labour to find some excuse to bring this chaos to an end. By the time it is finished the next election may already be over.
The pbCOM Tories really do not understand the Labour membership. If they were a bunch of militant lefties, they would have backed Abbott last time, or McDonnell the time before. Every constituency MP would be a lefty firebrand. The likes of Ed Jarvis, Starmer, Chuka would never get anywhere.
Corbyn is doing well because Burnham, Kendell and Cooper are unconvincing. And this is after the disaster that was Ed Miliband. A Chuka, a David Miliband, maybe Alan Johnson would be home and hosed by now. We want a good leader- and Corbyn, for all his baggage, is just a million times more authentic and convincing than the rest.
But the problem is that whilst he is authentic, and does a decent job of sounding convincing, there is absolutely zero evidence that he would be anything other than a disaster as a leader. And that's even without his past history of rebelling against the whip and the fact (as you seem to acknowledge, I think?) that his policy platform is vastly at odds with the majority of the Parliamentary Party. Apparently he doesn't even believe in whipping, and said today that he doesn't see it as the Leader's job to set policies.
The fact that the other candidates all seem pretty useless doesn't change that.
Corbyn would be a disaster as leader- I know that, you know that, everyone else knows that. But when I am presented with the pitifully poor selection of robotic, insipid, scripted other candidates- and don't forget, after having put up with a shambolic, laughable leader for five years, and that after a very flawed leader too- my vote is going to Corbyn with no second preference.
Presumably everyone who sees it on the news stand will assume he's a Tory?
Yeah, if it were a Tory it would have been "Tory Lord" this, and "Tory Lord" that. To be fair it does have a certain ring to it that "Labour Lord" doesn't.
The pbCOM Tories really do not understand the Labour membership. If they were a bunch of militant lefties, they would have backed Abbott last time, or McDonnell the time before. Every constituency MP would be a lefty firebrand. The likes of Ed Jarvis, Starmer, Chuka would never get anywhere.
Corbyn is doing well because Burnham, Kendell and Cooper are unconvincing. And this is after the disaster that was Ed Miliband. A Chuka, a David Miliband, maybe Alan Johnson would be home and hosed by now. We want a good leader- and Corbyn, for all his baggage, is just a million times more authentic and convincing than the rest.
But the problem is that whilst he is authentic, and does a decent job of sounding convincing, there is absolutely zero evidence that he would be anything other than a disaster as a leader. And that's even without his past history of rebelling against the whip and the fact (as you seem to acknowledge, I think?) that his policy platform is vastly at odds with the majority of the Parliamentary Party. Apparently he doesn't even believe in whipping, and said today that he doesn't see it as the Leader's job to set policies.
The fact that the other candidates all seem pretty useless doesn't change that.
Corbyn would be a disaster as leader- I know that, you know that, everyone else knows that. But when I am presented with the pitifully poor selection of robotic, insipid, scripted other candidates- and don't forget, after having put up with a shambolic, laughable leader for five years, and that after a very flawed leader too- my vote is going to Corbyn with no second preference.
Interesting, but what ultimately are your motives? What do you see as the endgame of the process? Are you just hoping that the Corbyn leadership falls apart in a matter of months, and you will be given a better slate of candidates? ie. you are effectively voting Corbyn as the "RON*" candidate? Or have you just had enough, and decided that if Labour are going to continue to be useless, they might as well be entertainingly so?
Presumably everyone who sees it on the news stand will assume he's a Tory?
Yeah, if it were a Tory it would have been "Tory Lord" this, and "Tory Lord" that. To be fair it does have a certain ring to it that "Labour Lord" doesn't.
BBC news just said he has "no party affiliation"
According to wiki he sat as an independent (not a crossbencher) due to his position on the standards committee (titter).
This is why I love America and the GOP, their lovely, understated rhetoric
The presidential candidate Mike Huckabee has said the deal between six world powers and Iran regarding the Islamic Republic’s nuclear ambitions will “take the Israelis and march them to the door of the oven”.
This is why I love America and the GOP, their lovely, understated rhetoric
The presidential candidate Mike Huckabee has said the deal between six world powers and Iran regarding the Islamic Republic’s nuclear ambitions will “take the Israelis and march them to the door of the oven”.
This is why I love America and the GOP, their lovely, understated rhetoric
The presidential candidate Mike Huckabee has said the deal between six world powers and Iran regarding the Islamic Republic’s nuclear ambitions will “take the Israelis and march them to the door of the oven”.
I don't find the Sun pix unexpected. But then I believe in the theorem that says that however peculiar, or worse, an activity is, someone somewhere is doing it. Or, as they say in Yorks: "There's nowt so queer as folk"
Not being an expert on these things, but isn't £200 a night for a hooker a bit on the cheap side? They must be right skanks.
And they took a cheque....
One of my friend's works for a company that rents/supplies mobile/portable credit card machines.
He said, that's what a lot of escorts use these days, although because of the rules, they have to classify themselves as personal trainers so the card machine allocates the right card transaction code.
I don't find the Sun pix unexpected. But then I believe in the theorem that says that however peculiar, or worse, an activity is, someone somewhere is doing it. Or, as they say in Yorks: "There's nowt so queer as folk"
Nah, in Yorkshire we say, "£200 quid for sex? Owwww much, world's gone mad"
Presumably everyone who sees it on the news stand will assume he's a Tory?
Yeah, if it were a Tory it would have been "Tory Lord" this, and "Tory Lord" that. To be fair it does have a certain ring to it that "Labour Lord" doesn't.
Lord MCAlpine for example. The demolition job the BBC and Newsnight did on him was appalling. Tory Lord this and that for days and weeks on end.
By the way has our Sally tweeted about the dep speaker yet? *innocent face*
Not being an expert on these things, but isn't £200 a night for a hooker a bit on the cheap side? They must be right skanks.
And they took a cheque....
One of my friend's works for a company that rents/supplies mobile/portable credit card machines.
He said, that's what a lot of escorts use these days, although because of the rules, they have to classify themselves as personal trainers so the card machine allocates the right card transaction code.
I can believe that, but a cheque....Who the hells takes a cheque for such an activity, in fact who the hell offers to pay for such an activity with a cheque?
I don't find the Sun pix unexpected. But then I believe in the theorem that says that however peculiar, or worse, an activity is, someone somewhere is doing it. Or, as they say in Yorks: "There's nowt so queer as folk"
Nah, in Yorkshire we say, "£200 quid for sex? Owwww much, world's gone mad"
Yes, I know. They're weighed down by brass up there.
Not being an expert on these things, but isn't £200 a night for a hooker a bit on the cheap side? They must be right skanks.
And they took a cheque....
One of my friend's works for a company that rents/supplies mobile/portable credit card machines.
He said, that's what a lot of escorts use these days, although because of the rules, they have to classify themselves as personal trainers so the card machine allocates the right card transaction code.
I can believe that, but a cheque....Who the hells takes a cheque for such an activity, in fact who the hell offers to pay for such an activity with a cheque?
I just threw up in my mouth after seeing the front page of tomorrow's Sun
precis?
I can't describe it, the only way I could describe it is, with dolls in a therapist's office. See the front page for yourself, once seen, it can never be unseen
Not being an expert on these things, but isn't £200 a night for a hooker a bit on the cheap side? They must be right skanks.
And they took a cheque....
One of my friend's works for a company that rents/supplies mobile/portable credit card machines.
He said, that's what a lot of escorts use these days, although because of the rules, they have to classify themselves as personal trainers so the card machine allocates the right card transaction code.
I can believe that, but a cheque....Who the hells takes a cheque for such an activity, in fact who the hell offers to pay for such an activity with a cheque?
He must be a repeat client? High levels of trust?
For £200 a night hookers...could he have not nipped to the cash machine? And also somebody in that position, sounds like a great idea to be signing cheques to ladies of the night.
Not being an expert on these things, but isn't £200 a night for a hooker a bit on the cheap side? They must be right skanks.
I consider myself an expert (though recently retired, hors de combat)
£200 will get you a VERY nice looking Eastern European "erotic therapist" for about one hour, if you go to her or his place, in London. £200 all night is definitely a bit cheapskate.
But I understand this might have happened "outside London", in which case I'm not surprised they were cutting cheques, I'm only surprised it didn't involve barter.
If you're not satisfied can you get your - ahem - deposit back?
You really need to watch the Swedish original 'real humans', it is fantastic. High quality science fiction. They seem to have deliberately made it difficult to get with english subtitles though.
The pbCOM Tories really do not understand the Labour membership. If they were a bunch of militant lefties, they would have backed Abbott last time, or McDonnell the time before. Every constituency MP would be a lefty firebrand. The likes of Ed Jarvis, Starmer, Chuka would never get anywhere.
Corbyn is doing well because Burnham, Kendell and Cooper are unconvincing. And this is after the disaster that was Ed Miliband. A Chuka, a David Miliband, maybe Alan Johnson would be home and hosed by now. We want a good leader- and Corbyn, for all his baggage, is just a million times more authentic and convincing than the rest.
But the problem is that whilst he is authentic, and does a decent job of sounding convincing, there is absolutely zero evidence that he would be anything other than a disaster as a leader. And that's even without his past history of rebelling against the whip and the fact (as you seem to acknowledge, I think?) that his policy platform is vastly at odds with the majority of the Parliamentary Party. Apparently he doesn't even believe in whipping, and said today that he doesn't see it as the Leader's job to set policies.
The fact that the other candidates all seem pretty useless doesn't change that.
Corbyn would be a disaster as leader- I know that, you know that, everyone else knows that. But when I am presented with the pitifully poor selection of robotic, insipid, scripted other candidates- and don't forget, after having put up with a shambolic, laughable leader for five years, and that after a very flawed leader too- my vote is going to Corbyn with no second preference.
Interesting, but what ultimately are your motives? What do you see as the endgame of the process? Are you just hoping that the Corbyn leadership falls apart in a matter of months, and you will be given a better slate of candidates? ie. you are effectively voting Corbyn as the "RON*" candidate? Or have you just had enough, and decided that if Labour are going to continue to be useless, they might as well be entertainingly so?
*Re-open nominations
My motives are I'm sick and fed up with the Labour party primarily because of them inflicting Ed Miliband on us for 5 years, and out of these candidates I like Corbyn best. But ultimately I want a leader who looks like a PM- so will hope that a Chuka, or Jarvis, or D Miliband comes forward.
FWIW- my disdain for Miliband wasn't because of the unions, or policies, or anything like that- it was simply the fact that he was completely not cut out to lead the party. He was a clown.
Not being an expert on these things, but isn't £200 a night for a hooker a bit on the cheap side? They must be right skanks.
And they took a cheque....
One of my friend's works for a company that rents/supplies mobile/portable credit card machines.
He said, that's what a lot of escorts use these days, although because of the rules, they have to classify themselves as personal trainers so the card machine allocates the right card transaction code.
I can believe that, but a cheque....Who the hells takes a cheque for such an activity, in fact who the hell offers to pay for such an activity with a cheque?
The pbCOM Tories really do not understand the Labour membership. If they were a bunch of militant lefties, they would have backed Abbott last time, or McDonnell the time before. Every constituency MP would be a lefty firebrand. The likes of Ed Jarvis, Starmer, Chuka would never get anywhere.
Corbyn is doing well because Burnham, Kendell and Cooper are unconvincing. And this is after the disaster that was Ed Miliband. A Chuka, a David Miliband, maybe Alan Johnson would be home and hosed by now. We want a good leader- and Corbyn, for all his baggage, is just a million times more authentic and convincing than the rest.
The reality of an authentic PB Tory view, from July 23rd:
On topic: Frankly, watching that clip from the LBC debate where Liz makes such a spectacular mess of answering a trivially simple question about whether she'd want Ed Milband in her Shadow Cabinet, my advice to Labour would be to keep her firmly on the back benches. The idea of making such a total lightweight Shadow Chancellor is risible.
More generally, I think we have to take seriously the possibility of Jeremy Corbyn winning this. The other three are just so useless that one has to sympathise with the proposition that he's Labour's best option out of the four. Of course, he'd be an unmitigated strategic disaster for Labour, but at least he can answer a straightforward question without looking as though he's trying, and failing, to remember the stock answer from Labour Leadership for Dummies.
All the talk re Corbyn supporters is about anti-austerity.
But aren't they all missing the elephant in the room?
If Corbyn wins, all of the media and his opponents are going to go big time on:
- his support for abolition of the monarchy - his support for unilateral nuclear disarmament
We know the above are both huge vote losers. And they are both things which will get through to the public very easily - they aren't the sort of policy detail which nobody understands or takes any notice of.
I guess Corbyn may say abolition of the monarchy is just a personal view and not Lab party policy. But it is going to be impossible to hold that line - as he will be questioned about it repeatedly.
And the above issues will dominate in the GE 2020 campaign to the extent that the rest of his message gets crowded out.
On topic: Frankly, watching that clip from the LBC debate where Liz makes such a spectacular mess of answering a trivially simple question about whether she'd want Ed Milband in her Shadow Cabinet, my advice to Labour would be to keep her firmly on the back benches. The idea of making such a total lightweight Shadow Chancellor is risible.
More generally, I think we have to take seriously the possibility of Jeremy Corbyn winning this. The other three are just so useless that one has to sympathise with the proposition that he's Labour's best option out of the four. Of course, he'd be an unmitigated strategic disaster for Labour, but at least he can answer a straightforward question without looking as though he's trying, and failing, to remember the stock answer from Labour Leadership for Dummies.
Yes Richard- you wrote a very good post, insightful, well argued and most probably 100% correct and you just wanted another opportunity to get it back on again. .
All the talk re Corbyn supporters is about anti-austerity.
But aren't they all missing the elephant in the room?
If Corbyn wins, all of the media and his opponents are going to go big time on:
- his support for abolition of the monarchy - his support for unilateral nuclear disarmament
We know the above are both huge vote losers. And they are both things which will get through to the public very easily - they aren't the sort of policy detail which nobody understands or takes any notice of.
I guess Corbyn may say abolition of the monarchy is just a personal view and not Lab party policy. But it is going to be impossible to hold that line - as he will be questioned about it repeatedly.
And the above issues will dominate in the GE 2020 campaign to the extent that the rest of his message gets crowded out.
Things change quickly. I doubt nuclear weapons holds any leverage, and if the Queen falls under the proverbial bus, support for the monarchy could possibly go with her if Charles falters which isn't entirely improbable.
All the talk re Corbyn supporters is about anti-austerity.
But aren't they all missing the elephant in the room?
If Corbyn wins, all of the media and his opponents are going to go big time on:
- his support for abolition of the monarchy - his support for unilateral nuclear disarmament
We know the above are both huge vote losers. And they are both things which will get through to the public very easily - they aren't the sort of policy detail which nobody understands or takes any notice of.
I guess Corbyn may say abolition of the monarchy is just a personal view and not Lab party policy. But it is going to be impossible to hold that line - as he will be questioned about it repeatedly.
And the above issues will dominate in the GE 2020 campaign to the extent that the rest of his message gets crowded out.
Saving £100 billion by stopping Trident is quite a popular policy, and I am not sure that Corbyns republicanism would be a major issue.
And now many prominent IRA leaders are in government in NI and shake hands with the Queen and other dignataries. Indeed Corbyn appears rather prescient in calling for talks with the IRA.
Yes Richard- you wrote a very good post, insightful, well argued and most probably 100% correct and you just wanted another opportunity to get it back on again. .
Just correcting yet another misapprehension. In relation to the post of yours which I was responding to, you perhaps haven't noticed that the likes of Ed Jarvis, Starmer, Chuka aren't even on the ballot paper.
That Jeremy Corbyn - Jeremy Corbyn - may be set to be leader of the Labour Party is staggering, however you look at it. The odds on this at the start of the contest were IIRC 250/1. Yes, the others are useless. But it doesn't take a PB Tory to recognise the disaster which Labour are setting themselves up for.
Apparently Newcastle's new signing is 20, no wait, 24, no wait, 25, no wait 28...I think all we can say for certain is that he has signed for Newcastle and plays in defence.
All the talk re Corbyn supporters is about anti-austerity.
But aren't they all missing the elephant in the room?
If Corbyn wins, all of the media and his opponents are going to go big time on:
- his support for abolition of the monarchy - his support for unilateral nuclear disarmament
We know the above are both huge vote losers. And they are both things which will get through to the public very easily - they aren't the sort of policy detail which nobody understands or takes any notice of.
Yes, you are right. Another big issue is Corbyn's support over the years for a rag-bag of terrorist organisations and their apologists. The economic lunacy is, relatively speaking, less of an issue.
Jeremy Corbyn is riding a tiger of populist enthusiasm. It's too late for him to risk dismounting. The eruption of outrage from the rebels without a clue would be volcanic.
They came back from the ride With the rider inside And a smile on the face of the tiger.
The pbCOM Tories really do not understand the Labour membership. If they were a bunch of militant lefties, they would have backed Abbott last time, or McDonnell the time before. Every constituency MP would be a lefty firebrand. The likes of Ed Jarvis, Starmer, Chuka would never get anywhere.
Corbyn is doing well because Burnham, Kendell and Cooper are unconvincing. And this is after the disaster that was Ed Miliband. A Chuka, a David Miliband, maybe Alan Johnson would be home and hosed by now. We want a good leader- and Corbyn, for all his baggage, is just a million times more authentic and convincing than the rest.
But the problem is that whilst he is authentic, and does a decent job of sounding convincing, there is absolutely zero evidence that he would be anything other than a disaster as a leader. And that's even without his past history of rebelling against the whip and the fact (as you seem to acknowledge, I think?) that his policy platform is vastly at odds with the majority of the Parliamentary Party. Apparently he doesn't even believe in whipping, and said today that he doesn't see it as the Leader's job to set policies.
The fact that the other candidates all seem pretty useless doesn't change that.
Corbyn would be a disaster as leader- I know that, you know that, everyone else knows that. But when I am presented with the pitifully poor selection of robotic, insipid, scripted other candidates- and don't forget, after having put up with a shambolic, laughable leader for five years, and that after a very flawed leader too- my vote is going to Corbyn with no second preference.
Interesting, but what ultimately are your motives? What do you see as the endgame of the process? Are you just hoping that the Corbyn leadership falls apart in a matter of months, and you will be given a better slate of candidates? ie. you are effectively voting Corbyn as the "RON*" candidate? Or have you just had enough, and decided that if Labour are going to continue to be useless, they might as well be entertainingly so?
*Re-open nominations
Labour needs a big fat slap round the face; a cataclsym that just cannot be explained away except by taking a long, hard look in the mirror. Tyson is right, a Corbyn leadership may just be it. If neither Burnham nor Cooper can defeat him, they are finished, which would basically end the phalanx of ex-ministerial deadweight grubbing around. I'll let Kendall off as she's only a few years into being an MP. She may have another chance.
Labour needs a big fat slap round the face; a cataclsym that just cannot be explained away except by taking a long, hard look in the mirror. Tyson is right, a Corbyn leadership may just be it. If neither Burnham nor Cooper can defeat him, they are finished, which would basically end the phalanx of ex-ministerial deadweight grubbing around. I'll let Kendall off as she's only a few years into being an MP. She may have another chance.
A pleasingly Marxist view. Everything needs to be destroyed so it can be rebuilt.
Unfortunately experience shows that this rarely works. The destruction bit goes according to plan but the rebuilding bit doesn't.
All the talk re Corbyn supporters is about anti-austerity.
But aren't they all missing the elephant in the room?
If Corbyn wins, all of the media and his opponents are going to go big time on:
- his support for abolition of the monarchy - his support for unilateral nuclear disarmament
We know the above are both huge vote losers. And they are both things which will get through to the public very easily - they aren't the sort of policy detail which nobody understands or takes any notice of.
I guess Corbyn may say abolition of the monarchy is just a personal view and not Lab party policy. But it is going to be impossible to hold that line - as he will be questioned about it repeatedly.
And the above issues will dominate in the GE 2020 campaign to the extent that the rest of his message gets crowded out.
Saving £100 billion by stopping Trident is quite a popular policy, and I am not sure that Corbyns republicanism would be a major issue.
And now many prominent IRA leaders are in government in NI and shake hands with the Queen and other dignataries. Indeed Corbyn appears rather prescient in calling for talks with the IRA.
Well Trident became an issue in GE 2015 - it was a significant issue re Lab joining with the SNP and weakening the UK's defences.
Stopping Trident is very popular with Corbyn supporters. It is not popular with Middle England.
And abolition of the monarchy will be even less popular with Middle England.
All the talk re Corbyn supporters is about anti-austerity.
But aren't they all missing the elephant in the room?
If Corbyn wins, all of the media and his opponents are going to go big time on:
- his support for abolition of the monarchy - his support for unilateral nuclear disarmament
We know the above are both huge vote losers. And they are both things which will get through to the public very easily - they aren't the sort of policy detail which nobody understands or takes any notice of.
I guess Corbyn may say abolition of the monarchy is just a personal view and not Lab party policy. But it is going to be impossible to hold that line - as he will be questioned about it repeatedly.
And the above issues will dominate in the GE 2020 campaign to the extent that the rest of his message gets crowded out.
Saving £100 billion by stopping Trident is quite a popular policy, and I am not sure that Corbyns republicanism would be a major issue.
And now many prominent IRA leaders are in government in NI and shake hands with the Queen and other dignataries. Indeed Corbyn appears rather prescient in calling for talks with the IRA.
Well Trident became an issue in GE 2015 - it was a significant issue re Lab joining with the SNP and weakening the UK's defences.
Stopping Trident is very popular with Corbyn supporters. It is not popular with Middle England.
And abolition of the monarchy will be even less popular with Middle England.
Labour needs a big fat slap round the face; a cataclsym that just cannot be explained away except by taking a long, hard look in the mirror. Tyson is right, a Corbyn leadership may just be it. If neither Burnham nor Cooper can defeat him, they are finished, which would basically end the phalanx of ex-ministerial deadweight grubbing around. I'll let Kendall off as she's only a few years into being an MP. She may have another chance.
A pleasingly Marxist view. Everything needs to be destroyed so it can be rebuilt.
Unfortunately experience shows that this rarely works. The destruction bit goes according to plan but the rebuilding bit doesn't.
Something will emerge. It may not be called the Labour party, but there will be a centre left party capable of challenging for power. Maybe not in 2020, but certainly the time after that. The alternative is just to give up and I can't see that happening. It's not as if the centre right option is spectacularly popular.
I suspect, though, that Labour will be led into the next election by Dan Jarvis and much that seems unsolveable now would have been solved.
Labour needs a big fat slap round the face; a cataclsym that just cannot be explained away except by taking a long, hard look in the mirror. Tyson is right, a Corbyn leadership may just be it. If neither Burnham nor Cooper can defeat him, they are finished, which would basically end the phalanx of ex-ministerial deadweight grubbing around. I'll let Kendall off as she's only a few years into being an MP. She may have another chance.
A pleasingly Marxist view. Everything needs to be destroyed so it can be rebuilt. Unfortunately experience shows that this rarely works. The destruction bit goes according to plan but the rebuilding bit doesn't.
He makes a point though - if either or neither Burnham or Cooper can beat the throwback then they lose all credibility. In other respects I do not think it really matters if Corbyn wins or loses - the damage is done and the fact that he appears in with a chance exposes Labour as being the infantile party they are.
All the talk re Corbyn supporters is about anti-austerity.
But aren't they all missing the elephant in the room?
If Corbyn wins, all of the media and his opponents are going to go big time on:
- his support for abolition of the monarchy - his support for unilateral nuclear disarmament
We know the above are both huge vote losers. And they are both things which will get through to the public very easily - they aren't the sort of policy detail which nobody understands or takes any notice of.
I guess Corbyn may say abolition of the monarchy is just a personal view and not Lab party policy. But it is going to be impossible to hold that line - as he will be questioned about it repeatedly.
And the above issues will dominate in the GE 2020 campaign to the extent that the rest of his message gets crowded out.
Saving £100 billion by stopping Trident is quite a popular policy, and I am not sure that Corbyns republicanism would be a major issue.
And now many prominent IRA leaders are in government in NI and shake hands with the Queen and other dignataries. Indeed Corbyn appears rather prescient in calling for talks with the IRA.
Well Trident became an issue in GE 2015 - it was a significant issue re Lab joining with the SNP and weakening the UK's defences.
Stopping Trident is very popular with Corbyn supporters. It is not popular with Middle England.
And abolition of the monarchy will be even less popular with Middle England.
It is an obselete cold war system designed for the problems of fifty years ago, and cannot be used independently of the USA. It is a £100 billion penis extension that convinces no one.
All the talk re Corbyn supporters is about anti-austerity.
But aren't they all missing the elephant in the room?
If Corbyn wins, all of the media and his opponents are going to go big time on:
- his support for abolition of the monarchy - his support for unilateral nuclear disarmament
We know the above are both huge vote losers. And they are both things which will get through to the public very easily - they aren't the sort of policy detail which nobody understands or takes any notice of.
I guess Corbyn may say abolition of the monarchy is just a personal view and not Lab party policy. But it is going to be impossible to hold that line - as he will be questioned about it repeatedly.
And the above issues will dominate in the GE 2020 campaign to the extent that the rest of his message gets crowded out.
Saving £100 billion by stopping Trident is quite a popular policy, and I am not sure that Corbyns republicanism would be a major issue.
And now many prominent IRA leaders are in government in NI and shake hands with the Queen and other dignataries. Indeed Corbyn appears rather prescient in calling for talks with the IRA.
Well Trident became an issue in GE 2015 - it was a significant issue re Lab joining with the SNP and weakening the UK's defences.
Stopping Trident is very popular with Corbyn supporters. It is not popular with Middle England.
And abolition of the monarchy will be even less popular with Middle England.
All the talk re Corbyn supporters is about anti-austerity.
But aren't they all missing the elephant in the room?
If Corbyn wins, all of the media and his opponents are going to go big time on:
- his support for abolition of the monarchy - his support for unilateral nuclear disarmament
We know the above are both huge vote losers. And they are both things which will get through to the public very easily - they aren't the sort of policy detail which nobody understands or takes any notice of.
I guess Corbyn may say abolition of the monarchy is just a personal view and not Lab party policy. But it is going to be impossible to hold that line - as he will be questioned about it repeatedly.
And the above issues will dominate in the GE 2020 campaign to the extent that the rest of his message gets crowded out.
Saving £100 billion by stopping Trident is quite a popular policy, and I am not sure that Corbyns republicanism would be a major issue.
And now many prominent IRA leaders are in government in NI and shake hands with the Queen and other dignataries. Indeed Corbyn appears rather prescient in calling for talks with the IRA.
Well Trident became an issue in GE 2015 - it was a significant issue re Lab joining with the SNP and weakening the UK's defences.
Stopping Trident is very popular with Corbyn supporters. It is not popular with Middle England.
And abolition of the monarchy will be even less popular with Middle England.
It is an obselete cold war system designed for the problems of fifty years ago, and cannot be used independently of the USA. It is a £100 billion penis extension that convinces no one.
Well there's an ideal image to dwell on just before bed...
All the talk re Corbyn supporters is about anti-austerity.
But aren't they all missing the elephant in the room?
If Corbyn wins, all of the media and his opponents are going to go big time on:
- his support for abolition of the monarchy - his support for unilateral nuclear disarmament
We know the above are both huge vote losers. And they are both things which will get through to the public very easily - they aren't the sort of policy detail which nobody understands or takes any notice of.
I guess Corbyn may say abolition of the monarchy is just a personal view and not Lab party policy. But it is going to be impossible to hold that line - as he will be questioned about it repeatedly.
And the above issues will dominate in the GE 2020 campaign to the extent that the rest of his message gets crowded out.
Saving £100 billion by stopping Trident is quite a popular policy, and I am not sure that Corbyns republicanism would be a major issue.
And now many prominent IRA leaders are in government in NI and shake hands with the Queen and other dignataries. Indeed Corbyn appears rather prescient in calling for talks with the IRA.
Well Trident became an issue in GE 2015 - it was a significant issue re Lab joining with the SNP and weakening the UK's defences.
Stopping Trident is very popular with Corbyn supporters. It is not popular with Middle England.
And abolition of the monarchy will be even less popular with Middle England.
Unelected monarchy!
Best kind of monarchy!
Surely being unelected is the whole point!
I think Corbyn would want to see the end of the Lords too. Not before time.
All the talk re Corbyn supporters is about anti-austerity.
But aren't they all missing the elephant in the room?
If Corbyn wins, all of the media and his opponents are going to go big time on:
- his support for abolition of the monarchy - his support for unilateral nuclear disarmament
We know the above are both huge vote losers. And they are both things which will get through to the public very easily - they aren't the sort of policy detail which nobody understands or takes any notice of.
I guess Corbyn may say abolition of the monarchy is just a personal view and not Lab party policy. But it is going to be impossible to hold that line - as he will be questioned about it repeatedly. And the above issues will dominate in the GE 2020 campaign to the extent that the rest of his message gets crowded out.
Saving £100 billion by stopping Trident is quite a popular policy, and I am not sure that Corbyns republicanism would be a major issue. And now many prominent IRA leaders are in government in NI and shake hands with the Queen and other dignataries. Indeed Corbyn appears rather prescient in calling for talks with the IRA.
Your slip is showing Mr Fox. Go off and join the Greens where you belong.
It is an obselete cold war system designed for the problems of fifty years ago, and cannot be used independently of the USA. It is a £100 billion penis extension that convinces no one.
I shall repeat for your benefit... If the UK wants "influence" in the EU then it has to keep nukes (vile things though they are). It's real world power politics.
All the talk re Corbyn supporters is about anti-austerity.
But aren't they all missing the elephant in the room?
If Corbyn wins, all of the media and his opponents are going to go big time on:
- his support for abolition of the monarchy - his support for unilateral nuclear disarmament
We know the above are both huge vote losers. And they are both things which will get through to the public very easily - they aren't the sort of policy detail which nobody understands or takes any notice of.
I guess Corbyn may say abolition of the monarchy is just a personal view and not Lab party policy. But it is going to be impossible to hold that line - as he will be questioned about it repeatedly.
And the above issues will dominate in the GE 2020 campaign to the extent that the rest of his message gets crowded out.
Saving £100 billion by stopping Trident is quite a popular policy, and I am not sure that Corbyns republicanism would be a major issue.
And now many prominent IRA leaders are in government in NI and shake hands with the Queen and other dignataries. Indeed Corbyn appears rather prescient in calling for talks with the IRA.
Well Trident became an issue in GE 2015 - it was a significant issue re Lab joining with the SNP and weakening the UK's defences.
Stopping Trident is very popular with Corbyn supporters. It is not popular with Middle England.
And abolition of the monarchy will be even less popular with Middle England.
It is an obselete cold war system designed for the problems of fifty years ago, and cannot be used independently of the USA. It is a £100 billion penis extension that convinces no one.
........ except Middle England voters - who don't care about the detail - and just vote on gut instinct.
ie: Someone wants to weaken the UK = Don't vote for them.
It is an obselete cold war system designed for the problems of fifty years ago, and cannot be used independently of the USA. It is a £100 billion penis extension that convinces no one.
I shall repeat for your benefit... If the UK wants "influence" in the EU then it has to keep nukes (vile things though they are). It's real world power politics.
Think it through.
Nonsense. There are 26 other countries without nukes, and they have plenty of influence. Indeed Germany is often accused of having too much.
All the talk re Corbyn supporters is about anti-austerity.
But aren't they all missing the elephant in the room?
If Corbyn wins, all of the media and his opponents are going to go big time on:
- his support for abolition of the monarchy - his support for unilateral nuclear disarmament
We know the above are both huge vote losers. And they are both things which will get through to the public very easily - they aren't the sort of policy detail which nobody understands or takes any notice of.
I guess Corbyn may say abolition of the monarchy is just a personal view and not Lab party policy. But it is going to be impossible to hold that line - as he will be questioned about it repeatedly.
And the above issues will dominate in the GE 2020 campaign to the extent that the rest of his message gets crowded out.
Saving £100 billion by stopping Trident is quite a popular policy, and I am not sure that Corbyns republicanism would be a major issue.
And now many prominent IRA leaders are in government in NI and shake hands with the Queen and other dignataries. Indeed Corbyn appears rather prescient in calling for talks with the IRA.
Well Trident became an issue in GE 2015 - it was a significant issue re Lab joining with the SNP and weakening the UK's defences.
Stopping Trident is very popular with Corbyn supporters. It is not popular with Middle England.
And abolition of the monarchy will be even less popular with Middle England.
It is an obselete cold war system designed for the problems of fifty years ago, and cannot be used independently of the USA. It is a £100 billion penis extension that convinces no one.
Why would we have a system that could not be used independently of the USA? The USA play no part in the launching procedure for the current Trident submarines. It could be argued that reliance on GPS for navigation, which can ultimately turned on or off by the USA, puts us at their mercy.
And the £100 billion is a fantasy figure based on an estimate (by CND) of the running costs over forty years.
All the talk re Corbyn supporters is about anti-austerity.
But aren't they all missing the elephant in the room?
If Corbyn wins, all of the media and his opponents are going to go big time on:
- his support for abolition of the monarchy - his support for unilateral nuclear disarmament
We know the above are both huge vote losers. And they are both things which will get through to the public very easily - they aren't the sort of policy detail which nobody understands or takes any notice of.
I guess Corbyn may say abolition of the monarchy is just a personal view and not Lab party policy. But it is going to be impossible to hold that line - as he will be questioned about it repeatedly.
And the above issues will dominate in the GE 2020 campaign to the extent that the rest of his message gets crowded out.
Saving £100 billion by stopping Trident is quite a popular policy, and I am not sure that Corbyns republicanism would be a major issue.
And now many prominent IRA leaders are in government in NI and shake hands with the Queen and other dignataries. Indeed Corbyn appears rather prescient in calling for talks with the IRA.
Well Trident became an issue in GE 2015 - it was a significant issue re Lab joining with the SNP and weakening the UK's defences.
Stopping Trident is very popular with Corbyn supporters. It is not popular with Middle England.
And abolition of the monarchy will be even less popular with Middle England.
It is an obselete cold war system designed for the problems of fifty years ago, and cannot be used independently of the USA. It is a £100 billion penis extension that convinces no one.
I shall repeat for your benefit... If the UK wants "influence" in the EU then it has to keep nukes (vile things though they are). It's real world power politics.
Think it through.
The EU couldn't give a monkeys about our nukes. THe only place it gives us influence is NATO. And as we're one of the original nuclear powers, we're lumped with the burden of them forevermore.
Comments
The pbCOM Tories really do not understand the Labour membership. If they were a bunch of militant lefties, they would have backed Abbott last time, or McDonnell the time before. Every constituency MP would be a lefty firebrand. The likes of Ed Jarvis, Starmer, Chuka would never get anywhere.
Corbyn is doing well because Burnham, Kendell and Cooper are unconvincing. And this is after the disaster that was Ed Miliband. A Chuka, a David Miliband, maybe Alan Johnson would be home and hosed by now. We want a good leader- and Corbyn, for all his baggage, is just a million times more authentic and convincing than the rest.
I also think Obama is an honest man as he busily tries to sort out some American tangles at the end of his two terms. Talk about a "lame duck".
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CK3pzV7XAAEhBZJ.jpg
yourhis shoes?The fact that the other candidates all seem pretty useless doesn't change that.
Please can anyone postng the Sun cover be banned. I don't need to see it EVER again.
Titter....
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CK3ruYqWoAE_StG.png
I think you might be able to do some roaring trade tonight.
*Re-open nominations
The presidential candidate Mike Huckabee has said the deal between six world powers and Iran regarding the Islamic Republic’s nuclear ambitions will “take the Israelis and march them to the door of the oven”.
http://bit.ly/1gejOwo
He said, that's what a lot of escorts use these days, although because of the rules, they have to classify themselves as personal trainers so the card machine allocates the right card transaction code.
By the way has our Sally tweeted about the dep speaker yet? *innocent face*
What a way to go, front page of The Sun, wearing a scarlet bra. He might be available to do Pizza Hut ads, wearing a brown paper bag over his head.
Just can't buy their discretion, apparently.
https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/625413698652405761
FWIW- my disdain for Miliband wasn't because of the unions, or policies, or anything like that- it was simply the fact that he was completely not cut out to lead the party. He was a clown.
(Labour leadership candidates take note)
But aren't they all missing the elephant in the room?
If Corbyn wins, all of the media and his opponents are going to go big time on:
- his support for abolition of the monarchy
- his support for unilateral nuclear disarmament
We know the above are both huge vote losers. And they are both things which will get through to the public very easily - they aren't the sort of policy detail which nobody understands or takes any notice of.
I guess Corbyn may say abolition of the monarchy is just a personal view and not Lab party policy. But it is going to be impossible to hold that line - as he will be questioned about it repeatedly.
And the above issues will dominate in the GE 2020 campaign to the extent that the rest of his message gets crowded out.
The reality of an authentic PB Tory view, from July 23rd:
Yes Richard- you wrote a very good post, insightful, well argued and most probably 100% correct and you just wanted another opportunity to get it back on again. .
And now many prominent IRA leaders are in government in NI and shake hands with the Queen and other dignataries. Indeed Corbyn appears rather prescient in calling for talks with the IRA.
That Jeremy Corbyn - Jeremy Corbyn - may be set to be leader of the Labour Party is staggering, however you look at it. The odds on this at the start of the contest were IIRC 250/1. Yes, the others are useless. But it doesn't take a PB Tory to recognise the disaster which Labour are setting themselves up for.
Tories = Persians
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/33669314
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/02/01/sport/football/age-african-football-mbemba/
With the rider inside
And a smile on the face of the tiger.
Unfortunately experience shows that this rarely works. The destruction bit goes according to plan but the rebuilding bit doesn't.
Stopping Trident is very popular with Corbyn supporters. It is not popular with Middle England.
And abolition of the monarchy will be even less popular with Middle England.
I suspect, though, that Labour will be led into the next election by Dan Jarvis and much that seems unsolveable now would have been solved.
...to be replaced by who, exactly?
I think Corbyn would want to see the end of the Lords too. Not before time.
Paging Sunil...
If the UK wants "influence" in the EU then it has to keep nukes (vile things though they are). It's real world power politics.
Think it through.
ie: Someone wants to weaken the UK = Don't vote for them.
We saw it 10 weeks ago.
Why would we have a system that could not be used independently of the USA? The USA play no part in the launching procedure for the current Trident submarines. It could be argued that reliance on GPS for navigation, which can ultimately turned on or off by the USA, puts us at their mercy.
And the £100 billion is a fantasy figure based on an estimate (by CND) of the running costs over forty years.