Details of the "purge" via the Guardian: Of those initially excluded for not being genuine supporters (and sent to a panel for review) - this doesn't include those refused for not being on the electoral register:
Total ruled ineligible – 3,138 (of which RS [registered supporters] 1,972, AS [affiliated supporters] 748 and Members 418).
Those deemed eligible – 144 (some decisions still pending).
More than half of those so far excluded are Green party members. Approximately, of those found to be ineligible, 400 are members or supporters of the Conservatives and 1,900 members or supporters of the Green Party.
Seems reasonable, even though the occasional anomaly will slip through - cerainly unlikely to provide a basis for a legal challenge to the outcome.
The fact that *full* membership has gone up by 60% since May is more interesting. For better or worse, CLPs will change significantly if lots of these people get involved. Labour membership is now roughly three times the size of Tory membership, though the election showed the limits of just chucking human waves of leaflets and volunteers.
600,000 new members, eh?
About 150,000 fewer than attended the Stop the War march in 2003.
Before Tony Blair was returned as PM two years later.
Blair had the advantage, of course, that the main opposition party took the same view on the war that he did (or if anything, were even more belligerent). Michael Howard's gullibility basically made it impossible for Iraq to cost Labour the election.
Yep what a gullible old sausage that Michael Howard, eh? The Prime Minister tells him that he has access to intelligence which states that there is a credible threat to the UK and the Leader of the Opposition has only gone and believed him.
Because of course to have taken a stand on the assumption that the Prime Minister was lying over a matter of national security is something the Leader of the Opposition hardly thinks twice about.
It was Iain Duncan Smith.
IDS should still have asked to see the evidence. As a privy councillor and shadow PM, at the very least, he could have had a confidential briefing from the senior MI6 bods. His taking not just Blair's word but also his interpretation was a serious failing.
He wanted to attack Iraq more than Blair by his own admission. Possibly lucky for him that he did, as I believe Tony Blair's diaries record Dubya saying that he could 'sort him out' or some such if IDS opposed the conflict. Whether he meant a stroppy phone call or a nasty skiing accident the reader is left to imagine.
Seems reasonable, even though the occasional anomaly will slip through - cerainly unlikely to provide a basis for a legal challenge to the outcome.
The fact that *full* membership has gone up by 60% since May is more interesting. For better or worse, CLPs will change significantly if lots of these people get involved. Labour membership is now roughly three times the size of Tory membership, though the election showed the limits of just chucking human waves of leaflets and volunteers.
600,000 new members, eh?
About 150,000 fewer than attended the Stop the War march in 2003.
Before Tony Blair was returned as PM two years later.
Blair had the advantage, of course, that the main opposition party took the same view on the war that he did (or if anything, were even more belligerent). Michael Howard's gullibility basically made it impossible for Iraq to cost Labour the election.
Yep what a gullible old sausage that Michael Howard, eh? The Prime Minister tells him that he has access to intelligence which states that there is a credible threat to the UK and the Leader of the Opposition has only gone and believed him.
Because of course to have taken a stand on the assumption that the Prime Minister was lying over a matter of national security is something the Leader of the Opposition hardly thinks twice about.
It was Iain Duncan Smith.
IDS should still have asked to see the evidence. As a privy councillor and shadow PM, at the very least, he could have had a confidential briefing from the senior MI6 bods. His taking not just Blair's word but also his interpretation was a serious failing.
Would IDS want to have been drawn in that close? But were WMD the driving force? Blair made a big deal of it, but Bush was clear that the issue was regime change. Blair was a fool, but he knew he had to convince a pacifist party. Egging up WMD was his nemesis - but it went beyond that. The treatment of Dr Kelly for instance. But Kelly himself believed that Saddam had WMD. But if Corbyn wants to go round making stupid apologies - it is his and labour's business.
The treatment of Dr Kelly for instance. But Kelly himself believed that Saddam had WMD. .
"They are not mobile germ warfare laboratories. You could not use them for making biological weapons. They do not even look like them. They are exactly what the Iraqis said they were – facilities for the production of hydrogen gas to fill balloons."[10]
The headline on that politics.co.uk article is pretty unfair. He didn't say the time isn't right for a female leader. He just said that neither of the women in the contest would be "the right candidate"; i.e. Cooper and Kendall are even crapper than he is. How's that sexist?
WRONG
Asked whether it would be "great" to have a woman leader, Burnham replied: "When the time is right, when the right leader comes along".
The headline is totally fair.
It's out of context. He's saying the time isn't right because neither of the only possible candidates are any good. The headline clearly implies that he thinks there's something innately wrong with having a woman leader.
He should have chosen his words more carefully.
This was an obvious question that was going to be put to him at some time and he should have had a form of words worked out. He didn't.
Why wasn't there a woman in the Lib Dem leadership election?
NO women MP's IIRC
There is a motion at the Lib Dem conference to make the Deputy Leader open to any member to stand and vote. I think it highly likely that this will go through and that there will be a female deputy leader. Possibilities are Jo Swinson, Lynne Featherstone, and Kirsty Williams.
Unpaid role? Typical exploitation of females (innocent face).
How can any sane person think it is acceptable to stand in front of a banner praising mass murderers such as Mao and Stalin? If Blair is so abhorrent for the deaths in Iraq we are talking thousands not the millions of deaths Mao and Stalin caused.
Labour didn't lose the last GE because they were too left-wing. They lost it because most couldn't take Ed Miliband seriously, and his message was an incoherent mess.
This is largely true, but Labour's reaction to it is impressively imaginative: they plan to test it next time by not only choosing an extreme left-wing leader, but also one who is even more impossible to take seriously than Ed, and whose message is even more incoherent.
I do see this as possibly having a significant impact on the outcome of the election for Labour leader:
"Figures reveal 60,000 names have already been stripped off the list of those who originally applied to vote.
Party officials registered 610,753 names in the contest, but the total of those who can vote now stands at 550,816.
Nearly all the names cut from the contest - 57,000 - either couldn't be found on the electoral roll or were duplicates who registered both individually and through unions by mistake.
Labour has declined to say how many came from each category.
Duplicates will have been an administrative error, but those on the electoral roll will have been barred from voting because their identities couldn't be proven.
The 57,000 also include people who've fallen behind in paying membership fees."
My hunch is that a disproportionally large segment of those voters that were not to be found on the electoral roll are Corbyn supporters who were turned off by the mainstream parties and did not bother with elections before Jezza appeared.
How can any sane person think it is acceptable to stand in front of a banner praising mass murderers such as Mao and Stalin? If Blair is so abhorrent for the deaths in Iraq we are talking thousands not the millions of deaths Mao and Stalin caused.
Half a million. More than Saddam managed to kill in his entire career.
Labour didn't lose the last GE because they were too left-wing. They lost it because most couldn't take Ed Miliband seriously, and his message was an incoherent mess.
This is largely true, but Labour's reaction to it is impressively imaginative: they plan to test it next time by not only choosing an extreme left-wing leader, but also one who is even more impossible to take seriously than Ed, and whose message is even more incoherent.
I actually think Corbyn's message is far more coherent than Ed Miliband's; I personally don't agree with it, but with Corbyn you know what you're getting (which wasn't always the case with Ed). Corbyn's problem isn't that you can't take him seriously, it's that his beliefs are absurd, he associates with terrible people, and is just dangerous in general.
How can any sane person think it is acceptable to stand in front of a banner praising mass murderers such as Mao and Stalin? If Blair is so abhorent for the deaths in Iraq we are talking thousands not the millions Mao and Stalin caused.
Imagine if there was a photo of David Cameron eagerly taking a photo of a poster praising Hitler and Mussolini.
It's always possible to get caught in the wrong place in an unfortunate photo. The problem is that we know from Corbyn's own words that he's not against extreme leftism. Can you imagine if David Cameron had invited the Klu Klux Klan over to parliament, to discuss how to bring about racial reconcilation in the United States? Calling them his "friends" - later explaining this was just having inclusive diplomatic language - but, of course, not inviting over any African American groups. He could maybe lobby to have David Duke enter the UK to speak to an audience, but say he hadn't personally heard him say anything racist, and describe him as an "honoured citizen".
How can any sane person think it is acceptable to stand in front of a banner praising mass murderers such as Mao and Stalin? If Blair is so abhorrent for the deaths in Iraq we are talking thousands not the millions of deaths Mao and Stalin caused.
Half a million. More than Saddam managed to kill in his entire career.
I never voted for Blair. But deaths attributed to Stalin's policies are circa 25 million and Mao 45 million. Why does Corbyn prefer them to Blair?
How can any sane person think it is acceptable to stand in front of a banner praising mass murderers such as Mao and Stalin? If Blair is so abhorrent for the deaths in Iraq we are talking thousands not the millions of deaths Mao and Stalin caused.
Half a million. More than Saddam managed to kill in his entire career.
Except Tony Blair's armies didn't kill half a million people. Most of the deaths were done by Al Qaeda in Iraq and other such groups. I'm no fan of Tony Blair, but he isn't a deliberate population exterminator.
I've tried to translate the back-to-front slogan on the flag at the right of the memorial. Google translate suggests it might be Turkish "ingiltere alevi federasyonu", which it translates as "England flame federation".
Does 'flame federation' refer to the Fire Brigade Union or something?
I do see this as possibly having a significant impact on the outcome of the election for Labour leader:
"Figures reveal 60,000 names have already been stripped off the list of those who originally applied to vote.
Party officials registered 610,753 names in the contest, but the total of those who can vote now stands at 550,816.
Nearly all the names cut from the contest - 57,000 - either couldn't be found on the electoral roll or were duplicates who registered both individually and through unions by mistake.
Labour has declined to say how many came from each category.
Duplicates will have been an administrative error, but those on the electoral roll will have been barred from voting because their identities couldn't be proven.
The 57,000 also include people who've fallen behind in paying membership fees."
My hunch is that a disproportionally large segment of those voters that were not to be found on the electoral roll are Corbyn supporters who were turned off by the mainstream parties and did not bother with elections before Jezza appeared.
Indeed, I think backing the 60+% bands for Corbyn is likely to end up with a lost stake. It may also narrow Corbyn's victory to just over or under the 50% mark in the first round.
Well, given their recent track record, I can't think of polls as juggernauts. Maybe even, after toying with every other possibility, Labour might do the least silly thing, so denying the tabloids much fodder. P/S It's a pity tim isn't around here to comment.
How can any sane person think it is acceptable to stand in front of a banner praising mass murderers such as Mao and Stalin? If Blair is so abhorrent for the deaths in Iraq we are talking thousands not the millions of deaths Mao and Stalin caused.
Half a million. More than Saddam managed to kill in his entire career.
I never voted for Blair. But deaths attributed to Stalin's policies are circa 25 million and Mao 45 million. Why does Corbyn prefer them to Blair?
Britain killed millions around the world during the Colonial period.
EDIT - sorry, sorry! Did I really say that? Appears that My Tebbit Chip briefly malfunctioned!
I actually think Corbyn's message is far more coherent than Ed Miliband's;
No it isn't. Does he really want to stop regional development grants, make it uneconomic for companies to pay for capital investment, and charge full unsubsidised train fares? Because that is the implication of the nonsense he spouted about '£120bn of subsidies to the private sector', a figure taken directly from some utter tosh written by Richard Murphy.
How can any sane person think it is acceptable to stand in front of a banner praising mass murderers such as Mao and Stalin? If Blair is so abhorent for the deaths in Iraq we are talking thousands not the millions Mao and Stalin caused.
Imagine if there was a photo of David Cameron eagerly taking a photo of a poster praising Hitler and Mussolini.
Plenty of relatively recent senior Labour bods were commies
I do see this as possibly having a significant impact on the outcome of the election for Labour leader:
"Figures reveal 60,000 names have already been stripped off the list of those who originally applied to vote.
Party officials registered 610,753 names in the contest, but the total of those who can vote now stands at 550,816.
Nearly all the names cut from the contest - 57,000 - either couldn't be found on the electoral roll or were duplicates who registered both individually and through unions by mistake.
Labour has declined to say how many came from each category.
Duplicates will have been an administrative error, but those on the electoral roll will have been barred from voting because their identities couldn't be proven.
The 57,000 also include people who've fallen behind in paying membership fees."
My hunch is that a disproportionally large segment of those voters that were not to be found on the electoral roll are Corbyn supporters who were turned off by the mainstream parties and did not bother with elections before Jezza appeared.
Indeed, I think backing the 60+% bands for Corbyn is likely to end up with a lost stake. It may also narrow Corbyn's victory to just over or under the 50% mark in the first round.
Those your thoughts too ?
Yes. The last YouGov poll had him on 57% in the first round based on some extrapolation. I'd say the low 50's in the first round sounds about right. He might also just fall below the 50% mark.
Those pictures of Stalin on Trafalgar Square remind me how distasteful I find the British Hard Left, and all its equivocation about condemning the horrors of Stalinism and Islamism. I have read in detail about the deliberate starvations of the USSR, especially the targeting of the Kulaks and the Ukrainians. The photos from that time are truly harrowing. The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
Labour didn't lose the last GE because they were too left-wing. They lost it because most couldn't take Ed Miliband seriously, and his message was an incoherent mess.
This is largely true, but Labour's reaction to it is impressively imaginative: they plan to test it next time by not only choosing an extreme left-wing leader, but also one who is even more impossible to take seriously than Ed, and whose message is even more incoherent.
"There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened." -- The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
Clearly somebody figured it out shortly after May 7th.
I've backed the 40-50 band at 5-2 and sub 50 at 7-4 for small stakes. If the 7-4 comes in and not the 5-2, I'm going to feel utterly pig sick mind as it means he probably hasn't won. Still the implied odds made it worthwhile to back both I think...
I've backed the 40-50 band at 5-2 and sub 50 at 7-4 for small stakes. If the 7-4 comes in and not the 5-2, I'm going to feel utterly pig sick mind as it means he probably hasn't won. Still the implied odds made it worthwhile to back both I think...
53.5%. It's probably time for a PB guessing game, actually...
I actually think Corbyn's message is far more coherent than Ed Miliband's;
No it isn't. Does he really want to stop regional development grants, make it uneconomic for companies to pay for capital investment, and charge full unsubsidised train fares? Because that is the implication of the nonsense he spouted about '£120bn of subsidies to the private sector', a figure taken directly from some utter tosh written by Richard Murphy.
Coherent in the sense your average joe can understand what he is saying, yes it is. Most people aren't looking that far into Corbyn's message.
The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
To be fair, the Labour Party tried very hard to eradicate the rot over many years, and were almost successful. Unfortunately they left a few spores in a forgotten corner of their backbenches and one of these has sprouted into a monstrous growth which is now engulfing them.
Those ComRes numbers would give a Con majority of 80 with Lab down to 199 seats
Not as bad as the Tories' seat-share in 1997/2001/2005?
It's also very slightly better than the Liberal Democrat share of the vote in 2010, if you are looking for positives. Of course, if any of the four candidates are elected, rather than Harman staging a coup on the grounds of corruption of the election, the poll suggests Labour would automatically dip below the 23% they got then, but I suppose it's a case of any port in a storm.
In any case, that figure strikes me as pretty unreliable - I don't think we'll know much about how people will respond to the new leader until s/he has had a few months to bed in. Apart from anything else, 22% for Corbyn strikes me as hopelessly unrealistic. It could be a lot lower than that if his unsavoury associations keep dogging him.
Those pictures of Stalin on Trafalgar Square remind me how distasteful I find the British Hard Left, and all its equivocation about condemning the horrors of Stalinism and Islamism. I have read in detail about the deliberate starvations of the USSR, especially the targeting of the Kulaks and the Ukrainians. The photos from that time are truly harrowing. The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
What do you mean? You think the government should have no adequate opposition whatsoever?
The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
To be fair, the Labour Party tried very hard to eradicate the rot over many years, and were almost successful. Unfortunately they left a few spores in a forgotten corner of their backbenches and one of these has sprouted into a monstrous growth which is now engulfing them.
People like Corbyn should have been de-selected as MPs.
Those pictures of Stalin on Trafalgar Square remind me how distasteful I find the British Hard Left, and all its equivocation about condemning the horrors of Stalinism and Islamism. I have read in detail about the deliberate starvations of the USSR, especially the targeting of the Kulaks and the Ukrainians. The photos from that time are truly harrowing. The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
What do you mean? You think the government should have no adequate opposition whatsoever?
The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
To be fair, the Labour Party tried very hard to eradicate the rot over many years, and were almost successful. Unfortunately they left a few spores in a forgotten corner of their backbenches and one of these has sprouted into a monstrous growth which is now engulfing them.
People like Corbyn should have been de-selected as MPs.
That's roughly what I took JEO's post to mean, Mr Apocalypse. That the Labour party should have actively got rid of these weirdos when it had the chance - and because it had a sneaking regard for them, didn't and is now paying the price.
It is of course a disaster from the point of view of having an effective opposition.
Those pictures of Stalin on Trafalgar Square remind me how distasteful I find the British Hard Left, and all its equivocation about condemning the horrors of Stalinism and Islamism. I have read in detail about the deliberate starvations of the USSR, especially the targeting of the Kulaks and the Ukrainians. The photos from that time are truly harrowing. The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
What do you mean? You think the government should have no adequate opposition whatsoever?
The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
To be fair, the Labour Party tried very hard to eradicate the rot over many years, and were almost successful. Unfortunately they left a few spores in a forgotten corner of their backbenches and one of these has sprouted into a monstrous growth which is now engulfing them.
People like Corbyn should have been de-selected as MPs.
That's roughly what I took JEO's post to mean, Mr Apocalypse. That the Labour party should have actively got rid of these weirdos when it had the chance - and because it had a sneaking regard for them, didn't and is now paying the price.
It is of course a disaster from the point of view of having an effective opposition.
Why does everyone think I'm a bloke?
On Labour, I doubt Mandelson, Campbell, Blair and Brown had a sneaking regard for people like Corbyn. Rather, after the Kinnock years I think they took things for granted and thought the hard left would never come back. But now it's back, when it gets defeated at the ballot box it'll be completely destroyed.
The chair of Kids Company signed an email to the government warning of a “high risk of arson attacks on government buildings” if the charity were to close, BuzzFeed News and BBC Newsnight have learned.
The message was contained in documents sent to the Cabinet Office on 2 July by the charity’s chair, Alan Yentob. They also warned the “communities” the charity served could “descend into savagery”.
So most of those that have been eliminated so far are union names. Most of them may have been duplicates who also were Labour supporters (although we can't know for sure). Only 10% of the £3 sign-ups have been "culled" so far. So the impact may not be that significant. But Harriet Harman appeared to suggest that it could increase by another 50,000. No wonder the other candidates have ruled out mounting a legal challenge. This development will undoubtedly benefit the other camps, the question is by which margin?
The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
To be fair, the Labour Party tried very hard to eradicate the rot over many years, and were almost successful. Unfortunately they left a few spores in a forgotten corner of their backbenches and one of these has sprouted into a monstrous growth which is now engulfing them.
Stupid statement from Burnham. This is such an obvious question, he should have had a prepared response. "We live in a modern society with equality of the sexes. Women have as much right to lead political parties as men. However, I am running because I think I am the person with the best ideas and the best chance to lead the Labour Party to victory in the next election." Simples
The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
To be fair, the Labour Party tried very hard to eradicate the rot over many years, and were almost successful. Unfortunately they left a few spores in a forgotten corner of their backbenches and one of these has sprouted into a monstrous growth which is now engulfing them.
People like Corbyn should have been de-selected as MPs.
Why? He has a comfortable majority in Islington so his voters like him, what next should the Tories deselect Bill Cash too?
Well, surprise suprise, the Labour Party might elect a commie as leader... The New Labour Blairites must wonder what on earth is going on.. or not
"The past lives of Labour Ministers have long been sanitised and many biographies that include their shady communist and Marxist pasts are inaccessible or removed from the net. The truth about these guys is similar to discovering that leading Tories were members of the Nazi Party. If you are a British voter and do not think that this is important then I despair for British politics. Had these people taken jobs in industry their past might be forgotten and forgiven but they continued in left wing politics and even today boast of being "Stalinist" or International Socialist."
Those pictures of Stalin on Trafalgar Square remind me how distasteful I find the British Hard Left, and all its equivocation about condemning the horrors of Stalinism and Islamism. I have read in detail about the deliberate starvations of the USSR, especially the targeting of the Kulaks and the Ukrainians. The photos from that time are truly harrowing. The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
What do you mean? You think the government should have no adequate opposition whatsoever?
The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
To be fair, the Labour Party tried very hard to eradicate the rot over many years, and were almost successful. Unfortunately they left a few spores in a forgotten corner of their backbenches and one of these has sprouted into a monstrous growth which is now engulfing them.
People like Corbyn should have been de-selected as MPs.
That's roughly what I took JEO's post to mean, Mr Apocalypse. That the Labour party should have actively got rid of these weirdos when it had the chance - and because it had a sneaking regard for them, didn't and is now paying the price.
It is of course a disaster from the point of view of having an effective opposition.
Why does everyone think I'm a bloke?
On Labour, I doubt Mandelson, Campbell, Blair and Brown had a sneaking regard for people like Corbyn. Rather, after the Kinnock years I think they took things for granted and thought the hard left would never come back. But now it's back, when it gets defeated at the ballot box it'll be completely destroyed.
My apologies, Ms Apocalypse, I hope you will forgive me for what was definitely a lazy assumption. Especially embarrassing given that this is a thread about Burnham's sexism...
Stupid statement from Burnham. This is such an obvious question, he should have had a prepared response. "We live in a modern society with equality of the sexes. Women have as much right to lead political parties as men. However, I am running because I think I am the person with the best ideas and the best chance to lead the Labour Party to victory in the next election." Simples
But he didnt, he used the kind of words that gets a Tory politician who doesnt know how to deal with harridans. Obviously Milibands top team knew perfectly well how to deal with them. they gave them a pink bus and sent them off to coffee mornings and 'baby and toddler' groups, while the men did all the hard work.
The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
To be fair, the Labour Party tried very hard to eradicate the rot over many years, and were almost successful. Unfortunately they left a few spores in a forgotten corner of their backbenches and one of these has sprouted into a monstrous growth which is now engulfing them.
People like Corbyn should have been de-selected as MPs.
Why? He has a comfortable majority in Islington so his voters like him, what next should the Tories deselect Bill Cash too?
Do his voters know what an extremist he is? And while I dislike Bill Cash, he's just a bit too right-wing as opposed to associating with terrorists!
Those pictures of Stalin on Trafalgar Square remind me how distasteful I find the British Hard Left, and all its equivocation about condemning the horrors of Stalinism and Islamism. I have read in detail about the deliberate starvations of the USSR, especially the targeting of the Kulaks and the Ukrainians. The photos from that time are truly harrowing. The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
What do you mean? You think the government should have no adequate opposition whatsoever?
I would definitely like an effective opposition. I would just prefer it was not the Labour Party. The Liberal Democrats, the SDP or UKIP would all be preferable. Labour for years have engaged in thoroughly nasty tactics like implying anyone who wanted to reduce immigration was a racist, yet refuse to condemn left-aligned actual racists their MPs regularly consort with. I'm afraid to say the party deserves what's coming to it.
The chair of Kids Company signed an email to the government warning of a “high risk of arson attacks on government buildings” if the charity were to close, BuzzFeed News and BBC Newsnight have learned.
The message was contained in documents sent to the Cabinet Office on 2 July by the charity’s chair, Alan Yentob. They also warned the “communities” the charity served could “descend into savagery”.
Stupid statement from Burnham. This is such an obvious question, he should have had a prepared response. "We live in a modern society with equality of the sexes. Women have as much right to lead political parties as men. However, I am running because I think I am the person with the best ideas and the best chance to lead the Labour Party to victory in the next election." Simples
But he didnt, he used the kind of words that gets a Tory politician who doesnt know how to deal with harridans. Obviously Milibands top team knew perfectly well how to deal with them. they gave them a pink bus and sent them off to coffee mornings and 'baby and toddler' groups, while the men did all the hard work.
Wow, I feel sorry for any of the women in your life....
Those pictures of Stalin on Trafalgar Square remind me how distasteful I find the British Hard Left, and all its equivocation about condemning the horrors of Stalinism and Islamism. I have read in detail about the deliberate starvations of the USSR, especially the targeting of the Kulaks and the Ukrainians. The photos from that time are truly harrowing. The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
What do you mean? You think the government should have no adequate opposition whatsoever?
The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
To be fair, the Labour Party tried very hard to eradicate the rot over many years, and were almost successful. Unfortunately they left a few spores in a forgotten corner of their backbenches and one of these has sprouted into a monstrous growth which is now engulfing them.
People like Corbyn should have been de-selected as MPs.
That's roughly what I took JEO's post to mean, Mr Apocalypse. That the Labour party should have actively got rid of these weirdos when it had the chance - and because it had a sneaking regard for them, didn't and is now paying the price.
It is of course a disaster from the point of view of having an effective opposition.
Why does everyone think I'm a bloke?
On Labour, I doubt Mandelson, Campbell, Blair and Brown had a sneaking regard for people like Corbyn. Rather, after the Kinnock years I think they took things for granted and thought the hard left would never come back. But now it's back, when it gets defeated at the ballot box it'll be completely destroyed.
My apologies, Ms Apocalypse, I hope you will forgive me for what was definitely a lazy assumption. Especially embarrassing given that this is a thread about Burnham's sexism...
It's okay. It's happened quite often on PB, so you're in large company
The chair of Kids Company signed an email to the government warning of a “high risk of arson attacks on government buildings” if the charity were to close, BuzzFeed News and BBC Newsnight have learned.
The message was contained in documents sent to the Cabinet Office on 2 July by the charity’s chair, Alan Yentob. They also warned the “communities” the charity served could “descend into savagery”.
That really proves that he has never spent time in such places (in addition to the fact that he has unusual genital arrangements). For most people in them, the government is almost unbelievably remote and irrelevant - I doubt if many of them even made the connection between this charity and the government (not that there were many, anyway).
The charity's buildings might have been attacked, but not 'government buildings'. It's only middle-class anarchists who go in for such places nowadays.
I have described Nick Palmer and other Corbyn backers as useful idiots. I would like to apologise. To useful idiots. Like the rest of us, Nick and his mates know all about Jeremy Corbyn. But they voted for him snyway. Frankly, they sicken me. And if that's nasty, so be it. I think it is unforgiveable to put someone like Corbyn in charge of anything, let alone a party that aspires to power.
The chair of Kids Company signed an email to the government warning of a “high risk of arson attacks on government buildings” if the charity were to close, BuzzFeed News and BBC Newsnight have learned.
The message was contained in documents sent to the Cabinet Office on 2 July by the charity’s chair, Alan Yentob. They also warned the “communities” the charity served could “descend into savagery”.
How can any sane person think it is acceptable to stand in front of a banner praising mass murderers such as Mao and Stalin? If Blair is so abhorrent for the deaths in Iraq we are talking thousands not the millions of deaths Mao and Stalin caused.
Half a million. More than Saddam managed to kill in his entire career.
Except Tony Blair's armies didn't kill half a million people. Most of the deaths were done by Al Qaeda in Iraq and other such groups. I'm no fan of Tony Blair, but he isn't a deliberate population exterminator.
Absolutely, though I doubt that's much comfort to the indirectly deceased.
Those pictures of Stalin on Trafalgar Square remind me how distasteful I find the British Hard Left, and all its equivocation about condemning the horrors of Stalinism and Islamism. I have read in detail about the deliberate starvations of the USSR, especially the targeting of the Kulaks and the Ukrainians. The photos from that time are truly harrowing. The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
What do you mean? You think the government should have no adequate opposition whatsoever?
The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
To be fair, the Labour Party tried very hard to eradicate the rot over many years, and were almost successful. Unfortunately they left a few spores in a forgotten corner of their backbenches and one of these has sprouted into a monstrous growth which is now engulfing them.
People like Corbyn should have been de-selected as MPs.
That's roughly what I took JEO's post to mean, Mr Apocalypse. That the Labour party should have actively got rid of these weirdos when it had the chance - and because it had a sneaking regard for them, didn't and is now paying the price.
It is of course a disaster from the point of view of having an effective opposition.
Why does everyone think I'm a bloke?
On Labour, I doubt Mandelson, Campbell, Blair and Brown had a sneaking regard for people like Corbyn. Rather, after the Kinnock years I think they took things for granted and thought the hard left would never come back. But now it's back, when it gets defeated at the ballot box it'll be completely destroyed.
I think the default assumption is for posters to be male, given the ratio on here it is the most probable. It's especially difficult if you have non-gender specific handles
Those pictures of Stalin on Trafalgar Square remind me how distasteful I find the British Hard Left, and all its equivocation about condemning the horrors of Stalinism and Islamism. I have read in detail about the deliberate starvations of the USSR, especially the targeting of the Kulaks and the Ukrainians. The photos from that time are truly harrowing. The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
What do you mean? You think the government should have no adequate opposition whatsoever?
I would definitely like an effective opposition. I would just prefer it was not the Labour Party. The Liberal Democrats, the SDP or UKIP would all be preferable. Labour for years have engaged in thoroughly nasty tactics like implying anyone who wanted to reduce immigration was a racist, yet refuse to condemn left-aligned actual racists their MPs regularly consort with. I'm afraid to say the party deserves what's coming to it.
Given UKIP has it's fair share of racists, the LDs dodgy hypocritical blokes on the issue of sexism I'm not sure they are that preferable. Do the SDP even still exist?
Stupid statement from Burnham. This is such an obvious question, he should have had a prepared response. "We live in a modern society with equality of the sexes. Women have as much right to lead political parties as men. However, I am running because I think I am the person with the best ideas and the best chance to lead the Labour Party to victory in the next election." Simples
But he didnt, he used the kind of words that gets a Tory politician who doesnt know how to deal with harridans. Obviously Milibands top team knew perfectly well how to deal with them. they gave them a pink bus and sent them off to coffee mornings and 'baby and toddler' groups, while the men did all the hard work.
Politicians are in the public spotlight all the time, so they are bound at some point or another to be caught on camera saying something they (know they) shouldn't. But it still always astounds me when politicians make basic gaffes on the bread and butter stuff like this. It's not rocket science.
Stupid statement from Burnham. This is such an obvious question, he should have had a prepared response. "We live in a modern society with equality of the sexes. Women have as much right to lead political parties as men. However, I am running because I think I am the person with the best ideas and the best chance to lead the Labour Party to victory in the next election." Simples
But he didnt, he used the kind of words that gets a Tory politician who doesnt know how to deal with harridans. Obviously Milibands top team knew perfectly well how to deal with them. they gave them a pink bus and sent them off to coffee mornings and 'baby and toddler' groups, while the men did all the hard work.
Wow, I feel sorry for any of the women in your life....
I dont have harridans in my life. I do have plenty of women though.
The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
To be fair, the Labour Party tried very hard to eradicate the rot over many years, and were almost successful. Unfortunately they left a few spores in a forgotten corner of their backbenches and one of these has sprouted into a monstrous growth which is now engulfing them.
People like Corbyn should have been de-selected as MPs.
Why? He has a comfortable majority in Islington so his voters like him, what next should the Tories deselect Bill Cash too?
Do his voters know what an extremist he is? And while I dislike Bill Cash, he's just a bit too right-wing as opposed to associating with terrorists!
Of course after all most voters in Islington have degrees
Stupid statement from Burnham. This is such an obvious question, he should have had a prepared response. "We live in a modern society with equality of the sexes. Women have as much right to lead political parties as men. However, I am running because I think I am the person with the best ideas and the best chance to lead the Labour Party to victory in the next election." Simples
Burnham said that he doesn't think the time is right for a female leader. What did he mean? I think Burnham would self-identify as a woman if he thought it would win him the election. But as he said "the time isn't right for that" (with Corbyn leading).
Those pictures of Stalin on Trafalgar Square remind me how distasteful I find the British Hard Left, and all its equivocation about condemning the horrors of Stalinism and Islamism. I have read in detail about the deliberate starvations of the USSR, especially the targeting of the Kulaks and the Ukrainians. The photos from that time are truly harrowing. The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
What do you mean? You think the government should have no adequate opposition whatsoever?
The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
To be fair, the Labour Party tried very hard to eradicate the rot over many years, and were almost successful. Unfortunately they left a few spores in a forgotten corner of their backbenches and one of these has sprouted into a monstrous growth which is now engulfing them.
People like Corbyn should have been de-selected as MPs.
That's roughly what I took JEO's post to mean, Mr Apocalypse. That the Labour party should have actively got rid of these weirdos when it had the chance - and because it had a sneaking regard for them, didn't and is now paying the price.
It is of course a disaster from the point of view of having an effective opposition.
Why does everyone think I'm a bloke?
On Labour, I doubt Mandelson, Campbell, Blair and Brown had a sneaking regard for people like Corbyn. Rather, after the Kinnock years I think they took things for granted and thought the hard left would never come back. But now it's back, when it gets defeated at the ballot box it'll be completely destroyed.
I think the default assumption is for posters to be male, given the ratio on here it is the most probable. It's especially difficult if you have non-gender specific handles
Labour is a broad church and all that. The issue here is that MPs who didn't want him as their leader nominated him in order to have a debate.
The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
To be fair, the Labour Party tried very hard to eradicate the rot over many years, and were almost successful. Unfortunately they left a few spores in a forgotten corner of their backbenches and one of these has sprouted into a monstrous growth which is now engulfing them.
A brilliant analogy. – We could dub Labour’s political death 'fungicide'.
Stupid statement from Burnham. This is such an obvious question, he should have had a prepared response. "We live in a modern society with equality of the sexes. Women have as much right to lead political parties as men. However, I am running because I think I am the person with the best ideas and the best chance to lead the Labour Party to victory in the next election." Simples
But he didnt, he used the kind of words that gets a Tory politician who doesnt know how to deal with harridans. Obviously Milibands top team knew perfectly well how to deal with them. they gave them a pink bus and sent them off to coffee mornings and 'baby and toddler' groups, while the men did all the hard work.
Wow, I feel sorry for any of the women in your life....
Apocalypse, to be fair to notme, I don't think those are words he would use himself in describing women. I believe he used 'harridan' to portray how the left view Tory views on women, and the second highlight is his dig at how the Labour Party treated women (both the public and women MPs) during the last election.
Those pictures of Stalin on Trafalgar Square remind me how distasteful I find the British Hard Left, and all its equivocation about condemning the horrors of Stalinism and Islamism. I have read in detail about the deliberate starvations of the USSR, especially the targeting of the Kulaks and the Ukrainians. The photos from that time are truly harrowing. The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
What do you mean? You think the government should have no adequate opposition whatsoever?
I would definitely like an effective opposition. I would just prefer it was not the Labour Party. The Liberal Democrats, the SDP or UKIP would all be preferable. Labour for years have engaged in thoroughly nasty tactics like implying anyone who wanted to reduce immigration was a racist, yet refuse to condemn left-aligned actual racists their MPs regularly consort with. I'm afraid to say the party deserves what's coming to it.
Given UKIP has it's fair share of racists, the LDs dodgy hypocritical blokes on the issue of sexism I'm not sure they are that preferable. Do the SDP even still exist?
No - wound up in 1990 after this extraordinarily embarrassing by-election result:
(Bearing in mind just a year earlier they had had a strong showing against William Hague at Richmond and indeed nearly took the seat, this came as a profound shock that even David Owen couldn't ignore.)
Those pictures of Stalin on Trafalgar Square remind me how distasteful I find the British Hard Left, and all its equivocation about condemning the horrors of Stalinism and Islamism. I have read in detail about the deliberate starvations of the USSR, especially the targeting of the Kulaks and the Ukrainians. The photos from that time are truly harrowing. The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
What do you mean? You think the government should have no adequate opposition whatsoever?
The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
To be fair, the Labour Party tried very hard to eradicate the rot over many years, and were almost successful. Unfortunately they left a few spores in a forgotten corner of their backbenches and one of these has sprouted into a monstrous growth which is now engulfing them.
People like Corbyn should have been de-selected as MPs.
That's roughly what I took JEO's post to mean, Mr Apocalypse. That the Labour party should have actively got rid of these weirdos when it had the chance - and because it had a sneaking regard for them, didn't and is now paying the price.
It is of course a disaster from the point of view of having an effective opposition.
Why does everyone think I'm a bloke?
On Labour, I doubt Mandelson, Campbell, Blair and Brown had a sneaking regard for people like Corbyn. Rather, after the Kinnock years I think they took things for granted and thought the hard left would never come back. But now it's back, when it gets defeated at the ballot box it'll be completely destroyed.
I think the default assumption is for posters to be male, given the ratio on here it is the most probable. It's especially difficult if you have non-gender specific handles
It's true that there is quite a lot of men on PB. The only female poster I can think of besides me, is Plato. I think men in general are more likely to be interested in politics, though. I wonder why that is?
Those pictures of Stalin on Trafalgar Square remind me how distasteful I find the British Hard Left, and all its equivocation about condemning the horrors of Stalinism and Islamism. I have read in detail about the deliberate starvations of the USSR, especially the targeting of the Kulaks and the Ukrainians. The photos from that time are truly harrowing. The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
What do you mean? You think the government should have no adequate opposition whatsoever?
The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
To be fair, the Labour Party tried very hard to eradicate the rot over many years, and were almost successful. Unfortunately they left a few spores in a forgotten corner of their backbenches and one of these has sprouted into a monstrous growth which is now engulfing them.
People like Corbyn should have been de-selected as MPs.
That's roughly what I took JEO's post to mean, Mr Apocalypse. That the Labour party should have actively got rid of these weirdos when it had the chance - and because it had a sneaking regard for them, didn't and is now paying the price.
It is of course a disaster from the point of view of having an effective opposition.
Why does everyone think I'm a bloke?
On Labour, I doubt Mandelson, Campbell, Blair and Brown had a sneaking regard for people like Corbyn. Rather, after the Kinnock years I think they took things for granted and thought the hard left would never come back. But now it's back, when it gets defeated at the ballot box it'll be completely destroyed.
I think the default assumption is for posters to be male, given the ratio on here it is the most probable. It's especially difficult if you have non-gender specific handles
Labour is a broad church and all that. The issue here is that MPs who didn't want him as their leader nominated him in order to have a debate.
Labour is a broad mosque* given the amount of Islamists Corbyn associates with...
Those pictures of Stalin on Trafalgar Square remind me how distasteful I find the British Hard Left, and all its equivocation about condemning the horrors of Stalinism and Islamism. I have read in detail about the deliberate starvations of the USSR, especially the targeting of the Kulaks and the Ukrainians. The photos from that time are truly harrowing. The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
What do you mean? You think the government should have no adequate opposition whatsoever?
The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
To be fair, the Labour Party tried very hard to eradicate the rot over many years, and were almost successful. Unfortunately they left a few spores in a forgotten corner of their backbenches and one of these has sprouted into a monstrous growth which is now engulfing them.
People like Corbyn should have been de-selected as MPs.
That's roughly what I took JEO's post to mean, Mr Apocalypse. That the Labour party should have actively got rid of these weirdos when it had the chance - and because it had a sneaking regard for them, didn't and is now paying the price.
It is of course a disaster from the point of view of having an effective opposition.
Why does everyone think I'm a bloke?
On Labour, I doubt Mandelson, Campbell, Blair and Brown had a sneaking regard for people like Corbyn. Rather, after the Kinnock years I think they took things for granted and thought the hard left would never come back. But now it's back, when it gets defeated at the ballot box it'll be completely destroyed.
I think the default assumption is for posters to be male, given the ratio on here it is the most probable. It's especially difficult if you have non-gender specific handles
It's true that there is quite a lot of men on PB. The only female poster I can think of besides me, is Plato. I think men in general are more likely to be interested in politics, though. I wonder why that is?
Stupid statement from Burnham. This is such an obvious question, he should have had a prepared response. "We live in a modern society with equality of the sexes. Women have as much right to lead political parties as men. However, I am running because I think I am the person with the best ideas and the best chance to lead the Labour Party to victory in the next election." Simples
But he didnt, he used the kind of words that gets a Tory politician who doesnt know how to deal with harridans. Obviously Milibands top team knew perfectly well how to deal with them. they gave them a pink bus and sent them off to coffee mornings and 'baby and toddler' groups, while the men did all the hard work.
Wow, I feel sorry for any of the women in your life....
I dont have harridans in my life. I do have plenty of women though.
It speaks volumes that you describe women who dare to have non-Tory view of life as 'harridans'.
Stupid statement from Burnham. This is such an obvious question, he should have had a prepared response. "We live in a modern society with equality of the sexes. Women have as much right to lead political parties as men. However, I am running because I think I am the person with the best ideas and the best chance to lead the Labour Party to victory in the next election." Simples
Burnham said that he doesn't think the time is right for a female leader. What did he mean? I think Burnham would self-identify as a woman if he thought it would win him the election. But as he said "the time isn't right for that" (with Corbyn leading).
My guess is that he was thinking that if he admitted that the time were right, he'd be saying he should not be running as he is not a woman. So his tongue denied that the time was right before his brain kicked in.
Those pictures of Stalin on Trafalgar Square remind me how distasteful I find the British Hard Left, and all its equivocation about condemning the horrors of Stalinism and Islamism. I have read in detail about the deliberate starvations of the USSR, especially the targeting of the Kulaks and the Ukrainians. The photos from that time are truly harrowing. The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
What do you mean? You think the government should have no adequate opposition whatsoever?
The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
To be fair, the Labour Party tried very hard to eradicate the rot over many years, and were almost successful. Unfortunately they left a few spores in a forgotten corner of their backbenches and one of these has sprouted into a monstrous growth which is now engulfing them.
People like Corbyn should have been de-selected as MPs.
That's roughly what I took JEO's post to mean, Mr Apocalypse. That the Labour party should have actively got rid of these weirdos when it had the chance - and because it had a sneaking regard for them, didn't and is now paying the price.
It is of course a disaster from the point of view of having an effective opposition.
Why does everyone think I'm a bloke?
On Labour, I doubt Mandelson, Campbell, Blair and Brown had a sneaking regard for people like Corbyn. Rather, after the Kinnock years I think they took things for granted and thought the hard left would never come back. But now it's back, when it gets defeated at the ballot box it'll be completely destroyed.
I think the default assumption is for posters to be male, given the ratio on here it is the most probable. It's especially difficult if you have non-gender specific handles
It's true that there is quite a lot of men on PB. The only female poster I can think of besides me, is Plato. I think men in general are more likely to be interested in politics, though. I wonder why that is?
The only female posters I can think of are Plato, Cyclefree, MrsB and fitalass
One man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter both Cash and Corbyn were elected
Sure, and as far as I'm concerned it's a free country, and if terrorist sympathisers and associates of those who support the ideology of mass murderers want to stand for election, that's democracy.
But that wasn't the question. The question was whether the Labour Party, which used to be a political party which aspired to government, was wise to allow its name to be associated with someone whose views are so extreme. It's an academic question now, of course, since it seems they're about to make him leader.
The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
To be fair, the Labour Party tried very hard to eradicate the rot over many years, and were almost successful. Unfortunately they left a few spores in a forgotten corner of their backbenches and one of these has sprouted into a monstrous growth which is now engulfing them.
People like Corbyn should have been de-selected as MPs.
Why? He has a comfortable majority in Islington so his voters like him, what next should the Tories deselect Bill Cash too?
Do his voters know what an extremist he is? And while I dislike Bill Cash, he's just a bit too right-wing as opposed to associating with terrorists!
Of course after all most voters in Islington have degrees
Having a degree really doesn't mean you know much about politics, let alone your local MP!
"Britain killed millions around the world during the Colonial period."
Millions, Cap'n Comrade Doc? Really? You got some figures and sources t back up that claim?
I would have thought that with your scientific training you, of all posters on here, would actually have a grasp of numbers. There is quite a well known theory that most people can't envision a number bigger than seven, but the propensity of people to use "millions" when they mean "lots" and the modern day tendency to confuse billions with millions is something that gets my goat.
Those pictures of Stalin on Trafalgar Square remind me how distasteful I find the British Hard Left, and all its equivocation about condemning the horrors of Stalinism and Islamism. I have read in detail about the deliberate starvations of the USSR, especially the targeting of the Kulaks and the Ukrainians. The photos from that time are truly harrowing. The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
What do you mean? You think the government should have no adequate opposition whatsoever?
The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
To be fair, the Labour Party tried very hard to eradicate the rot over many years, and were almost successful. Unfortunately they left a few spores in a forgotten corner of their backbenches and one of these has sprouted into a monstrous growth which is now engulfing them.
People like Corbyn should have been de-selected as MPs.
That's roughly what I took JEO's post to mean, Mr Apocalypse. That the Labour party should have actively got rid of these weirdos when it had the chance - and because it had a sneaking regard for them, didn't and is now paying the price.
It is of course a disaster from the point of view of having an effective opposition.
Why does everyone think I'm a bloke?
On Labour, I doubt Mandelson, Campbell, Blair and Brown had a sneaking regard for people like Corbyn. Rather, after the Kinnock years I think they took things for granted and thought the hard left would never come back. But now it's back, when it gets defeated at the ballot box it'll be completely destroyed.
I think the default assumption is for posters to be male, given the ratio on here it is the most probable. It's especially difficult if you have non-gender specific handles
It's true that there is quite a lot of men on PB. The only female poster I can think of besides me, is Plato. I think men in general are more likely to be interested in politics, though. I wonder why that is?
Being on PB is a super nerdy and geeky way of being into politics (welcome to the club!). I think this skews the demographics much further.
Those pictures of Stalin on Trafalgar Square remind me how distasteful I find the British Hard Left, and all its equivocation about condemning the horrors of Stalinism and Islamism. I have read in detail about the deliberate starvations of the USSR, especially the targeting of the Kulaks and the Ukrainians. The photos from that time are truly harrowing. The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
What do you mean? You think the government should have no adequate opposition whatsoever?
I would definitely like an effective opposition. I would just prefer it was not the Labour Party. The Liberal Democrats, the SDP or UKIP would all be preferable. Labour for years have engaged in thoroughly nasty tactics like implying anyone who wanted to reduce immigration was a racist, yet refuse to condemn left-aligned actual racists their MPs regularly consort with. I'm afraid to say the party deserves what's coming to it.
Given UKIP has it's fair share of racists, the LDs dodgy hypocritical blokes on the issue of sexism I'm not sure they are that preferable. Do the SDP even still exist?
In my experience, if you speak to a typical UKIP activist about their racists, they say "It's exagerrated by the media, but yes, we have a few. It's unfortunate, but we do our best to kick them out." If you speak to a typical Labour activist about their racists, they say "well that comment was badly worded and I disagree with them, but that person isn't a real racist."
How many Labour people do you know that support kicking Diane Abbott out of the party?
The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
To be fair, the Labour Party tried very hard to eradicate the rot over many years, and were almost successful. Unfortunately they left a few spores in a forgotten corner of their backbenches and one of these has sprouted into a monstrous growth which is now engulfing them.
A brilliant analogy. – We could dub Labour’s political death 'fungicide'.
Those pictures of Stalin on Trafalgar Square remind me how distasteful I find the British Hard Left, and all its equivocation about condemning the horrors of Stalinism and Islamism. I have read in detail about the deliberate starvations of the USSR, especially the targeting of the Kulaks and the Ukrainians. The photos from that time are truly harrowing. The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
What do you mean? You think the government should have no adequate opposition whatsoever?
The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
To be fair, the Labour Party tried very hard to eradicate the rot over many years, and were almost successful. Unfortunately they left a few spores in a forgotten corner of their backbenches and one of these has sprouted into a monstrous growth which is now engulfing them.
People like Corbyn should have been de-selected as MPs.
That's roughly what I took JEO's post to mean, Mr Apocalypse. That the Labour party should have actively got rid of these weirdos when it had the chance - and because it had a sneaking regard for them, didn't and is now paying the price.
It is of course a disaster from the point of view of having an effective opposition.
Why does everyone think I'm a bloke?
On Labour, I doubt Mandelson, Campbell, Blair and Brown had a sneaking regard for people like Corbyn. Rather, after the Kinnock years I think they took things for granted and thought the hard left would never come back. But now it's back, when it gets defeated at the ballot box it'll be completely destroyed.
I think the default assumption is for posters to be male, given the ratio on here it is the most probable. It's especially difficult if you have non-gender specific handles
It's true that there is quite a lot of men on PB. The only female poster I can think of besides me, is Plato. I think men in general are more likely to be interested in politics, though. I wonder why that is?
The only female posters I can think of are Plato, Cyclefree, MrsB and fitalass
At some point, one of these seriously right wing populist parties is going to take power in a European country, especially as the immigration crisis escalates. And then....
Will be interesting to compare the %s of Muslims in the population by recent voting patterns/govts elected
Islam in Europe by percentage of country population
<1% Armenia · Belarus · Czech Republic · Estonia · Finland · Hungary · Iceland · Latvia · Lithuania · Malta · Moldova · Monaco · Poland · Portugal · Romania · San Marino · Slovakia · Ukraine
At some point, one of these seriously right wing populist parties is going to take power in a European country, especially as the immigration crisis escalates. And then....
I don't know if Trump wins, but Jeb Bush looks like the clear Andy Burnham of the Republican race.
God only knows he is 2.8 on Betfair.
Lay !
He has money. Pots of it. And establishment support from GOP networks. Might not be enough but I got on him at 10/1 as the most likely to emerge from the sack of rats in one piece.
Stupid statement from Burnham. This is such an obvious question, he should have had a prepared response. "We live in a modern society with equality of the sexes. Women have as much right to lead political parties as men. However, I am running because I think I am the person with the best ideas and the best chance to lead the Labour Party to victory in the next election." Simples
But he didnt, he used the kind of words that gets a Tory politician who doesnt know how to deal with harridans. Obviously Milibands top team knew perfectly well how to deal with them. they gave them a pink bus and sent them off to coffee mornings and 'baby and toddler' groups, while the men did all the hard work.
Wow, I feel sorry for any of the women in your life....
Apocalypse, to be fair to notme, I don't think those are words he would use himself in describing women. I believe he used 'harridan' to portray how the left view Tory views on women, and the second highlight is his dig at how the Labour Party treated women (both the public and women MPs) during the last election.
I've never heard anyone on the Left call Tory woman 'harridans' it's used the other way round more so than anything. Also, I didn't like the implication that Labour women weren't doing any hard work at all during the GE, while Labour men were. And that's coming from someone who didn't like the whole pink bus thing.
Those pictures of Stalin on Trafalgar Square remind me how distasteful I find the British Hard Left, and all its equivocation about condemning the horrors of Stalinism and Islamism. I have read in detail about the deliberate starvations of the USSR, especially the targeting of the Kulaks and the Ukrainians. The photos from that time are truly harrowing. The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
What do you mean? You think the government should have no adequate opposition whatsoever?
The Labour Party has tolerated the rot for far too long, and now the whole structure is collapsing. I'm glad there is some justice in this world.
To be fair, the Labour Party tried very hard to eradicate the rot over many years, and were almost successful. Unfortunately they left a few spores in a forgotten corner of their backbenches and one of these has sprouted into a monstrous growth which is now engulfing them.
People like Corbyn should have been de-selected as MPs.
That's roughly what I took JEO's post to mean, Mr Apocalypse. That the Labour party should have actively got rid of these weirdos when it had the chance - and because it had a sneaking regard for them, didn't and is now paying the price.
It is of course a disaster from the point of view of having an effective opposition.
Why does everyone think I'm a bloke?
On Labour, I doubt Mandelson, Campbell, Blair and Brown had a sneaking regard for people like Corbyn. Rather, after the Kinnock years I think they took things for granted and thought the hard left would never come back. But now it's back, when it gets defeated at the ballot box it'll be completely destroyed.
I think the default assumption is for posters to be male, given the ratio on here it is the most probable. It's especially difficult if you have non-gender specific handles
It's true that there is quite a lot of men on PB. The only female poster I can think of besides me, is Plato. I think men in general are more likely to be interested in politics, though. I wonder why that is?
The only female posters I can think of are Plato, Cyclefree, MrsB and fitalass
And Beverley_C?
And Audreyanne (unconfirmed)
And Peter the Punter (on the 2nd Tuesday of each month).
At some point, one of these seriously right wing populist parties is going to take power in a European country, especially as the immigration crisis escalates. And then....
Hopefully they will be occupied by returning to their old currency for long enough to avoid anything more serious happening... fortunately it should only take 1 or 2 countries to end the european federal dream once and for all.
Comments
But if Corbyn wants to go round making stupid apologies - it is his and labour's business.
If Blair is so abhorrent for the deaths in Iraq we are talking thousands not the millions of deaths Mao and Stalin caused.
My hunch is that a disproportionally large segment of those voters that were not to be found on the electoral roll are Corbyn supporters who were turned off by the mainstream parties and did not bother with elections before Jezza appeared.
Does 'flame federation' refer to the Fire Brigade Union or something?
My hunch is that a disproportionally large segment of those voters that were not to be found on the electoral roll are Corbyn supporters who were turned off by the mainstream parties and did not bother with elections before Jezza appeared.
Indeed, I think backing the 60+% bands for Corbyn is likely to end up with a lost stake. It may also narrow Corbyn's victory to just over or under the 50% mark in the first round.
Those your thoughts too ?
Burnham 8%
Cooper 10%
Kendall 12%
Corbyn 36%
The Watermelon Coup.
Well, given their recent track record, I can't think of polls as juggernauts. Maybe even, after toying with every other possibility, Labour might do the least silly thing, so denying the tabloids much fodder.
P/S It's a pity tim isn't around here to comment.
EDIT - sorry, sorry! Did I really say that? Appears that My Tebbit Chip briefly malfunctioned!
Those your thoughts too ?
Yes. The last YouGov poll had him on 57% in the first round based on some extrapolation. I'd say the low 50's in the first round sounds about right. He might also just fall below the 50% mark.
There is another theory which states that this has already happened."
-- The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
Clearly somebody figured it out shortly after May 7th.
In any case, that figure strikes me as pretty unreliable - I don't think we'll know much about how people will respond to the new leader until s/he has had a few months to bed in. Apart from anything else, 22% for Corbyn strikes me as hopelessly unrealistic. It could be a lot lower than that if his unsavoury associations keep dogging him.
It is of course a disaster from the point of view of having an effective opposition.
On Labour, I doubt Mandelson, Campbell, Blair and Brown had a sneaking regard for people like Corbyn. Rather, after the Kinnock years I think they took things for granted and thought the hard left would never come back. But now it's back, when it gets defeated at the ballot box it'll be completely destroyed.
"42,569 union names, 10,468 £3 sign-ups and 7,250 members have been stripped out."
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/four-labour-leadership-candidates-rule-6316659
So most of those that have been eliminated so far are union names. Most of them may have been duplicates who also were Labour supporters (although we can't know for sure). Only 10% of the £3 sign-ups have been "culled" so far. So the impact may not be that significant. But Harriet Harman appeared to suggest that it could increase by another 50,000. No wonder the other candidates have ruled out mounting a legal challenge. This development will undoubtedly benefit the other camps, the question is by which margin?
That banner's a disgrace. Someone might want to point out to the bearded tit left of picture that Stalin did kill rather a lot of people.
Mr. Price, one can only agree. If we could somehow harness the vanity of Yentob, we could keep the lights on in half of England.
Or we could just fire him from a giant artillery gun into the heart of the sun.
Ms. Apocalypse, there is a significant gender imbalance here, which may explain the assumption.
"The past lives of Labour Ministers have long been sanitised and many biographies that include their shady communist and Marxist pasts are inaccessible or removed from the net. The truth about these guys is similar to discovering that leading Tories were members of the Nazi Party. If you are a British voter and do not think that this is important then I despair for British politics. Had these people taken jobs in industry their past might be forgotten and forgiven but they continued in left wing politics and even today boast of being "Stalinist" or International Socialist."
http://pol-check.blogspot.co.uk/2009/11/roots-of-new-labour.html
(RN tiptoes away gingerly before the riot starts)
That really proves that he has never spent time in such places (in addition to the fact that he has unusual genital arrangements). For most people in them, the government is almost unbelievably remote and irrelevant - I doubt if many of them even made the connection between this charity and the government (not that there were many, anyway).
The charity's buildings might have been attacked, but not 'government buildings'. It's only middle-class anarchists who go in for such places nowadays.
!!!!!
'descend'?
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/nh/new_hampshire_republican_presidential_primary-3350.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bootle_by-elections,_1990
(Bearing in mind just a year earlier they had had a strong showing against William Hague at Richmond and indeed nearly took the seat, this came as a profound shock that even David Owen couldn't ignore.)
God only knows he is 2.8 on Betfair.
Lay !
But that wasn't the question. The question was whether the Labour Party, which used to be a political party which aspired to government, was wise to allow its name to be associated with someone whose views are so extreme. It's an academic question now, of course, since it seems they're about to make him leader.
"Britain killed millions around the world during the Colonial period."
Millions, Cap'n Comrade Doc? Really? You got some figures and sources t back up that claim?
I would have thought that with your scientific training you, of all posters on here, would actually have a grasp of numbers. There is quite a well known theory that most people can't envision a number bigger than seven, but the propensity of people to use "millions" when they mean "lots" and the modern day tendency to confuse billions with millions is something that gets my goat.
How many Labour people do you know that support kicking Diane Abbott out of the party?
And Audreyanne (unconfirmed)
Islam in Europe by percentage of country population
<1% Armenia · Belarus · Czech Republic · Estonia · Finland · Hungary · Iceland · Latvia · Lithuania · Malta · Moldova · Monaco · Poland · Portugal · Romania · San Marino · Slovakia · Ukraine
1–2% Andorra · Croatia · Ireland
2–4% Italy · Luxembourg · Norway · Serbia · Slovenia · Spain
4–5% Denmark · Greece · Liechtenstein · United Kingdom
5–10% Austria · Belgium · Bulgaria · France · Germany · Netherlands · Sweden · Switzerland
10–20% Georgia · Montenegro · Russia
20–30% Cyprus
30–40% Rep. of Macedonia
40–50% Bosnia–Herzegovina
80–90% Albania
90–95% Kosovo
95–100% Turkey · Azerbaijan
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Europe