Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Message to Andy, Yvette and Liz: Jeremy is a man you can do
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Message to Andy, Yvette and Liz: Jeremy is a man you can do business with
It’s a pretty boring picture – two men and a woman standing in front of a model train. What made it newsworthy for the Metro, the London free sheet, in October 2007 was that the two men were Prime Minister Gordon Brown and Mayor of London Ken Livingstone. Flanked by the Transport Secretary Ruth Kelly they are gazing at a Crossrail train as the £16 billion project was given the green light.
0
Comments
Two years to influence policy, followed by a resignation perhaps on health grounds as he moves to party grandee status would seem best case scenario for JC
You are really proud of minority-buying identity politics and inviting homophobia hate preachers to spread their filth?
The Hogg comments remind me that the media utterly and completely lost their heads over the expenses scandal. The truth of individual cases got lost behind insinuation and sneers.
Yes, there were sinners, and it was good for them to face ridicule and the legal system (Margaret Moran seeming particularly egregious, especially when combined with her part in the lobbying scandal whilst too ill to attend parliament). Yes, there were some who pushed things too far (then again, in my experience that's a common trait). But many more were lambasted unfairly in a hysterical witch hunt.
It's worse that the ringleaders of that witch hunt were the media, who are hardly unknown for both high salaries and rather large expense bills (although those days are probably in the past for newspapers).
(Dons flame-proof coat).
When read with Mr Brind's other pieces the lack of intellectual consistency and the stench of desperation is palpable.
Yet another Labourite hoping that Corbyn will be gone before 2020. That's an unusual position to take on a leader that has not even been elected yet, and reeks of desperation.
Clearly the stunning overnight Barnsley by-election triumph is indicative of the stunning sweep that the Dear Leader will achieve in the years to come.
Comrade Corbyn's Brave New World Is Almost Upon Us.
Labour is an idea whose time has gone. At least in shire England, there are only Tories and Traitors.
The header is right though about the important of anything Corbyn might come up with in the economic realm. It's where he can do the most damage most swiftly. Labour are already regarded as somewhat unsafe by most of the electorate economically after all. Business in general probably just wants to get on with making money in a stable economic background. Corbyn seems unlikely to propose such a state of affairs.
He may turn out of course to propose policies that are less left-wing than his suggestions during the campaign. The issue then is that he'll be seen to be trying to win votes rather than go with what he really thinks.
The economy will remain Labour's most problematic issue for a long time in my view.
Had Labour taken six months to work out what a left leaning party actually stood for in a world of globalisation, the near impossibility of significantly increasing the tax base, and difficulty in borrowing money, and then looked for a leader to sell it to the public they might be in a better place.
The trick now is going to be to stop the batshit crazy sect from pushing the party beyond the electoral pale before Comrade Corbyn leaves and they get another bite at selection someone that the voters might warm to. More moderate Labour should spend the next 2-3 years keeping their heads down in public, and working very hard in private to evolve a credible centre left platform, and then have it ready to roll when the nutters implode.
One of those two assertions is wrong. If his leadership is short-lived, then he should be left to fend for himself so that the new leadership can distance itself from the disaster; and for the same reason, if the party rallies round him then it cannot quickly dump him.
Corbyn's policies do not add up, quite literally. Hence the economic lunacy of printing money year on year to fill in the gap; something which may well be illegal under European law and is certainly going to give fright to moderate, cautious, centrist voters. He - and Labour - are going to find themselves in something of the same bind that the SNP got into over the referendum on the linked currency-EU-budget questions. You cannot assert your way out of scepticism. And yet that seems to be what the entire movement is intent on doing.
He may not be a monster, but if so he must at least be gullible and credulous and content to associate with monsters. As for being a saviour of the LP, well only in the Dan Hodges "self-immolation and allowing a sensible party to arise from the ashes" sense of the term.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vTIWloXBCww
The collected thoughts of Mr Brind are proving most enlightening.
Ken Livingstone kept awful company, and it's probably best not to remind everyone about the horrendous GLC, but keep kidding yourself if it makes one feel better about the cataclysmic disaster that will likely sweep over the Labour Party in a few weeks.
I’ll defeat Tories with the new people’s politics - http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/article4540370.ece
EDIT He mentions two economists as titans Ha-Joon Chang and Mariana Mazzucato - anyone know who they are?
I would hate for the Labour party to split: In football you should support your team through thick-and-thin. I am at a loss as to where constructive oppossition is to come from.
Rather less balanced than your usual posts Charles. You must have been spending too much time reading PB.com
I fear you are urinating without first checking the direction of the air flow.
The best you can hope for (should he be elected) is that he is overwhelmed by the complexity of the job and leaves it to his deputy. Should that be the Billy Bunter lookalike, you are well and truly ... insert appropriate word.
Jezza won't surprise anyone - he's spent his life being predictably awkward. Fortunately, you will be saved by the length of the election, as Labour is slowly awakening to the potential horror.
http://youtu.be/COt65HZCJaA
Two are former cabinet ministers, never mind members of the shadow cabinet. They were the two that this election was supposed to have been between. How can they possibly have grown during the campaign when they have been overtaken by what was originally the token no-hope left-wing candidate?
I would hate for the Labour party to split: In football you should support your team through thick-and-thin. I am at a loss as to where constructive oppossition is to come from.
1987 to 1991 too. Governments without credible and sensible oppositions go off the rails and indulge their sillier fantasies about what they would like the world to be, not how it is. Cameron and Osborne are not immune to this and elements of their party considerably less so.
Mr. Brind, when you say short-lived do you mean months, or a couple of years? If Labour releases the vote breakdown and Corbyn does best (at least a plurality) it's hard to see him being immediately defenestrated, especially given Labour's general incompetence when it comes to regicide.
It may be that fresh economic woe will make voters more receptive to leftwingery on the economy. However, a chap who poses with Stalin posters, is a friend of Hamas and wants to have a chat [with just the one gender, mind] about gender segregation in public areas is perhaps not the chap to sell that.
I hold my head erect
And whistle a happy tune
So no one will suspect
I'm afraid
https://twitter.com/mrchrisaddison/status/628133557144264704
*temporarily, obviously.
Corbyn hasn't been entrusted with the running of taps, there must be a reason why he like Abbott has been left to linger on the backbenches.
Labour has dug its own grave, Miliband & Corbyn are the undertakers.
But referring to Mary Riddell as "brilliant" AND saying " Andy Burnham, Yvette Cooper and Liz Kendall have had their ups and downs but, in my view, all have grown during the protracted campaign." has me rolling around laughing..
I thin k your future success lies on the stage as a stand up comic:-)
This reminds me of the latest fad for sportsmen to comment on a poor performance. "We'll take a lot of positives from this. We may have lost 11 - 0 but the throw in just before half time was great. We can build on this horrendous defeat and go on to achieve our aims."
Not sure that making racism illegal changes people's thinking but nice try anyway.
Looking good for Jezza...
Who moved heaven & earth to stop Ken getting it!
But no, the only villains in Labour mythology are Tories - and Thatcher in particular!
I can see Jezzlar being a fan.
"I've never rebelled". If Labour MPs wore team shirts, he'd be kissing the badge whenever he appeared on the telly.
Bravo Mr Brind, an article well up to your usual standard and just as informative.
So why elect JC in the first place if he is not really wanted? Is this a clever plot by Mandelson et al to wake up Labour from the torpor they have been in since 2007/8?
DB neglects the other option; that JC and Labour become ignored and laughed at (even worse than EDM) due to his ridiculous and illogical policies, and so become so down and out that even the wooliest Islingtonite will pass by their begging bowl.That could lead to Labour being out of power til 2030 (assuming fixed Parliaments).
BTW, London councils had/still includes many 'rotten boroughs' where politics is put before people.
I spotted a young Caroline Cox pointing out Maths exams with % questions comparing US and Soviet spending on Defence. Wonder where they got the Soviet numbers from as they were never published accurately :-)
A young Bernie Grant.
Who else?
It strikes me that he's a very comfy sinecure for life and has used it to spout whatever tosh he wants from the safety of his majority. He's got the ex-leader of Respect as one of his campaign managers, and hosts of Greenies, SWPers and other Trots offering their first born.
I don't think he's a Labour man at all - he's just an MP who happens to have gotten a lucky gig and stuck around.
Outside of the governing party the only person who has made their presence felt is Nicola. No one can know whether Corbyn's radicalism will be popular yet but it worked for the SNP and I can't see any reason why it shouldn't work for Labour.
I went into the campaign recalling thinking burnham was best in 2010 in my opinion and that cooper was solid and had always been more formidable than her husband and had more substance than the others, even if she is terrifyingly lacking in charisma. Now they are the amazing flip flopping liar and the woman who just seems incapable of making any sort of impression even after years at the top.
@Isam, thank you for the video. I hadn't seen it before and I hadn't realised just how far the Loony Left had gone. I did wonder though about this line in the header: As I understand it, that has had some very mixed results. One result was undoubtedly a great increase in tensions between ethnic minorities and the police, which made it more difficult to deal with genuine problems in the police force (any criticisms of the police, however legitimate, were dismissed as the usual suspects scare-mongering - look at the murder of Steven Lawrence). Another was of course that certain types of racism were attacked - others were made more or less mainstream, as we have seen with Corbyn's (and for that matter Livingstone's) apologia for his association with anti-semites.
As regards homophobia - again, let's not forget that there were some pretty grim results from the 'positive discrimination' policies of Haringey and Islington. Anyone who self-identified as gay was almost certain to be hired, and almost guaranteed not to be sacked. Which meant that a number of paedophiles described themselves as gay, were hired to work in children's homes, and committed some pretty dreadful acts with total impunity that as late as 2003 were being covered up by senior Labour figures who should have been acting against them.
So I don't think 'rightly proud' is necessarily the right phrase for such extreme policies. A genuine effort to educate people and change attitudes in a positive way would have been something to be proud of - but that's not what this was or at least, not the totality of it.
Guess you've got to try and look for a positive when your heading for oblivion! :^O
'Inspiring you people' is probably 'inspiring young people.' Again, a great idea, but they don't vote. And that's not because politicians are uninspiring, but because they are impatient and voting is a process that leads to gradual change. Direct action is quicker, less effective at getting things done and relieves their feelings. When Corbyn speaks at the first rally that turns into a riot, his credibility will be instantly shot with every parent of young children, every mortgage holder, every teacher.
As for the other three 'growing in stature' - absurd. Two of them were tipped for top offices in a Labour government. They can't even beat Jeremy Corbyn. They have not come up with one good idea, one clear policy, one breath of energy between them. That is why they are losing. After this election, all three should be summarily returned to the back benches.
I think this header is very optimistic about the effect of Corbyn on Labour. I am pessimistic both about his effect on Labour (making them not merely unelectable, but potentially destroying them) the Conservatives (we saw what happened in 2012 when the less-than-brilliant Osborne gets overconfident) our democratic system (it needs two realistic parties of government) and therefore the country (we face too many problems to be complacent about the quality of our government).
Mary Riddell is right. Corbyn's not a monster. He's absolute poison. He's like a Stone Age priest telling a sacrifice to take neat strychnine on the grounds it will destroy her body, but will preserve the purity of her soul for the gods and reap a great harvest for everyone else. Labour is too important to us all to be wasted in such mindless self-indulgence.
As such, he couldn't go anywhere else, as he insists his is the true, pure labour. Just a theory though.
As someone who mocked Tories who thought they would even most seats at the GE, I know there were plenty of even more mocking labour and LD folk around. Some of that has, temporarily I hope, dissipated. Balance will be restored in time. Whinging about it does nothing.
It's certainly more right wing than usual this morning, but it's a pro Corbyn piece, and even many labour people despair of him, so of course it energises the right wing.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3212152/Tory-donor-Kids-storm-peerage.html
Good actor though.
[NB you will have to communicate for the game to work, but if you're a regular here it'll probably take less time than you spend posting on pb.com].
Edited extra bit: Mr. kle4, quite. "Agree with me or be considered scum" isn't necessarily the most persuasive of messages.
Did he come third or fourth in the end? I remember in Andrew Rawnsley's Servants of the People Tony Blair is recorded as secretly hoping Norris, who wasn't that different from Blair himself apart from the colourful private life, might beat Livingstone when it was clear Dobson had no chance.
Will Corbyn keep us amused with regular proposals of gender segregation and appropriation of private assets? Or will someone else win?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWLN7rIby9s
Kinnock was never a potential PM, but anyone who thinks he wasn't a magnificent speaker and an extremely brave politician should watch this one: 'I'm telling you - and you'll listen...you can't play politics with people's jobs and people's services!'