It was probably too late. Hell, cooper didn't take him in until a day or before ballots went out even, that allows for lots of people to make up their minds.
Betting on the Stupid Party being stupid is like being given free money. Put a terrorist hugging, anti-American class warrior with illiterate economic policies, a track record of disloyalty, no discernible affection for the UK and, therefore, zero chance of ever winning an election, in front of Labour members and £3 part-timers, and of course they'll vote for him in large numbers having convinced themselves his a breath of fresh air and a misunderstood champion of peace. It's hard for most people to comprehend this, but the Useful Idiots really are a demographic apart.
The excuse that governments have to speak to the political representatives of terrorists and other bigots really doesn't wash for an obscure back bencher. When he shares a platform with these people he cannot really believe he is a part of a peace process (unless he is totally delusional), he is supporting their cause as a player in the game (which Corbyn was not).
When he did that he chose to associate with some very unpleasant people with morally contemptible views. When doing so he did not think it necessary to challenge those views but instead he called these players "friends". The "governments do this" line is frankly ridiculous and he should be called on it.
But I don't think this is going to make any difference to the result. He has campaigned for this and the others haven't. He has generated enthusiasm. He has brought new blood into the party. I think he just might destroy the Labour party as a party of government but he deserves to win. And the others don't.
The revelations have come too late. The bulk of Jeremy Corbyn's supporters are still in full-on denial mode, claiming that meeting Holocaust-deniers and blood-libellers is a routine occurrence for MPs looking for peace in the Middle East, that disavowing their views would be undiplomatic and that anyone could have senior moments about who they'd met and spoken with and procured visas for.
Another week or two of such revelations and they will be awkwardly shuffling away from him. But their votes wil already have been cast.
The Chilcott report was successfully held up so that it was not published before the 2015GE, and now looks as if the same is happening for the Labour leadership elections. What is the next impediment for the interested parties involved?
There was a great post by someone (apols can't remember) saying how PB did Cons' thinking well but were less sure of Lab thinking.
Lab have now joined UKIP & the LDs in needing to work out what they are for. And they must then communicate this clearly to the electorate.
Centrist-ish but nice doesn't seem to have worked.
I'm not saying that we are at the end of (political) history. Yet. But I can understand the rationale of trying out further left as a uniquely Labour position. The slight shame, as @alex. pointed out, is that Jezza is not the left wing candidate to succeed at anything. They needed a grown-up left winger and sadly haven't got one.
If different from Jezza's, I would be interested to hear @JWisemann's view of what Lab should think or look like.
The troubled Co-operative Bank has reported bigger losses, in part due to higher legal costs.
Pre-tax losses for the first six months of the year were £204.2m, compared with losses of £77m a year earlier. The figure was slightly better than expected.
It included losses of £38.2m on sales of assets needed to reduce the bank's overall levels of debt.
The revelations have come too late. The bulk of Jeremy Corbyn's supporters are still in full-on denial mode, claiming that meeting Holocaust-deniers and blood-libellers is a routine occurrence for MPs looking for peace in the Middle East, that disavowing their views would be undiplomatic and that anyone could have senior moments about who they'd met and spoken with and procured visas for.
Another week or two of such revelations and they will be awkwardly shuffling away from him. But their votes wil already have been cast.
Yep. Nick Palmer and the Useful Idiots have closed their eyes to what was and is plain to see. They'll take a little time to acknowledge this, but the sheer weight of evidence - speeches, photos, recordings, videos etc - will leave them little choice. But not before they have set back the cause of moderate, electorally viable social democracy by many, many years.
There was a great post by someone (apols can't remember) saying how PB did Cons' thinking well but were less sure of Lab thinking.
Lab have now joined UKIP & the LDs in needing to work out what they are for. And they must then communicate this clearly to the electorate.
Centrist-ish but nice doesn't seem to have worked.
I'm not saying that we are at the end of (political) history. Yet. But I can understand the rationale of trying out further left as a uniquely Labour position. The slight shame, as @alex. pointed out, is that Jezza is not the left wing candidate to succeed at anything. They needed a grown-up left winger and sadly haven't got one.
If different from Jezza's, I would be interested to hear @JWisemann's view of what Lab should think or look like.
A lot is about the perception of competence. Neither Burnham nor Cooper appear remotely competent for anything. Kendall looks too competent for the current tastes of Labour. Whilst Corbyn (rather like EdM) looks competent regarding problem identification but also like EdM totally incompetent on providing viable and economic solutions.
The Chilcott report was successfully held up so that it was not published before the 2015GE, and now looks as if the same is happening for the Labour leadership elections. What is the next impediment for the interested parties involved?
If Jez wins, we could have an interesting position of the current leader of a political party wanting a prior leader to be arrested for war crimes.
The revelations have come too late. The bulk of Jeremy Corbyn's supporters are still in full-on denial mode, claiming that meeting Holocaust-deniers and blood-libellers is a routine occurrence for MPs looking for peace in the Middle East, that disavowing their views would be undiplomatic and that anyone could have senior moments about who they'd met and spoken with and procured visas for.
Another week or two of such revelations and they will be awkwardly shuffling away from him. But their votes wil already have been cast.
Yep. Nick Palmer and the Useful Idiots have closed their eyes to what was and is plain to see. They'll take a little time to acknowledge this, but the sheer weight of evidence - speeches, photos, recordings, videos etc - will leave them little choice. But not before they have set back the cause of moderate, electorally viable social democracy by many, many years.
BTW, the "Stupid Party" is traditionally the Tories...
Why would anyone want to vote for "moderate social democracy"? It's boring and it ignores the basic rule that politics are about the sources of political cleavage, i.e. race, class and religion.
We are moving from class-based politics to identity politics (except in the Six Counties, which have never had anything else). This move means that Labour is an idea whose time has gone. For all that right-wingers moan about "the politics of envy" they'll miss it when it's gone. Boy, will they ever.
Are the aims and values of the Labour Party those espoused by Liz Kendall, who disagrees with the former leader, or those promoted by Jeremy Corbyn, who has regularly voted against his own party, and does not have the support of the majority of Labour MPs?
The excuse that governments have to speak to the political representatives of terrorists and other bigots really doesn't wash for an obscure back bencher. When he shares a platform with these people he cannot really believe he is a part of a peace process (unless he is totally delusional), he is supporting their cause as a player in the game (which Corbyn was not).
When he did that he chose to associate with some very unpleasant people with morally contemptible views. When doing so he did not think it necessary to challenge those views but instead he called these players "friends". The "governments do this" line is frankly ridiculous and he should be called on it.
But I don't think this is going to make any difference to the result. He has campaigned for this and the others haven't. He has generated enthusiasm. He has brought new blood into the party. I think he just might destroy the Labour party as a party of government but he deserves to win. And the others don't.
Yes, but its not a leadership of the Labour Party he is contesting - a Labour Party as you mean it. It is the leadership of a new party created by the £3 migrants that will still call itself the Labour Party. He himself, Corbyn, could not have attracted enough nominations except from MPs who in reality do not support him. Its the Labour Party that put him in this position that deserves obliteration and Corbyn will oblige. Should tories offer the hand of friendship to all those right wing labourites that have been vilified? Would it make the tories too inclusive? Too broad a church?? I imagine the tories would not want the gullible useful idiots who would just shrug their shoulders at Corbyn, but genuine um... thinkers? And of course there are the labour voters on the right of the party - why should the tories just watch them scurry to the lib dems?
A huge difference between taking a robust line against Israel's exesses which is overwhelmingly popular with all but a small pro Istraeli lobby (usually right wingers anyway) and consorting with racists and anti semites. No one seriously believes Corbyn is a racist or an anti semite. As it stands Corbyns position on the Middle East is almost certainly helping his cause.
His achilles heel are the unions and the dangers he poses to party unity. I'm sure Burnham and Kendall are dead in the water and the only thing standing between Corbyn and the leadership is Cooper.
There was a great post by someone (apols can't remember) saying how PB did Cons' thinking well but were less sure of Lab thinking.
Lab have now joined UKIP & the LDs in needing to work out what they are for. And they must then communicate this clearly to the electorate.
Centrist-ish but nice doesn't seem to have worked.
I'm not saying that we are at the end of (political) history. Yet. But I can understand the rationale of trying out further left as a uniquely Labour position. The slight shame, as @alex. pointed out, is that Jezza is not the left wing candidate to succeed at anything. They needed a grown-up left winger and sadly haven't got one.
If different from Jezza's, I would be interested to hear @JWisemann's view of what Lab should think or look like.
A lot is about the perception of competence. Neither Burnham nor Cooper appear remotely competent for anything. Kendall looks too competent for the current tastes of Labour. Whilst Corbyn (rather like EdM) looks competent regarding problem identification but also like EdM totally incompetent on providing viable and economic solutions.
It is interesting that this, right wing view has sort of become the orthodoxy. I backed YC because she seemed to me the most competent of the lot but, and back to the original point about us not doing Lab very well, I am a Cons supporter.
Little wonder a) leftish Lab like Jezza; and b) non-leftish Lab are in despair.
Jezza supporters have just completely tuned out to any revelations that will in any case only have an impact at the margin and that simply isn't enough to swing the Jezza coronation.
The Chilcott report was successfully held up so that it was not published before the 2015GE, and now looks as if the same is happening for the Labour leadership elections. What is the next impediment for the interested parties involved?
I'm not at the stage of thinking there is a conspiracy over the report's release: its just a bunch of bundling incompetents who, despite being well-paid and supposedly intelligent lawyers, have not realised that being 'independent' does not mean that you do not have a responsibility to be timely as well as thorough.
However today's story in the Independent makes me wonder if they are actually intelligent enough to run such an inquiry. Can someone send them some tinfoil hats?
The revelations have come too late. The bulk of Jeremy Corbyn's supporters are still in full-on denial mode, claiming that meeting Holocaust-deniers and blood-libellers is a routine occurrence for MPs looking for peace in the Middle East, that disavowing their views would be undiplomatic and that anyone could have senior moments about who they'd met and spoken with and procured visas for.
Another week or two of such revelations and they will be awkwardly shuffling away from him. But their votes wil already have been cast.
Yep. Nick Palmer and the Useful Idiots have closed their eyes to what was and is plain to see. They'll take a little time to acknowledge this, but the sheer weight of evidence - speeches, photos, recordings, videos etc - will leave them little choice. But not before they have set back the cause of moderate, electorally viable social democracy by many, many years.
BTW, the "Stupid Party" is traditionally the Tories...
Why would anyone want to vote for "moderate social democracy"? It's boring and it ignores the basic rule that politics are about the sources of political cleavage, i.e. race, class and religion.
We are moving from class-based politics to identity politics (except in the Six Counties, which have never had anything else). This move means that Labour is an idea whose time has gone. For all that right-wingers moan about "the politics of envy" they'll miss it when it's gone. Boy, will they ever.
Yes, that's basically the last Labour government's contribution to our society: identity based politics.
The revelations have come too late. The bulk of Jeremy Corbyn's supporters are still in full-on denial mode, claiming that meeting Holocaust-deniers and blood-libellers is a routine occurrence for MPs looking for peace in the Middle East, that disavowing their views would be undiplomatic and that anyone could have senior moments about who they'd met and spoken with and procured visas for.
Another week or two of such revelations and they will be awkwardly shuffling away from him. But their votes wil already have been cast.
I sense a slight improvement for Cooper and Burnham will crash and burn but, otherwise, yes, I agree: too little, too late.
The excuse that governments have to speak to the political representatives of terrorists and other bigots really doesn't wash for an obscure back bencher. When he shares a platform with these people he cannot really believe he is a part of a peace process (unless he is totally delusional), he is supporting their cause as a player in the game (which Corbyn was not).
When he did that he chose to associate with some very unpleasant people with morally contemptible views. When doing so he did not think it necessary to challenge those views but instead he called these players "friends". The "governments do this" line is frankly ridiculous and he should be called on it.
But I don't think this is going to make any difference to the result. He has campaigned for this and the others haven't. He has generated enthusiasm. He has brought new blood into the party. I think he just might destroy the Labour party as a party of government but he deserves to win. And the others don't.
Yes, but its not a leadership of the Labour Party he is contesting - a Labour Party as you mean it. It is the leadership of a new party created by the £3 migrants that will still call itself the Labour Party. He himself, Corbyn, could not have attracted enough nominations except from MPs who in reality do not support him. Its the Labour Party that put him in this position that deserves obliteration and Corbyn will oblige. Should tories offer the hand of friendship to all those right wing labourites that have been vilified? Would it make the tories too inclusive? Too broad a church?? I imagine the tories would not want the gullible useful idiots who would just shrug their shoulders at Corbyn, but genuine um... thinkers? And of course there are the labour voters on the right of the party - why should the tories just watch them scurry to the lib dems?
I think there's ever more room than ever before for a new party of moderate labour, which would be attractive to many in the centre.
The issue is 'how' different that would be from the tory party under Cameron.
Jezza supporters have just completely tuned out to any revelations that will in any case only have an impact at the margin and that simply isn't enough to swing the Jezza coronation.
They want Jezza and they don't care.
Indeed. Someone could release a video of Corbyn kicking a puppy, and his supporters would probably claim it was a tory.
The Chilcott report was successfully held up so that it was not published before the 2015GE, and now looks as if the same is happening for the Labour leadership elections. What is the next impediment for the interested parties involved?
I'm not at the stage of thinking there is a conspiracy over the report's release: its just a bunch of bundling incompetents who, despite being well-paid and supposedly intelligent lawyers, have not realised that being 'independent' does not mean that you do not have a responsibility to be timely as well as thorough.
However today's story in the Independent makes me wonder if they are actually intelligent enough to run such an inquiry. Can someone send them some tinfoil hats?
I would not call it a conspiracy, but interested parties can use delaying tactics in the hope that the later the report is published, then the more its impact will be diminished and the longer the grass will have grown.
The excuse that governments have to speak to the political representatives of terrorists and other bigots really doesn't wash for an obscure back bencher. When he shares a platform with these people he cannot really believe he is a part of a peace process (unless he is totally delusional), he is supporting their cause as a player in the game (which Corbyn was not).
When he did that he chose to associate with some very unpleasant people with morally contemptible views. When doing so he did not think it necessary to challenge those views but instead he called these players "friends". The "governments do this" line is frankly ridiculous and he should be called on it.
But I don't think this is going to make any difference to the result. He has campaigned for this and the others haven't. He has generated enthusiasm. He has brought new blood into the party. I think he just might destroy the Labour party as a party of government but he deserves to win. And the others don't.
Yes, but its not a leadership of the Labour Party he is contesting - a Labour Party as you mean it. It is the leadership of a new party created by the £3 migrants that will still call itself the Labour Party. He himself, Corbyn, could not have attracted enough nominations except from MPs who in reality do not support him. Its the Labour Party that put him in this position that deserves obliteration and Corbyn will oblige. Should tories offer the hand of friendship to all those right wing labourites that have been vilified? Would it make the tories too inclusive? Too broad a church?? I imagine the tories would not want the gullible useful idiots who would just shrug their shoulders at Corbyn, but genuine um... thinkers? And of course there are the labour voters on the right of the party - why should the tories just watch them scurry to the lib dems?
I think there's ever more room than ever before for a new party of moderate labour, which would be attractive to many in the centre.
The issue is 'how' different that would be from the tory party under Cameron.
That was pretty much what Liz Kendall was proposing, her view being that elections are won in the competent centre. See Blair, T, and Cameron, D, for recent successful examples.
As we can see from the graph above though, the current Labour Party and organisation don't appear to agree with her.
The revelations have come too late. The bulk of Jeremy Corbyn's supporters are still in full-on denial mode, claiming that meeting Holocaust-deniers and blood-libellers is a routine occurrence for MPs looking for peace in the Middle East, that disavowing their views would be undiplomatic and that anyone could have senior moments about who they'd met and spoken with and procured visas for.
Another week or two of such revelations and they will be awkwardly shuffling away from him. But their votes wil already have been cast.
Yep. Nick Palmer and the Useful Idiots have closed their eyes to what was and is plain to see. They'll take a little time to acknowledge this, but the sheer weight of evidence - speeches, photos, recordings, videos etc - will leave them little choice. But not before they have set back the cause of moderate, electorally viable social democracy by many, many years.
BTW, the "Stupid Party" is traditionally the Tories...
Why would anyone want to vote for "moderate social democracy"? It's boring and it ignores the basic rule that politics are about the sources of political cleavage, i.e. race, class and religion.
We are moving from class-based politics to identity politics (except in the Six Counties, which have never had anything else). This move means that Labour is an idea whose time has gone. For all that right-wingers moan about "the politics of envy" they'll miss it when it's gone. Boy, will they ever.
Yes, that's basically the last Labour government's contribution to our society: identity based politics.
If only everyone was a Tory we'd be living in an earthly paradise, eh, CR?
The FTSE has dropped from a high of 7104 in May to current 6375, when will it return to the 5000s?
Brent Crude goes below $47.
It is back to where it was at the beginning of the year. No panic, but the sell off in emerging markets and commodities is creating some bargains. Cheap oil is quite a good economic stimulus!
Corbynites are not listening, - any criticism, from whichever quarter, is merely ignored as either establishment smears or as a reasonable position because (fill in blank space here).
[edit] @JackW "They want Jezza and they don't care."
Indeed so, there is nothing 'rational' about this group worship.
How can Kendall have a negative percentage chance of winning?
LOL!
I backed her at 200/1 yesterday. Actually think that was value. Yes, she's going to come last, but at least she's still in the race.
How could she win? In theory, if she polled better than Burnham, got his transfers, then went ahead of Cooper on those reallocations and Corbyn did wildly underperform, it's not totally impossible for it to be much close under AV.
The revelations have come too late. The bulk of Jeremy Corbyn's supporters are still in full-on denial mode, claiming that meeting Holocaust-deniers and blood-libellers is a routine occurrence for MPs looking for peace in the Middle East, that disavowing their views would be undiplomatic and that anyone could have senior moments about who they'd met and spoken with and procured visas for.
Another week or two of such revelations and they will be awkwardly shuffling away from him. But their votes wil already have been cast.
Yep. Nick Palmer and the Useful Idiots have closed their eyes to what was and is plain to see. They'll take a little time to acknowledge this, but the sheer weight of evidence - speeches, photos, recordings, videos etc - will leave them little choice. But not before they have set back the cause of moderate, electorally viable social democracy by many, many years.
BTW, the "Stupid Party" is traditionally the Tories...
Why would anyone want to vote for "moderate social democracy"? It's boring and it ignores the basic rule that politics are about the sources of political cleavage, i.e. race, class and religion.
We are moving from class-based politics to identity politics (except in the Six Counties, which have never had anything else). This move means that Labour is an idea whose time has gone. For all that right-wingers moan about "the politics of envy" they'll miss it when it's gone. Boy, will they ever.
The evidence strongly indicates that Labour is now the Stupid Party and has been for a while.
I would vote for a moderate social democratic party: one that believes people at the top should pay a little more tax, that understands who delivers public services is far less important than the quality of the service delivered, one that embraces capitalism but sees its flaws and does not automatically assume the private sector has a monopoly on wisdom, one that is committed to the maintenance of the UK, one that focuses relentlessly on equality of opportunity, one whose first instincts are to ensure change does not have a negative impact on the most vulnerable and one that understands soft power, rather than military force, is what can and should set the UK apart. I agree that identity politics is all too prevalent these days, but I don't believe that it has to be.
The revelations have come too late. The bulk of Jeremy Corbyn's supporters are still in full-on denial mode, claiming that meeting Holocaust-deniers and blood-libellers is a routine occurrence for MPs looking for peace in the Middle East, that disavowing their views would be undiplomatic and that anyone could have senior moments about who they'd met and spoken with and procured visas for.
Another week or two of such revelations and they will be awkwardly shuffling away from him. But their votes wil already have been cast.
Yep. Nick Palmer and the Useful Idiots have closed their eyes to what was and is plain to see. They'll take a little time to acknowledge this, but the sheer weight of evidence - speeches, photos, recordings, videos etc - will leave them little choice. But not before they have set back the cause of moderate, electorally viable social democracy by many, many years.
BTW, the "Stupid Party" is traditionally the Tories...
Why would anyone want to vote for "moderate social democracy"? It's boring and it ignores the basic rule that politics are about the sources of political cleavage, i.e. race, class and religion.
We are moving from class-based politics to identity politics (except in the Six Counties, which have never had anything else). This move means that Labour is an idea whose time has gone. For all that right-wingers moan about "the politics of envy" they'll miss it when it's gone. Boy, will they ever.
Yes, that's basically the last Labour government's contribution to our society: identity based politics.
If only everyone was a Tory we'd be living in an earthly paradise, eh, CR?
It's difficult for most on the centre left to see how a Cooper/Corbyn/Kendall victory would be different from a Cameron/Osborne one. They've had three months to sell themselves and few of us are any the wiser.
Before them Ed had five years and the sum of our understanding of his brand of left wing politics was a giant stone with six meaningless platitudes.
Are you surprised that Labour activists are now in the mood to throw their balls in the air in the hope that they land in a more interesting place?
The revelations have come too late. The bulk of Jeremy Corbyn's supporters are still in full-on denial mode, claiming that meeting Holocaust-deniers and blood-libellers is a routine occurrence for MPs looking for peace in the Middle East, that disavowing their views would be undiplomatic and that anyone could have senior moments about who they'd met and spoken with and procured visas for.
Another week or two of such revelations and they will be awkwardly shuffling away from him. But their votes wil already have been cast.
Yep. Nick Palmer and the Useful Idiots have closed their eyes to what was and is plain to see. They'll take a little time to acknowledge this, but the sheer weight of evidence - speeches, photos, recordings, videos etc - will leave them little choice. But not before they have set back the cause of moderate, electorally viable social democracy by many, many years.
BTW, the "Stupid Party" is traditionally the Tories...
Why would anyone want to vote for "moderate social democracy"? It's boring and it ignores the basic rule that politics are about the sources of political cleavage, i.e. race, class and religion.
We are moving from class-based politics to identity politics (except in the Six Counties, which have never had anything else). This move means that Labour is an idea whose time has gone. For all that right-wingers moan about "the politics of envy" they'll miss it when it's gone. Boy, will they ever.
The evidence strongly indicates that Labour is now the Stupid Party and has been for a while.
I would vote for a moderate social democratic party: one that believes people at the top should pay a little more tax, that understands who delivers public services is far less important than the quality of the service delivered, one that embraces capitalism but sees its flaws and does not automatically assume the private sector has a monopoly on wisdom, one that is committed to the maintenance of the UK, one that focuses relentlessly on equality of opportunity, one whose first instincts are to ensure change does not have a negative impact on the most vulnerable and one that understands soft power, rather than military force, is what can and should set the UK apart. I agree that identity politics is all too prevalent these days, but I don't believe that it has to be.
What I'm finding REALLY hard to get my head around is the horror that sensible Labourites must be experiencing.
If someone told me that the Tories were about to elect a supporter of a Holocaust denier, hugged terrorists as a hobby, was still a member of the Monday Club, divorced their wife for not sending their kid to public school and called similar far-rightists *friends* = I'd be APPALLED.
It's only by putting it in those terms that I can even begin to understand what Labour are doing. And I still can't believe it's happening.
The revelations have come too late. The bulk of Jeremy Corbyn's supporters are still in full-on denial mode, claiming that meeting Holocaust-deniers and blood-libellers is a routine occurrence for MPs looking for peace in the Middle East, that disavowing their views would be undiplomatic and that anyone could have senior moments about who they'd met and spoken with and procured visas for.
Another week or two of such revelations and they will be awkwardly shuffling away from him. But their votes wil already have been cast.
How will the Zoomers handle this? Dare they criticise Liz Lochhead?
Anti-Englishness is not recognised in Scotland as racism. We do not consider ourselves racists, so how can we be guilty of racism? Scots may not like English people getting big jobs in their line of work; they may make comments about “English bastards” or “English bitches”; they may ridicule someone’s English accent; but that’s not like slagging off Jews or Asians, is it? Anti-Englishness isn’t proper racism, is it?
Well, yes it is. So when Lochhead this week follows her friend, the novelist and artist Alasdair Gray, in complaining about too many immigrants taking good jobs that should go to proper, native, Scottish people, I have no hesitation in pointing out the similarities between her rhetoric and that of Nigel Farage.
The Chilcott report was successfully held up so that it was not published before the 2015GE, and now looks as if the same is happening for the Labour leadership elections. What is the next impediment for the interested parties involved?
If Jez wins, we could have an interesting position of the current leader of a political party wanting a prior leader to be arrested for war crimes.
While simultaneously turning a blind eye to war crimes committed by his friends and associates.
'Schools are using community languages such as Urdu and Polish to give themselves “an easy hit” to gain top grade GCSE passes and boost their rankings in league tables, a leading academic has said. Figures show that more than one in three (36 per cent) of candidates who sit GCSEs in community languages obtain an A* grade - the highest figure for any subject and seven time as many as those who get the top grade for maths.'
...and
'The report also shows that pupils in Northern Ireland are “well in front” when it comes to exam passes with 78 per cent obtaining five A* to C grade passes compared with 68.6 per cent for England and 66.6 per cent for Wales. “It is not a popular thing to say but an obvious candidate to account for NI’s success ... is its grammar school system,” says the report. '
People are making the mistake of assuming the Chilcott inquiry was set up to find out anything and report back promptly.
It wasn't. It was set up to deal with the demands for an inquiry by kicking them into the long grass. Remember who set it up - the man who was a key member of the government involved in the decision to go to war.
That's why it got a Chairman who is a third rate civil servant, has a panel consisting of nonentities who couldn't take the skin off a rice pudding, and why it was given no deadline. It has achieved its purpose - to stop anything embarrassing being said about senior Labour politicians while they were still in power or even in Parliament - beautifully.
If we want to find out about the decision to go to war in Iraq in 2003, we would need a proper inquiry, with all relevant documents published, a proper, sharp timetable, forensic questioners etc. We won't get one.
The more 'the establishment' in all its guises attacks JC, the firmer his support will become.
This isn't a personality cult, it is a chance to break from the imposed consensus. We have seen it happen in Greece, it may be happening in Spain, so let's bring it to Britain. If it fails, the Tories will be in government, but that was going to happen anyway.
The troubled Co-operative Bank has reported bigger losses, in part due to higher legal costs. Pre-tax losses for the first six months of the year were £204.2m, compared with losses of £77m a year earlier. The figure was slightly better than expected. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33999141
So bad they are let off fines. "At the end of last year, the bank failed a Bank of England stress test, designed to test banks' ability to withstand another financial crisis." "And last week, a regulatory report criticised the bank for misleading investors. The bank escaped a fine, however, because the regulator said it needed all the money it has to strengthen its balance sheet."
The revelations have come too late. The bulk of Jeremy Corbyn's supporters are still in full-on denial mode, claiming that meeting Holocaust-deniers and blood-libellers is a routine occurrence for MPs looking for peace in the Middle East, that disavowing their views would be undiplomatic and that anyone could have senior moments about who they'd met and spoken with and procured visas for.
Another week or two of such revelations and they will be awkwardly shuffling away from him. But their votes wil already have been cast.
I sense a slight improvement for Cooper and Burnham will crash and burn but, otherwise, yes, I agree: too little, too late.
40-50% of votes have probably already been cast.
I agree , this is all way too late ...the other candidates should have Blitzed Corbyn weeks ago and totally humiliated him , but they all lacked the attack dog mode , Burnham was the most toothless of all , and now its all too late , Corbyn will win (probably on the first ballot) The only slight hope is for something completely embarrassing to come out about Corbyn that will force him to quit the race or resign before he takes his position as leader
The LP deserve Corbyn ; they are totally anachronistic and outdated ; it's only poetic justice that a quasi Marxist fool from the 1970s leads them in their suicide jump off the cliff edge
The revelations have come too late. The bulk of Jeremy Corbyn's supporters are still in full-on denial mode, claiming that meeting Holocaust-deniers and blood-libellers is a routine occurrence for MPs looking for peace in the Middle East, that disavowing their views would be undiplomatic and that anyone could have senior moments about who they'd met and spoken with and procured visas for.
Another week or two of such revelations and they will be awkwardly shuffling away from him. But their votes wil already have been cast.
Yep. Nick Palmer and the Useful Idiots have closed their eyes to what was and is plain to see. They'll take a little time to acknowledge this, but the sheer weight of evidence - speeches, photos, recordings, videos etc - will leave them little choice. But not before they have set back the cause of moderate, electorally viable social democracy by many, many years.
BTW, the "Stupid Party" is traditionally the Tories...
Why would anyone want to vote for "moderate social democracy"? It's boring and it ignores the basic rule that politics are about the sources of political cleavage, i.e. race, class and religion.
We are moving from class-based politics to identity politics (except in the Six Counties, which have never had anything else). This move means that Labour is an idea whose time has gone. For all that right-wingers moan about "the politics of envy" they'll miss it when it's gone. Boy, will they ever.
The evidence strongly indicates that Labour is now the Stupid Party and has been for a while.
I would vote for a moderate social democratic party: one that believes people at the top should pay a little more tax, that understands who delivers public services is far less important than the quality of the service delivered, one that embraces capitalism but sees its flaws and does not automatically assume the private sector has a monopoly on wisdom, one that is committed to the maintenance of the UK, one that focuses relentlessly on equality of opportunity, one whose first instincts are to ensure change does not have a negative impact on the most vulnerable and one that understands soft power, rather than military force, is what can and should set the UK apart. I agree that identity politics is all too prevalent these days, but I don't believe that it has to be.
I agree. I would vote for such a party. But the Labour party is not that party and does not even look like it wants to be such a party. More fool them.
People are making the mistake of assuming the Chilcott inquiry was set up to find out anything and report back promptly.
It wasn't. It was set up to deal with the demands for an inquiry by kicking them into the long grass. Remember who set it up - the man who was a key member of the government involved in the decision to go to war.
That's why it got a Chairman who is a third rate civil servant, has a panel consisting of nonentities who couldn't take the skin off a rice pudding, and why it was given no deadline. It has achieved its purpose - to stop anything embarrassing being said about senior Labour politicians while they were still in power or even in Parliament - beautifully.
If we want to find out about the decision to go to war in Iraq in 2003, we would need a proper inquiry, with all relevant documents published, a proper, sharp timetable, forensic questioners etc. We won't get one.
Is Chilcott going to tell us anything that we didn't know already about the rotten centre of New Labour?
Corbyn was right about the second gulf war and its consequences that we see on Kos and in Calais. What we are seeing with Corbyn is the chickens coming home to roost from that unpopular war.
What I'm finding REALLY hard to get my head around is the horror that sensible Labourites must be experiencing. If someone told me that the Tories were about to elect a supporter of a Holocaust denier, hugged terrorists as a hobby, was still a member of the Monday Club, divorced their wife for not sending their kid to public school and called similar far-rightists *friends* = I'd be APPALLED...
The revelations have come too late. The bulk of Jeremy Corbyn's supporters are still in full-on denial mode, claiming that meeting Holocaust-deniers and blood-libellers is a routine occurrence for MPs looking for peace in the Middle East, that disavowing their views would be undiplomatic and that anyone could have senior moments about who they'd met and spoken with and procured visas for.
Another week or two of such revelations and they will be awkwardly shuffling away from him. But their votes wil already have been cast.
But, the real puzzle is why PB Labour people such as NickP and BJowls back Corbyn. They have fallen in love. Mad and funny to watch. Impossible to rationalise.
'Schools are using community languages such as Urdu and Polish to give themselves “an easy hit” to gain top grade GCSE passes and boost their rankings in league tables, a leading academic has said. Figures show that more than one in three (36 per cent) of candidates who sit GCSEs in community languages obtain an A* grade - the highest figure for any subject and seven time as many as those who get the top grade for maths.'
...and
'The report also shows that pupils in Northern Ireland are “well in front” when it comes to exam passes with 78 per cent obtaining five A* to C grade passes compared with 68.6 per cent for England and 66.6 per cent for Wales. “It is not a popular thing to say but an obvious candidate to account for NI’s success ... is its grammar school system,” says the report. '
The Corbyn supporters I met outside of a rally in Middlesbrough were mostly the types who didn't grasp even the basics of the political spectrum IE ...Right and Left ...their support for Corbyn was of a revivalist nature ,just pure emotion,,,Corbyn had ''reached ''them with idealistic , but unrealistic phrases that had ''chimed '' and now they were hooked on 'hope and change '' These are the folks who are going to follow Corbyn in his death march over the cliff edge ...I do not realistically expect the LP to recover from this debacle
It's difficult for most on the centre left to see how a Cooper/Corbyn/Kendall victory would be different from a Cameron/Osborne one. They've had three months to sell themselves and few of us are any the wiser.
Before them Ed had five years and the sum of our understanding of his brand of left wing politics was a giant stone with six meaningless platitudes.
Are you surprised that Labour activists are now in the mood to throw their balls in the air in the hope that they land in a more interesting place?
I absolutely understand why they want to do it. It's the impulse of a drunken teenager at a boring dinner party who decides to set fire to the table cloth in the hope of making the dinner more interesting. Neither Kendall nor Cooper nor Burnham have impressed. This is what Labour has been reduced to - a husk of a party with few talented people in it and so rotten that it can be taken over by those wanting to vote for someone whose world view is so out of date and malign in its effect that it was comprehensively trashed by George Orwell in the 1940's.
The revelations have come too late. The bulk of Jeremy Corbyn's supporters are still in full-on denial mode, claiming that meeting Holocaust-deniers and blood-libellers is a routine occurrence for MPs looking for peace in the Middle East, that disavowing their views would be undiplomatic and that anyone could have senior moments about who they'd met and spoken with and procured visas for.
Another week or two of such revelations and they will be awkwardly shuffling away from him. But their votes wil already have been cast.
Yep. Nick Palmer and the Useful Idiots have closed their eyes to what was and is plain to see. They'll take a little time to acknowledge this, but the sheer weight of evidence - speeches, photos, recordings, videos etc - will leave them little choice. But not before they have set back the cause of moderate, electorally viable social democracy by many, many years.
BTW, the "Stupid Party" is traditionally the Tories...
Why would anyone want to vote for "moderate social democracy"? It's boring and it ignores the basic rule that politics are about the sources of political cleavage, i.e. race, class and religion.
We are moving from class-based politics to identity politics (except in the Six Counties, which have never had anything else). This move means that Labour is an idea whose time has gone. For all that right-wingers moan about "the politics of envy" they'll miss it when it's gone. Boy, will they ever.
The evidence strongly indicates that Labour is now the Stupid Party and has been for a while.
I would vote for a moderate social democratic party: one that believes people at the top should pay a little more tax, that understands who delivers public services is far less important than the quality of the service delivered, one that embraces capitalism but sees its flaws and does not automatically assume the private sector has a monopoly on wisdom, one that is committed to the maintenance of the UK, one that focuses relentlessly on equality of opportunity, one whose first instincts are to ensure change does not have a negative impact on the most vulnerable and one that understands soft power, rather than military force, is what can and should set the UK apart. I agree that identity politics is all too prevalent these days, but I don't believe that it has to be.
Agreed - the essence of any political party that wants to govern is to lean to the centre. Nick Palmer comes out of all this very badly - thank heavens the Broxtowe voters kept him out.
One thing I do wonder is how will Corbyn be received by the PLP in the H/C at QT for example? With barely 40 sympathetic MPs and many more hostile things could look pretty ugly very quickly.
FPT: "F1: just from the gossip column: it seems like the sport will shift to a ground effect approach from 2017.
That could be a sea change in relative performance. It could provide a golden opportunity for McLaren to bounce back, especially as they hired Prodromou[sp], formerly the top aero chap working under Adrian Newey at Red Bull."
Mr. Foxinsox, ISIS began in Syria. Without the Iraq war of Blair, it's perhaps unlikely they would've spread to Saddam's Iraq, but then, that country might also have been torn apart by the so-called Arab Spring.
"I would vote for a moderate social democratic party:"
I would and have done many times. The tacit agreement has been breached, though. The one that says the hard left in their many manifestations should talk loudly but have no say in policy - full of sound and fury and signifying nothing. They should continue to be that embarrassing uncle at the wedding who occasionally drinks a lot and makes a fool of himself - but he is family.
Tony was a bit too glib though so I went to the LDs until the last election. Ed ...????
Tories were always the opposition not the enemies.
I still believe Labour will come to their senses. They let Mrs Rochester take over for a while and then the unions decided on gormless Ed.
Now they're peeking into Pandora's box. Leave that lid alone!
Fox- Kendall's approach is indeed more electable but Labour need to find someone who can articulate these ideas with much more authority and gravitas- something which Kendell lacks.
It would be like the Tories electing Oliver Letwin- someone whose philosophy is deeply rooted in the centre ground, but he couldn't carry it off as leader.
The revelations have come too late. The bulk of Jeremy Corbyn's supporters are still in full-on denial mode, claiming that meeting Holocaust-deniers and blood-libellers is a routine occurrence for MPs looking for peace in the Middle East, that disavowing their views would be undiplomatic and that anyone could have senior moments about who they'd met and spoken with and procured visas for.
Another week or two of such revelations and they will be awkwardly shuffling away from him. But their votes wil already have been cast.
Yep. Nick Palmer and the Useful Idiots have closed their eyes to what was and is plain to see. They'll take a little time to acknowledge this, but the sheer weight of evidence - speeches, photos, recordings, videos etc - will leave them little choice. But not before they have set back the cause of moderate, electorally viable social democracy by many, many years.
BTW, the "Stupid Party" is traditionally the Tories...
Why would anyone want to vote for "moderate social democracy"? It's boring and it ignores the basic rule that politics are about the sources of political cleavage, i.e. race, class and religion.
We are moving from class-based politics to identity politics (except in the Six Counties, which have never had anything else). This move means that Labour is an idea whose time has gone. For all that right-wingers moan about "the politics of envy" they'll miss it when it's gone. Boy, will they ever.
Fox- Kendall's approach is indeed more electable but Labour need to find someone who can articulate these ideas with much more authority and gravitas- something which Kendell lacks.
It would be like the Tories electing Oliver Letwin- someone whose philosophy is deeply rooted in the centre ground, but he couldn't carry it off as leader.
The revelations have come too late. The bulk of Jeremy Corbyn's supporters are still in full-on denial mode, claiming that meeting Holocaust-deniers and blood-libellers is a routine occurrence for MPs looking for peace in the Middle East, that disavowing their views would be undiplomatic and that anyone could have senior moments about who they'd met and spoken with and procured visas for.
Another week or two of such revelations and they will be awkwardly shuffling away from him. But their votes wil already have been cast.
Yep. Nick Palmer and the Useful Idiots have closed their eyes to what was and is plain to see. They'll take a little time to acknowledge this, but the sheer weight of evidence - speeches, photos, recordings, videos etc - will leave them little choice. But not before they have set back the cause of moderate, electorally viable social democracy by many, many years.
BTW, the "Stupid Party" is traditionally the Tories...
Why would anyone want to vote for "moderate social democracy"? It's boring and it ignores the basic rule that politics are about the sources of political cleavage, i.e. race, class and religion.
We are moving from class-based politics to identity politics (except in the Six Counties, which have never had anything else). This move means that Labour is an idea whose time has gone. For all that right-wingers moan about "the politics of envy" they'll miss it when it's gone. Boy, will they ever.
I agree. That is why I voted Kendall.
I've never voted Labour, but if Oli Letwin and Liz Kendall were the respective leaders...
'Schools are using community languages such as Urdu and Polish to give themselves “an easy hit” to gain top grade GCSE passes and boost their rankings in league tables, a leading academic has said. Figures show that more than one in three (36 per cent) of candidates who sit GCSEs in community languages obtain an A* grade - the highest figure for any subject and seven time as many as those who get the top grade for maths.'
...and
'The report also shows that pupils in Northern Ireland are “well in front” when it comes to exam passes with 78 per cent obtaining five A* to C grade passes compared with 68.6 per cent for England and 66.6 per cent for Wales. “It is not a popular thing to say but an obvious candidate to account for NI’s success ... is its grammar school system,” says the report. '
There was a great post by someone (apols can't remember) saying how PB did Cons' thinking well but were less sure of Lab thinking.
Lab have now joined UKIP & the LDs in needing to work out what they are for. And they must then communicate this clearly to the electorate.
Centrist-ish but nice doesn't seem to have worked.
I'm not saying that we are at the end of (political) history. Yet. But I can understand the rationale of trying out further left as a uniquely Labour position. The slight shame, as @alex. pointed out, is that Jezza is not the left wing candidate to succeed at anything. They needed a grown-up left winger and sadly haven't got one.
If different from Jezza's, I would be interested to hear @JWisemann's view of what Lab should think or look like.
UKIP know exactly what they are for - getting us out of the EU whether or not that takes 10 more years of eurozone chaos first.
The revelations have come too late. The bulk of Jeremy Corbyn's supporters are still in full-on denial mode, claiming that meeting Holocaust-deniers and blood-libellers is a routine occurrence for MPs looking for peace in the Middle East, that disavowing their views would be undiplomatic and that anyone could have senior moments about who they'd met and spoken with and procured visas for.
Another week or two of such revelations and they will be awkwardly shuffling away from him. But their votes wil already have been cast.
I sense a slight improvement for Cooper and Burnham will crash and burn but, otherwise, yes, I agree: too little, too late.
40-50% of votes have probably already been cast.
The revelations may be too late to affect the election but they will keep on coming over the next few years and will be repeated at moments of maximum possible embarrassment e.g any time there is a terrorist atrocity in the UK or in Europe and it turns out that someone Corbyn shilled for or invited or praised or the groups he is chair of or involved in says something repellent he will find himself on the defensive and the meme will slowly develop that Labour is somehow on the side of those who hate us and want to kill us. One widow of a dead soldier asking Corbyn or any Labour MP why their leader wanted invited to Britain and sat beside a man who was glad that her husband had been killed, asking what such a party has to say to her and her fatherless children.
Some gruesome atrocity against Yazidis or Christians or others by IS and Labour MPs with their face in their hands in Parliament as Corbyn is asked whether he still agrees with the statement by Stop the War that action should not be taken against IS because the US is involved.
As Adams might put it, the questions "haven't gone away".
The revelations have come too late. The bulk of Jeremy Corbyn's supporters are still in full-on denial mode, claiming that meeting Holocaust-deniers and blood-libellers is a routine occurrence for MPs looking for peace in the Middle East, that disavowing their views would be undiplomatic and that anyone could have senior moments about who they'd met and spoken with and procured visas for.
Another week or two of such revelations and they will be awkwardly shuffling away from him. But their votes wil already have been cast.
Yep. Nick Palmer and the Useful Idiots have closed their eyes to what was and is plain to see. They'll take a little time to acknowledge this, but the sheer weight of evidence - speeches, photos, recordings, videos etc - will leave them little choice. But not before they have set back the cause of moderate, electorally viable social democracy by many, many years.
The evidence strongly indicates that Labour is now the Stupid Party and has been for a while.
I would vote for a moderate social democratic party: one that believes people at the top should pay a little more tax, that understands who delivers public services is far less important than the quality of the service delivered, one that embraces capitalism but sees its flaws and does not automatically assume the private sector has a monopoly on wisdom, one that is committed to the maintenance of the UK, one that focuses relentlessly on equality of opportunity, one whose first instincts are to ensure change does not have a negative impact on the most vulnerable and one that understands soft power, rather than military force, is what can and should set the UK apart. I agree that identity politics is all too prevalent these days, but I don't believe that it has to be.
Oh very much this. I've never been a member of any party, but I've generally voted conservative as the 'least-worst' option.
However, I am a sopping wet conservative - as socially liberal as you like, but the government has to run its finances well.
My only differences from Southam is (possibly) that 'people at the top' should include wealthy pensioners and I don't particularly care about the union (as I've said before, I'm a BOO, so how can I not support Scottish independence?).
I could certainly be persuaded to vote for a party that espoused Southam's expressed values.
"Are you surprised that Labour activists are now in the mood to throw their balls in the air in the hope that they land in a more interesting place? "
But they're not throwing their balls in the air, they're throwing them away. They are castrating the Labour Party, excluding it from any chance of power for at least a decade, possibly a generation and conceivably ever again.
Gordon Brown may turn out to be last Labour PM of the UK. How apt.
Jezza supporters have just completely tuned out to any revelations that will in any case only have an impact at the margin and that simply isn't enough to swing the Jezza coronation.
They want Jezza and they don't care.
Indeed. Someone could release a video of Corbyn kicking a puppy, and his supporters would probably claim it was a tory.
The revelations have come too late. The bulk of Jeremy Corbyn's supporters are still in full-on denial mode, claiming that meeting Holocaust-deniers and blood-libellers is a routine occurrence for MPs looking for peace in the Middle East, that disavowing their views would be undiplomatic and that anyone could have senior moments about who they'd met and spoken with and procured visas for.
Another week or two of such revelations and they will be awkwardly shuffling away from him. But their votes wil already have been cast.
Yep. Nick Palmer and the Useful Idiots have closed their eyes to what was and is plain to see. They'll take a little time to acknowledge this, but the sheer weight of evidence - speeches, photos, recordings, videos etc - will leave them little choice. But not before they have set back the cause of moderate, electorally viable social democracy by many, many years.
BTW, the "Stupid Party" is traditionally the Tories...
Why would anyone want to vote for "moderate social democracy"? It's boring and it ignores the basic rule that politics are about the sources of political cleavage, i.e. race, class and religion.
We are moving from class-based politics to identity politics (except in the Six Counties, which have never had anything else). This move means that Labour is an idea whose time has gone. For all that right-wingers moan about "the politics of envy" they'll miss it when it's gone. Boy, will they ever.
The evidence strongly indicates that Labour is now the Stupid Party and has been for a while.
snipped
Agreed - the essence of any political party that wants to govern is to lean to the centre. Nick Palmer comes out of all this very badly - thank heavens the Broxtowe voters kept him out.
One thing I do wonder is how will Corbyn be received by the PLP in the H/C at QT for example? With barely 40 sympathetic MPs and many more hostile things could look pretty ugly very quickly.
It will partly depending on the scale of his win (if win it is - I remain calm, a la Hatwal). A huge win means Lab MPs will need to respect the membership and keep down for a few months. John Mann in today's DT saying JC will probably get a chance to reclaim something in Scotland in May 2016 Holyrood elections.
Mr. Foxinsox, ISIS began in Syria. Without the Iraq war of Blair, it's perhaps unlikely they would've spread to Saddam's Iraq, but then, that country might also have been torn apart by the so-called Arab Spring.
IS began in East Syria because they had support from fellow travellers in the Sunni fighters fighting the Shiite Iraqi government. The two are one phenomenon.
People are making the mistake of assuming the Chilcott inquiry was set up to find out anything and report back promptly.
It wasn't. It was set up to deal with the demands for an inquiry by kicking them into the long grass. Remember who set it up - the man who was a key member of the government involved in the decision to go to war.
That's why it got a Chairman who is a third rate civil servant, has a panel consisting of nonentities who couldn't take the skin off a rice pudding, and why it was given no deadline. It has achieved its purpose - to stop anything embarrassing being said about senior Labour politicians while they were still in power or even in Parliament - beautifully.
If we want to find out about the decision to go to war in Iraq in 2003, we would need a proper inquiry, with all relevant documents published, a proper, sharp timetable, forensic questioners etc. We won't get one.
Is Chilcott going to tell us anything that we didn't know already about the rotten centre of New Labour?
Corbyn was right about the second gulf war and its consequences that we see on Kos and in Calais. What we are seeing with Corbyn is the chickens coming home to roost from that unpopular war.
Is that why Corbyn was against the Iraq war? Because it would lead to increased immigration into Europe? I don't think so - he's in favour of immigration. He was against it because the US were leading it. Do you really think that if there had been a second UN resolution the opposition of the Stop the War group would have disappeared? I don't.
And I thought someone posted on here a few days ago polls showing that even at the height of the opposition, the was was supported by a majority. I may be wrong on this.
Certainly Labour are now paying the price for the emptiness and dishonesty and moral vacuousness at the heart of Blair and Brown's Labour. But they are replacing it with the Left's own emptiness and dishonesty and moral vacuousness.
What I'm finding REALLY hard to get my head around is the horror that sensible Labourites must be experiencing. If someone told me that the Tories were about to elect a supporter of a Holocaust denier, hugged terrorists as a hobby, was still a member of the Monday Club, divorced their wife for not sending their kid to public school and called similar far-rightists *friends* = I'd be APPALLED...
The revelations have come too late. The bulk of Jeremy Corbyn's supporters are still in full-on denial mode, claiming that meeting Holocaust-deniers and blood-libellers is a routine occurrence for MPs looking for peace in the Middle East, that disavowing their views would be undiplomatic and that anyone could have senior moments about who they'd met and spoken with and procured visas for.
Another week or two of such revelations and they will be awkwardly shuffling away from him. But their votes wil already have been cast.
But, the real puzzle is why PB Labour people such as NickP and BJowls back Corbyn. They have fallen in love. Mad and funny to watch. Impossible to rationalise.
'Schools are using community languages such as Urdu and Polish to give themselves “an easy hit” to gain top grade GCSE passes and boost their rankings in league tables, a leading academic has said. Figures show that more than one in three (36 per cent) of candidates who sit GCSEs in community languages obtain an A* grade - the highest figure for any subject and seven time as many as those who get the top grade for maths.'
...and
'The report also shows that pupils in Northern Ireland are “well in front” when it comes to exam passes with 78 per cent obtaining five A* to C grade passes compared with 68.6 per cent for England and 66.6 per cent for Wales. “It is not a popular thing to say but an obvious candidate to account for NI’s success ... is its grammar school system,” says the report. '
I don't have an issue with polish and Pakistani kids getting decent GCSEs in Polish and Urdu.
I also think that the grammar school system is an excellent one, on the proviso that secondary moderns receive the same funding as grammars !
Doesn't it give schools w a high proportion of children from polish or Urdu speaking countries an unfair advantage in the race for £££?
Nah I don't think that's a worry. It's one GCSE. If a kid happens to be bilingual, good luck to them ! They may well find English tougher, too. A swing and a roundabout.
"Are you surprised that Labour activists are now in the mood to throw their balls in the air in the hope that they land in a more interesting place? "
But they're not throwing their balls in the air, they're throwing them away. They are castrating the Labour Party, excluding it from any chance of power for at least a decade, possibly a generation and conceivably ever again.
Gordon Brown may turn out to be last Labour PM of the UK. How apt.
I don't think it is quite as bad as you predict. It seems to me more likely that JC will (if he wins) be given a couple of years. There'll be some kind of honeymoon with the public as they enjoy a bit of change and then, next year, the appalling polls, the by-election loses, the policy howlers, the skeletons in the Sun's photo drawer etc will follow. Coup by 2018 at latest.
I think you also have to consider that three election cycles under Blair/ Brow exhausted the party philosophically- much like the Tories in the 90's after 4 cycles.
A party needs to rejuvenate to get that hunger back- this takes time, and mistakes. Without the mistakes you lose the discipline, ideas and thirst to get back into power. Apart from the polls, did anyone actually believe that the Labour party led by Ed Miliband deserved to get back in? It would have been a travesty if Ed had won; a lazy Labour party that was just basically gambling on a 35% strategy. What would it have said about UK politics is Ed had won. He was deservedly beaten and the Tories deserved their majority.
I'm pretty OK about Corbyn becoming leader, and folk like SouthernObserver should just chill and wait and stay loyal to the cause. Corbyn will crash and burn for sure- but at the other end lies a Labour party that'll be fit for purpose. 2020 might still be too soon.
"I would vote for a moderate social democratic party:"
I would and have done many times. The tacit agreement has been breached, though. The one that says the hard left in their many manifestations should talk loudly but have no say in policy - full of sound and fury and signifying nothing. They should continue to be that embarrassing uncle at the wedding who occasionally drinks a lot and makes a fool of himself - but he is family.
Tony was a bit too glib though so I went to the LDs until the last election. Ed ...????
Tories were always the opposition not the enemies.
I still believe Labour will come to their senses. They let Mrs Rochester take over for a while and then the unions decided on gormless Ed.
Now they're peeking into Pandora's box. Leave that lid alone!
What I'm finding REALLY hard to get my head around is the horror that sensible Labourites must be experiencing.
If someone told me that the Tories were about to elect a supporter of a Holocaust denier, hugged terrorists as a hobby, was still a member of the Monday Club, divorced their wife for not sending their kid to public school and called similar far-rightists *friends* = I'd be APPALLED.
It's only by putting it in those terms that I can even begin to understand what Labour are doing. And I still can't believe it's happening.
The revelations have come too late. The bulk of Jeremy Corbyn's supporters are still in full-on denial mode, claiming that meeting Holocaust-deniers and blood-libellers is a routine occurrence for MPs looking for peace in the Middle East, that disavowing their views would be undiplomatic and that anyone could have senior moments about who they'd met and spoken with and procured visas for.
Another week or two of such revelations and they will be awkwardly shuffling away from him. But their votes wil already have been cast.
If someone told you that the Tories were about to elect a supporter of a Holocaust denier, hugged terrorists as a hobby, was still a member of the Monday Club, divorced their wife for not sending their kid to public school and called similar far-rightists *friends* - you'd probably think they were exaggerating - and you'd be right.
I find myself torn. I'm a longstanding Tory member and activist, and a former Conservative Council Leader. I'm also a registered supporter of the Labour Party, and my ballot paper has arrived.
There was a time that voting for Jeremy Corbyn was funny; it doesn't seem so funny anymore. I'm seeking PB's advice on a genuine ethical question. Should I:
a) Vote Corbyn - to hell with them b) Not vote - it's their handcart they can do what they like with it c) Vote Kendall 1 Cooper 2, because Kendall would do least damage to the country and Cooper is the only grown up in the race?
Comments
LOL!
When he did that he chose to associate with some very unpleasant people with morally contemptible views. When doing so he did not think it necessary to challenge those views but instead he called these players "friends". The "governments do this" line is frankly ridiculous and he should be called on it.
But I don't think this is going to make any difference to the result. He has campaigned for this and the others haven't. He has generated enthusiasm. He has brought new blood into the party. I think he just might destroy the Labour party as a party of government but he deserves to win. And the others don't.
Another week or two of such revelations and they will be awkwardly shuffling away from him. But their votes wil already have been cast.
The Chilcott report was successfully held up so that it was not published before the 2015GE, and now looks as if the same is happening for the Labour leadership elections. What is the next impediment for the interested parties involved?
Lab have now joined UKIP & the LDs in needing to work out what they are for. And they must then communicate this clearly to the electorate.
Centrist-ish but nice doesn't seem to have worked.
I'm not saying that we are at the end of (political) history. Yet. But I can understand the rationale of trying out further left as a uniquely Labour position. The slight shame, as @alex. pointed out, is that Jezza is not the left wing candidate to succeed at anything. They needed a grown-up left winger and sadly haven't got one.
If different from Jezza's, I would be interested to hear @JWisemann's view of what Lab should think or look like.
Pre-tax losses for the first six months of the year were £204.2m, compared with losses of £77m a year earlier. The figure was slightly better than expected.
It included losses of £38.2m on sales of assets needed to reduce the bank's overall levels of debt.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33999141
So probably little extra money for Labour there.
Why would anyone want to vote for "moderate social democracy"? It's boring and it ignores the basic rule that politics are about the sources of political cleavage, i.e. race, class and religion.
We are moving from class-based politics to identity politics (except in the Six Counties, which have never had anything else). This move means that Labour is an idea whose time has gone. For all that right-wingers moan about "the politics of envy" they'll miss it when it's gone. Boy, will they ever.
Should tories offer the hand of friendship to all those right wing labourites that have been vilified? Would it make the tories too inclusive? Too broad a church??
I imagine the tories would not want the gullible useful idiots who would just shrug their shoulders at Corbyn, but genuine um... thinkers? And of course there are the labour voters on the right of the party - why should the tories just watch them scurry to the lib dems?
His achilles heel are the unions and the dangers he poses to party unity. I'm sure Burnham and Kendall are dead in the water and the only thing standing between Corbyn and the leadership is Cooper.
Little wonder a) leftish Lab like Jezza; and b) non-leftish Lab are in despair.
They want Jezza and they don't care.
However today's story in the Independent makes me wonder if they are actually intelligent enough to run such an inquiry. Can someone send them some tinfoil hats?
Oh sorry, brackets implying negative?
Brent Crude goes below $47.
40-50% of votes have probably already been cast.
The issue is 'how' different that would be from the tory party under Cameron.
"Nick Palmer and the Useful Idiots"
They sound like a 70's pop group.
As we can see from the graph above though, the current Labour Party and organisation don't appear to agree with her.
Corbynites are not listening, - any criticism, from whichever quarter, is merely ignored as either establishment smears or as a reasonable position because (fill in blank space here).
[edit] @JackW "They want Jezza and they don't care."
Indeed so, there is nothing 'rational' about this group worship.
How could she win? In theory, if she polled better than Burnham, got his transfers, then went ahead of Cooper on those reallocations and Corbyn did wildly underperform, it's not totally impossible for it to be much close under AV.
I've backed far worse 200/1 shots.
@rupertmurdoch: Corbyn increasingly likely Labor winner. Seems only candidate who believes anything, right or wrong.
So the Great Satan to the lefties, Rupert Murdoch, has just endorsed Corbyn, after a fashion.
I would vote for a moderate social democratic party: one that believes people at the top should pay a little more tax, that understands who delivers public services is far less important than the quality of the service delivered, one that embraces capitalism but sees its flaws and does not automatically assume the private sector has a monopoly on wisdom, one that is committed to the maintenance of the UK, one that focuses relentlessly on equality of opportunity, one whose first instincts are to ensure change does not have a negative impact on the most vulnerable and one that understands soft power, rather than military force, is what can and should set the UK apart. I agree that identity politics is all too prevalent these days, but I don't believe that it has to be.
Well it was 1979!
It's difficult for most on the centre left to see how a Cooper/Corbyn/Kendall victory would be different from a Cameron/Osborne one. They've had three months to sell themselves and few of us are any the wiser.
Before them Ed had five years and the sum of our understanding of his brand of left wing politics was a giant stone with six meaningless platitudes.
Are you surprised that Labour activists are now in the mood to throw their balls in the air in the hope that they land in a more interesting place?
If someone told me that the Tories were about to elect a supporter of a Holocaust denier, hugged terrorists as a hobby, was still a member of the Monday Club, divorced their wife for not sending their kid to public school and called similar far-rightists *friends* = I'd be APPALLED.
It's only by putting it in those terms that I can even begin to understand what Labour are doing. And I still can't believe it's happening.
"Interesting" doesn't quite cover it.
'Schools are using community languages such as Urdu and Polish to give themselves “an easy hit” to gain top grade GCSE passes and boost their rankings in league tables, a leading academic has said.
Figures show that more than one in three (36 per cent) of candidates who sit GCSEs in community languages obtain an A* grade - the highest figure for any subject and seven time as many as those who get the top grade for maths.'
...and
'The report also shows that pupils in Northern Ireland are “well in front” when it comes to exam passes with 78 per cent obtaining five A* to C grade passes compared with 68.6 per cent for England and 66.6 per cent for Wales.
“It is not a popular thing to say but an obvious candidate to account for NI’s success ... is its grammar school system,” says the report. '
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/schools-using-community-languages-such-as-urdu-and-polish-to-boost-their-rankings-in-league-tables-says-leading-academic-10462840.html
It wasn't. It was set up to deal with the demands for an inquiry by kicking them into the long grass. Remember who set it up - the man who was a key member of the government involved in the decision to go to war.
That's why it got a Chairman who is a third rate civil servant, has a panel consisting of nonentities who couldn't take the skin off a rice pudding, and why it was given no deadline. It has achieved its purpose - to stop anything embarrassing being said about senior Labour politicians while they were still in power or even in Parliament - beautifully.
If we want to find out about the decision to go to war in Iraq in 2003, we would need a proper inquiry, with all relevant documents published, a proper, sharp timetable, forensic questioners etc. We won't get one.
This isn't a personality cult, it is a chance to break from the imposed consensus. We have seen it happen in Greece, it may be happening in Spain, so let's bring it to Britain. If it fails, the Tories will be in government, but that was going to happen anyway.
"At the end of last year, the bank failed a Bank of England stress test, designed to test banks' ability to withstand another financial crisis."
"And last week, a regulatory report criticised the bank for misleading investors. The bank escaped a fine, however, because the regulator said it needed all the money it has to strengthen its balance sheet."
The only slight hope is for something completely embarrassing to come out about Corbyn that will force him to quit the race or resign before he takes his position as leader
The LP deserve Corbyn ; they are totally anachronistic and outdated ; it's only poetic justice that a quasi Marxist fool from the 1970s leads them in their suicide jump off the cliff edge
Your pension has never been safer.
Oh wait....
Corbyn was right about the second gulf war and its consequences that we see on Kos and in Calais. What we are seeing with Corbyn is the chickens coming home to roost from that unpopular war.
I also think that the grammar school system is an excellent one, on the proviso that secondary moderns receive the same funding as grammars !
The Corbyn supporters I met outside of a rally in Middlesbrough were mostly the types who didn't grasp even the basics of the political spectrum IE ...Right and Left ...their support for Corbyn was of a revivalist nature ,just pure emotion,,,Corbyn had ''reached ''them with idealistic , but unrealistic phrases that had ''chimed '' and now they were hooked on 'hope and change ''
These are the folks who are going to follow Corbyn in his death march over the cliff edge ...I do not realistically expect the LP to recover from this debacle
One thing I do wonder is how will Corbyn be received by the PLP in the H/C at QT for example? With barely 40 sympathetic MPs and many more hostile things could look pretty ugly very quickly.
"F1: just from the gossip column: it seems like the sport will shift to a ground effect approach from 2017.
That could be a sea change in relative performance. It could provide a golden opportunity for McLaren to bounce back, especially as they hired Prodromou[sp], formerly the top aero chap working under Adrian Newey at Red Bull."
Well argued.
"I would vote for a moderate social democratic party:"
I would and have done many times. The tacit agreement has been breached, though. The one that says the hard left in their many manifestations should talk loudly but have no say in policy - full of sound and fury and signifying nothing. They should continue to be that embarrassing uncle at the wedding who occasionally drinks a lot and makes a fool of himself - but he is family.
Tony was a bit too glib though so I went to the LDs until the last election. Ed ...????
Tories were always the opposition not the enemies.
I still believe Labour will come to their senses. They let Mrs Rochester take over for a while and then the unions decided on gormless Ed.
Now they're peeking into Pandora's box. Leave that lid alone!
Classic second child.
It would be like the Tories electing Oliver Letwin- someone whose philosophy is deeply rooted in the centre ground, but he couldn't carry it off as leader.
Some gruesome atrocity against Yazidis or Christians or others by IS and Labour MPs with their face in their hands in Parliament as Corbyn is asked whether he still agrees with the statement by Stop the War that action should not be taken against IS because the US is involved.
As Adams might put it, the questions "haven't gone away".
However, I am a sopping wet conservative - as socially liberal as you like, but the government has to run its finances well.
My only differences from Southam is (possibly) that 'people at the top' should include wealthy pensioners and I don't particularly care about the union (as I've said before, I'm a BOO, so how can I not support Scottish independence?).
I could certainly be persuaded to vote for a party that espoused Southam's expressed values.
"Are you surprised that Labour activists are now in the mood to throw their balls in the air in the hope that they land in a more interesting place? "
But they're not throwing their balls in the air, they're throwing them away. They are castrating the Labour Party, excluding it from any chance of power for at least a decade, possibly a generation and conceivably ever again.
Gordon Brown may turn out to be last Labour PM of the UK. How apt.
China's burning the wrong kind of coal
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-33972247
And I thought someone posted on here a few days ago polls showing that even at the height of the opposition, the was was supported by a majority. I may be wrong on this.
Certainly Labour are now paying the price for the emptiness and dishonesty and moral vacuousness at the heart of Blair and Brown's Labour. But they are replacing it with the Left's own emptiness and dishonesty and moral vacuousness.
Who will he back North or South Korea ?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3204452/North-Korea-shells-South-Korean-military-unit-stationed-countries-shared-border.html
Always picks the right side Libya Syria etc
A party needs to rejuvenate to get that hunger back- this takes time, and mistakes. Without the mistakes you lose the discipline, ideas and thirst to get back into power. Apart from the polls, did anyone actually believe that the Labour party led by Ed Miliband deserved to get back in? It would have been a travesty if Ed had won; a lazy Labour party that was just basically gambling on a 35% strategy. What would it have said about UK politics is Ed had won. He was deservedly beaten and the Tories deserved their majority.
I'm pretty OK about Corbyn becoming leader, and folk like SouthernObserver should just chill and wait and stay loyal to the cause. Corbyn will crash and burn for sure- but at the other end lies a Labour party that'll be fit for purpose. 2020 might still be too soon.
Many thought Miliband could get in, perhaps propped up by the SNP.
There was a time that voting for Jeremy Corbyn was funny; it doesn't seem so funny anymore. I'm seeking PB's advice on a genuine ethical question. Should I:
a) Vote Corbyn - to hell with them
b) Not vote - it's their handcart they can do what they like with it
c) Vote Kendall 1 Cooper 2, because Kendall would do least damage to the country and Cooper is the only grown up in the race?