politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In Register

Categories

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Ex LAB voters in Newsnight Ipsos MORI focus groups rate Coo

SystemSystem Posts: 12,219
edited August 2015 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Ex LAB voters in Newsnight Ipsos MORI focus groups rate Cooper top and Corbyn bottom

IPSOS MORI focus groups of ex LAB voters for Newsnight finds Cooper most favoured. Corbyn last
http://t.co/dPd3A8Dv6J pic.twitter.com/mFnWKlH05R

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,672
    "Could the party be making a terrible mistake?"

    Hmmm - I wonder. Just why would the Tories want an anti-capitalist, anti-western, economic naïf who consorts with anti-semites and terrorists to lead the Labour party? My guess is that it is not because he worries them.

    Mike's tongue is so deep into his cheek it may burst through.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    "Could the party be making a terrible mistake?"

    I think the consensus on that is well known, though apparently it's being rude to express it.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,046
    Glorious third!
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,137
    What have I been saying for weeks. Go Cooper!
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,137
    Why didn't Newsnight do this two weeks ago?
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,331
    I'm still hopeful that second preferences might yet win it for her - but then I'm an incorrigible optimist.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Could the party be making a terrible mistake?

    Nay! Nay! And Thrice Nay!

    We Commend their Indefatigability!
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    edited August 2015
    kle4 said:

    "Could the party be making a terrible mistake?" I think the consensus on that is well known, though apparently it's being rude to express it.

    It is noticeable how quiet the Conservatives are in the media about this. They seem to believe in Napoleon's maxim. Do not interrupt the enemy when they are making mistakes.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,331
    CarlottaVance said:

    Could the party be making a terrible mistake?

    Nay! Nay! And Thrice Nay!

    We Commend their Indefatigability!

    I know you're a tory. Fair enough. But do you not feel even a little worried about the probability that there isn't going to be an effective opposition for the next five years?
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    ThomasNashe said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Could the party be making a terrible mistake?

    Nay! Nay! And Thrice Nay!

    We Commend their Indefatigability!

    I know you're a tory. Fair enough. But do you not feel even a little worried about the probability that there isn't going to be an effective opposition for the next five years?
    No. Actually I think we are more likely to have a constitutional crisis brought about by all these Lib Dem peers who say "we never signed up to the previous agreement on manifesto promises not being blocked in the HoL". It is possible that Corbyn may do the same and break the previous Labour agreement.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,331
    Just to add to that. We know that Cameron is at his best with his back against the wall. If things - as seems likely - are going to be just too damned comfortable for him, are we not likely to see many dips in performance?
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Well, them not liking Jeremy is not surprising news, but interesting (and against the grain of public polls) to see them rating Yvette above Andy.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @simonsketch: To blame 1) Miliband, 2) Baldwin. . https://t.co/Ou4bN7FVIc
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,331
    Danny565 said:

    Well, them not liking Jeremy is not surprising news, but interesting (and against the grain of public polls) to see them rating Yvette above Andy.

    I have a feeling his stock has been falling quite considerably since that poll that HYUFD keeps referencing.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    ThomasNashe said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Could the party be making a terrible mistake?

    Nay! Nay! And Thrice Nay!

    We Commend their Indefatigability!

    I know you're a tory. Fair enough. But do you not feel even a little worried about the probability that there isn't going to be an effective opposition for the next five years?
    Nature abhors a vacuum. Opposition will emerge.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,331
    antifrank said:

    ThomasNashe said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Could the party be making a terrible mistake?

    Nay! Nay! And Thrice Nay!

    We Commend their Indefatigability!

    I know you're a tory. Fair enough. But do you not feel even a little worried about the probability that there isn't going to be an effective opposition for the next five years?
    Nature abhors a vacuum. Opposition will emerge.
    I guess so. I remember in the 1980s when the effective opposition was the Church of England (Robert Runcie as Archbishop of Canterbury).
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    ThomasNashe said:

    Just to add to that. We know that Cameron is at his best with his back against the wall. If things - as seems likely - are going to be just too damned comfortable for him, are we not likely to see many dips in performance?

    Time was we could rely on UKIPers and 'wish-we-had-the-balls-to-be-Ukippers-but-are-scared-to-defect-ers' to put the pressure on him, but right now he's at his strongest and they are keeping quiet. Soon though, no doubt. All this migration stuff and EU stuff on the horizon will make them put his back against the wall.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    ThomasNashe said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Could the party be making a terrible mistake?

    Nay! Nay! And Thrice Nay!

    We Commend their Indefatigability!

    I know you're a tory. Fair enough. But do you not feel even a little worried about the probability that there isn't going to be an effective opposition for the next five years?
    I am not a Tory and the prospect of not having an effective opposition for the next five years doesn't worry me one bit. We have not had effective opposition for the last five or indeed for very much, if any, of at least the last thirty. So I see nothing to worry about.

    The opposition is the party that disagrees with everything the government wants to do even if they agree with the aim and can think of no better way of achieving said aim or even, as we had in the last Parliament, HMG is actually doing what the the opposition did when in government or said they would do if re-elected. That is what we normally get.

    Effective opposition is actually holding HMG to account and forcing them to explain and re-consider policies. This is normally done by government backbenchers, the press and/or minor parties acting as pressure groups. As, in this country, the opposition merely oppose just about everything it is very rare for HMG to pay them any attention when it comes to policy.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    antifrank said:

    ThomasNashe said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Could the party be making a terrible mistake?

    Nay! Nay! And Thrice Nay!

    We Commend their Indefatigability!

    I know you're a tory. Fair enough. But do you not feel even a little worried about the probability that there isn't going to be an effective opposition for the next five years?
    Nature abhors a vacuum. Opposition will emerge.
    UKIP most probably. It'll take a year or so for them to get going again after the election, therefore looking at local election results won't be particularly helpful for a while.
  • dodradedodrade Posts: 597
    "Former Prime Minister Tony Blair was still highly regarded among participants."

    I had no idea these people still existed.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    AndyJS said:

    antifrank said:

    ThomasNashe said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Could the party be making a terrible mistake?

    Nay! Nay! And Thrice Nay!

    We Commend their Indefatigability!

    I know you're a tory. Fair enough. But do you not feel even a little worried about the probability that there isn't going to be an effective opposition for the next five years?
    Nature abhors a vacuum. Opposition will emerge.
    UKIP most probably. It'll take a year or so for them to get going again after the election, therefore looking at local election results won't be particularly helpful for a while.
    Maybe. They'll need to up their game. They've been fairly hopeless since the election and Nigel Farage isn't the man to get the public as a whole behind him.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,571
    Worth noting that in

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/28/ed-miliband-jeremy-corbyn-labour-leadership

    it says in passing that Progress says 40% of the membership has yet to vote. How they know that (and indeed whether they're correct) and whether they really mean membership and not electorate I'm not sure, but perhaps the ERS is publishing a running total? I don't know many people who are still brooding.
  • ArtistArtist Posts: 1,893
    It shows the gulf between motivating party members and motivating the (voting) public, which is why I think it's wrong for people to overly criticise Burnham and Cooper for failing to inspire during the campaign. Both would have been fine as party leader and a step up from Miliband.
  • EPGEPG Posts: 6,653
    I nearly bet on Cooper earlier in the contest but realised it was a tendency more based on my opinion as to what I would do if I were a Labour voter, that there were reasons why I am not like a Labour voter, and that it was not what actual Labour voters would do, even if they ought to.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,834
    "Could the party be making a terrible mistake?"

    Yes.

    Actually, it's already made two. Firstly, it changed the rules to the present absurdity; secondly, the PLP sidestepped the sensible precaution of the 15% nomination rule to allow Corbyn onto the ballot. Electing him would be the hattrick.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,834
    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    ThomasNashe said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Could the party be making a terrible mistake?

    Nay! Nay! And Thrice Nay!

    We Commend their Indefatigability!

    I know you're a tory. Fair enough. But do you not feel even a little worried about the probability that there isn't going to be an effective opposition for the next five years?
    No. Actually I think we are more likely to have a constitutional crisis brought about by all these Lib Dem peers who say "we never signed up to the previous agreement on manifesto promises not being blocked in the HoL". It is possible that Corbyn may do the same and break the previous Labour agreement.
    They can't block them; them can only delay them. Besides, I don't think they'll do that: they're unlikely to vote themselves out of a plum job.
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,117
    Gosh- really exciting news that the Tories are extending the badger cull- at 4 grand a pop it is great value for money...bloody badgers, long nosed, stripy burrowers- worth 4k to kill each of them if you ask me. I say let's go for the lot, let's make the UK a badger free zone. In times of austerity 4k to kill a badger is great value for money.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,046
    tyson said:

    Gosh- really exciting news that the Tories are extending the badger cull- at 4 grand a pop it is great value for money...bloody badgers, long nosed, stripy burrowers- worth 4k to kill each of them if you ask me. I say let's go for the lot, let's make the UK a badger free zone. In times of austerity 4k to kill a badger is great value for money.

    Such an eloquent and informative post, thanks for spending the time to write it.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    ThomasNashe said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Could the party be making a terrible mistake?

    Nay! Nay! And Thrice Nay!

    We Commend their Indefatigability!

    I know you're a tory. Fair enough. But do you not feel even a little worried about the probability that there isn't going to be an effective opposition for the next five years?
    Actually, yes - its a very bad idea - bad for the country - every government needs a good opposition to keep it on its toes - and bad for Labour - which I thought had left this nonsense behind in the eighties. Thatcher was lucky in her enemies, looks like Cameron is going to be too.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    RobD said:

    tyson said:

    Gosh- really exciting news that the Tories are extending the badger cull- at 4 grand a pop it is great value for money...bloody badgers, long nosed, stripy burrowers- worth 4k to kill each of them if you ask me. I say let's go for the lot, let's make the UK a badger free zone. In times of austerity 4k to kill a badger is great value for money.

    Such an eloquent and informative post, thanks for spending the time to write it.
    Nearly as good as Yasmin Alibhai brown twitter post today.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,046
    CarlottaVance said:

    ThomasNashe said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Could the party be making a terrible mistake?

    Nay! Nay! And Thrice Nay!

    We Commend their Indefatigability!

    I know you're a tory. Fair enough. But do you not feel even a little worried about the probability that there isn't going to be an effective opposition for the next five years?
    Actually, yes - its a very bad idea - bad for the country - every government needs a good opposition to keep it on its toes - and bad for Labour - which I thought had left this nonsense behind in the eighties. Thatcher was lucky in her enemies, looks like Cameron is going to be too.
    Just waiting for Cameron to take his man purse to the European Commission.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    RobD said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    ThomasNashe said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Could the party be making a terrible mistake?

    Nay! Nay! And Thrice Nay!

    We Commend their Indefatigability!

    I know you're a tory. Fair enough. But do you not feel even a little worried about the probability that there isn't going to be an effective opposition for the next five years?
    Actually, yes - its a very bad idea - bad for the country - every government needs a good opposition to keep it on its toes - and bad for Labour - which I thought had left this nonsense behind in the eighties. Thatcher was lucky in her enemies, looks like Cameron is going to be too.
    Just waiting for Cameron to take his man purse to the European Commission.
    On EasyJet?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,046
    CarlottaVance said:

    RobD said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    ThomasNashe said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Could the party be making a terrible mistake?

    Nay! Nay! And Thrice Nay!

    We Commend their Indefatigability!

    I know you're a tory. Fair enough. But do you not feel even a little worried about the probability that there isn't going to be an effective opposition for the next five years?
    Actually, yes - its a very bad idea - bad for the country - every government needs a good opposition to keep it on its toes - and bad for Labour - which I thought had left this nonsense behind in the eighties. Thatcher was lucky in her enemies, looks like Cameron is going to be too.
    Just waiting for Cameron to take his man purse to the European Commission.
    On EasyJet?
    Wonder how close to Brussels you can get on EasyJet. Probably somewhere in France, while still advertised as Brussels!
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,117
    On the Lab leadership- the Radio 5 Hustings yesterday Burnham was by far the best, and Corbyn the worst- which is saying alot to be outperformed by Liz Kendell, but there you go. It kind of says to me that when Corbyn is leader his tenure will be short lived. Even his Corbynites might soon find out he's a bit dour and humourless and not great at thinking on his feet which the Radio 5 coverage showed.
  • maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,591
    tyson said:

    On the Lab leadership- the Radio 5 Hustings yesterday Burnham was by far the best, and Corbyn the worst- which is saying alot to be outperformed by Liz Kendell, but there you go. It kind of says to me that when Corbyn is leader his tenure will be short lived. Even his Corbynites might soon find out he's a bit dour and humourless and not great at thinking on his feet which the Radio 5 coverage showed.

    'not great at thinking on his feet'

    This is a man with 2 Es at A-level, no real world experience and a set of opinions handed down by his parents and careful maintained without any exposure to air or challenge ever since.

    It's a miracle he can put his trousers on the right way round.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited August 2015
    Off topic

    You may or may not have heard of France Farmer but her story is amazing and This Is Your Life appearance a real eye opener... fascinating woman

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6hOO-AZHk4
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,571
    I think lack of solid second preference transfers between the others is going to doom whoever comes second. What I can't figure out is who that's going to be. Nearly all the non-Corbyn voters who I know have gone for Cooper (like most of those on PB), but Burnham is shown by multiple polls to be more popular both with Labour voters and the wider public, and he's close to the traditional choice of members as "inside left". As my circle is mainly Guardianista, I wonder if there's a bigger Burnham vote out there that I'm not seeing.

    If Burnham comes second then he'll probably get his choice of Shadow roles. If Cooper comes second - especially if it's close - it'll be an important test for both Corbyn and Cooper whether she joins the Shadow Cabinet or not.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,680
    NickPalmer said:

    I think lack of solid second preference transfers between the others is going to doom whoever comes second. What I can't figure out is who that's going to be. Nearly all the non-Corbyn voters who I know have gone for Cooper (like most of those on PB), but Burnham is shown by multiple polls to be more popular both with Labour voters and the wider public, and he's close to the traditional choice of members as "inside left". As my circle is mainly Guardianista, I wonder if there's a bigger Burnham vote out there that I'm not seeing.

    If Burnham comes second then he'll probably get his choice of Shadow roles. If Cooper comes second - especially if it's close - it'll be an important test for both Corbyn and Cooper whether she joins the Shadow Cabinet or not.

    I think Cooper will join Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet whether she is second or third. So will Burnham. A team of all the talents (but not Kendall).
  • flightpath01flightpath01 Posts: 4,903
    maaarsh said:

    tyson said:

    On the Lab leadership- the Radio 5 Hustings yesterday Burnham was by far the best, and Corbyn the worst- which is saying alot to be outperformed by Liz Kendell, but there you go. It kind of says to me that when Corbyn is leader his tenure will be short lived. Even his Corbynites might soon find out he's a bit dour and humourless and not great at thinking on his feet which the Radio 5 coverage showed.

    'not great at thinking on his feet'

    This is a man with 2 Es at A-level, no real world experience and a set of opinions handed down by his parents and careful maintained without any exposure to air or challenge ever since.

    It's a miracle he can put his trousers on the right way round.
    ''no real world experience and a set of opinions handed down by his parents and careful maintained without any exposure to air or challenge ever since'' --- amazingly you could be talking about Ed Miliband.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,736
    Daniel Hannan MEP: Cameron’s peerages are helping to discredit the Lords
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,008
    'Jeremy Corbyn was the least preferred contender. He was described by one as "bitter and jealous of the rich people" and by another as "unelectable as prime minister".
    Yvette Cooper came out on top, and was described as "positive" and "addressing the needs of the working class people".
    The focus group participants described Andy Burnham as "quite credible". On Liz Kendall, they said she needs more "passion" and "personality".
    Former Prime Minister Tony Blair was still highly regarded among participants.'

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34087829
  • FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486
    RobD said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    RobD said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    ThomasNashe said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Could the party be making a terrible mistake?

    Nay! Nay! And Thrice Nay!

    We Commend their Indefatigability!

    I know you're a tory. Fair enough. But do you not feel even a little worried about the probability that there isn't going to be an effective opposition for the next five years?
    Actually, yes - its a very bad idea - bad for the country - every government needs a good opposition to keep it on its toes - and bad for Labour - which I thought had left this nonsense behind in the eighties. Thatcher was lucky in her enemies, looks like Cameron is going to be too.
    Just waiting for Cameron to take his man purse to the European Commission.
    On EasyJet?
    Wonder how close to Brussels you can get on EasyJet. Probably somewhere in France, while still advertised as Brussels!
    I once flew Ryanair to Brussels - you end up a bit south of the city. That was for an assessment centre to work for the EU.... wonder how many eurocrats formerly lived on a Ryanair budget
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,417
    Barnesian said:

    A team of all the talents (but not Kendall).

    Team of slightly substandard middle managers more like ;)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,008
    Quinnipiac 2016 General Election

    Clinton – 44% (45)
    Rubio – 43% (41)

    Clinton – 42% (41)
    Bush – 40% (42)

    Clinton – 45% (48)
    Trump – 41% (36)

    Biden 44% (45%)
    Rubio 41% (38%)

    Biden 45% (43%)
    Bush 39% (42%)

    Biden 48% (49%)
    Trump 40% (37%)

    Rubio 41% (–)
    Sanders 40% (–)

    Sanders 44% (45%)
    Trump 41% (37%)

    Sanders 43% (39%)
    Bush 39% (44%)
    http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2274
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,166
    edited August 2015
    RobD said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    RobD said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    ThomasNashe said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Could the party be making a terrible mistake?

    Nay! Nay! And Thrice Nay!

    We Commend their Indefatigability!

    I know you're a tory. Fair enough. But do you not feel even a little worried about the probability that there isn't going to be an effective opposition for the next five years?
    Actually, yes - its a very bad idea - bad for the country - every government needs a good opposition to keep it on its toes - and bad for Labour - which I thought had left this nonsense behind in the eighties. Thatcher was lucky in her enemies, looks like Cameron is going to be too.
    Just waiting for Cameron to take his man purse to the European Commission.
    On EasyJet?
    Wonder how close to Brussels you can get on EasyJet. Probably somewhere in France, while still advertised as Brussels!
    London Oxford Airport :lol:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_Airport
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,166
    Yet another excellent PB Tory Propaganda piece, Mike! :)
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,834
    NickPalmer said:

    I think lack of solid second preference transfers between the others is going to doom whoever comes second. What I can't figure out is who that's going to be. Nearly all the non-Corbyn voters who I know have gone for Cooper (like most of those on PB), but Burnham is shown by multiple polls to be more popular both with Labour voters and the wider public, and he's close to the traditional choice of members as "inside left". As my circle is mainly Guardianista, I wonder if there's a bigger Burnham vote out there that I'm not seeing.

    If Burnham comes second then he'll probably get his choice of Shadow roles. If Cooper comes second - especially if it's close - it'll be an important test for both Corbyn and Cooper whether she joins the Shadow Cabinet or not.

    She surely doesn't have a meaningful choice. To turn down an offer when Burnham accepts one would be to openly declare herself the queen-over-the-water, which won't go down well with party loyalists.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,175
    RobD said:

    tyson said:

    Gosh- really exciting news that the Tories are extending the badger cull- at 4 grand a pop it is great value for money...bloody badgers, long nosed, stripy burrowers- worth 4k to kill each of them if you ask me. I say let's go for the lot, let's make the UK a badger free zone. In times of austerity 4k to kill a badger is great value for money.

    Such an eloquent and informative post, thanks for spending the time to write it.
    To be fair it makes a change from 'Look - a squirrel'!
  • MyBurningEarsMyBurningEars Posts: 3,651
    isam said:

    Off topic

    You may or may not have heard of France Farmer but her story is amazing and This Is Your Life appearance a real eye opener... fascinating woman

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6hOO-AZHk4

    That's quite astonishing and very moving. Particularly the bit about the electric shock therapy.

    Also the appearance of Edsel Pacer at the end - a proper Bullseye moment, that one. It dates the show to the very year.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    edited August 2015
    bigjohnowls said:

    Daniel Hannan MEP: Cameron’s peerages are helping to discredit the Lords

    Hannan doesn't like a lot of things Cameron does, it lessens even those times one might agree with him because it seems so expected that who knows how much he feeels strongly about.

    More seriously, I don't see that Cameron's appointments are that much worse than usual are they, moat man hogg and a few others notwithstanding? If one is already against the Lords it is pretty much same old same old, and if you support it it's still not egregiously bad in term of appointments is it?
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    The EM women going for Cooper rather than Corbyn in the Newsnight focus group.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,175
    On topic - the Labour party since May has presented a pretty deplorable demeanour of bitter bad losers - blaming everyone but themselves and then turning on each other in aself-indulgent orgy of of lefty political puritanism which has demeaned them in the eyes of most rational onlookers.

    A number of people not least one of them prominent on here have joined in with the most pathetic of self-justifications I have ever seen. the country does need a credible opposition but they are not about to get it from the Labour party.
  • maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,591
    felix said:

    On topic - the Labour party since May has presented a pretty deplorable demeanour of bitter bad losers - blaming everyone but themselves and then turning on each other in aself-indulgent orgy of of lefty political puritanism which has demeaned them in the eyes of most rational onlookers.

    A number of people not least one of them prominent on here have joined in with the most pathetic of self-justifications I have ever seen. the country does need a credible opposition but they are not about to get it from the Labour party.

    You'd think some of them would be ashamed to have lived for all these years at the taxpayers expense and now effectively turn around and just say '*&^* it' to providing the sort of genuine opposition the system requires, preferring the current inward looking farce instead.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,166
    felix said:

    On topic - the Labour party since May has presented a pretty deplorable demeanour of bitter bad losers - blaming everyone but themselves and then turning on each other in aself-indulgent orgy of of lefty political puritanism which has demeaned them in the eyes of most rational onlookers.

    A number of people not least one of them prominent on here have joined in with the most pathetic of self-justifications I have ever seen. the country does need a credible opposition but they are not about to get it from the Labour party.

    Bourgeois propaganda!

    Corbyn is the only antidote to the puffed-up Bullingdon posh-boy Cameron!
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    bigjohnowls said:

    Daniel Hannan MEP: Cameron’s peerages are helping to discredit the Lords

    Can't help but agree with Hannan. Mind you which staunch Labour chap said just last year,

    "The Lords are an archaic anomaly which fuels disillusionment with British politics. It exists purely on a democratic deficit which has been allowed to evolve unchecked for centuries… the fact is that people are fed up with an out-of-touch political class and the growing sense that Westminster is failing us all.”

    Yes, you have remembered correctly it was Peter Hain, who has just accepted a peerage. Given Hain's relationship with money, I am sure the attendance allowance and travel expenses had no part in his overcoming his socialist principles to accept the honour.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    isam said:

    Off topic

    You may or may not have heard of France Farmer but her story is amazing and This Is Your Life appearance a real eye opener... fascinating woman

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6hOO-AZHk4

    Thanks for that,just watched it,yes it was a real eye opener.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,166
    The Lords is the world's only Upper House bigger than its respective Lower House!

    120% before yesterday's shenanigans, now 127% larger than the Commons!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    The Lords is the world's only Upper House bigger than its respective Lower House!

    120% before yesterday's shenanigans, now 127% larger than the Commons!

    That it is larger or smaller speaks nothing as to its effectiveness at its purpose, or lack thereof. It could be 1600 or 20 members if it does the job right.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    david_herdson said:

    NickPalmer said:

    I think lack of solid second preference transfers between the others is going to doom whoever comes second. What I can't figure out is who that's going to be. Nearly all the non-Corbyn voters who I know have gone for Cooper (like most of those on PB), but Burnham is shown by multiple polls to be more popular both with Labour voters and the wider public, and he's close to the traditional choice of members as "inside left". As my circle is mainly Guardianista, I wonder if there's a bigger Burnham vote out there that I'm not seeing.

    If Burnham comes second then he'll probably get his choice of Shadow roles. If Cooper comes second - especially if it's close - it'll be an important test for both Corbyn and Cooper whether she joins the Shadow Cabinet or not.

    She surely doesn't have a meaningful choice. To turn down an offer when Burnham accepts one would be to openly declare herself the queen-over-the-water, which won't go down well with party loyalists.
    She should think of the long game and aim to be queen over the water. Some short term heat is less damaging than looking unprincipled.

    Her line should be "while I respect that Jeremy is sincere in his beliefs, I disagree with too many of his policy preferences to be able to serve in his shadow Cabinet with integrity. I remain a loyal Labour supporter and will continue to argue for pragmatic progressive policies constructively."
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    HurstLlama said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    Daniel Hannan MEP: Cameron’s peerages are helping to discredit the Lords

    Can't help but agree with Hannan. Mind you which staunch Labour chap said just last year,

    "The Lords are an archaic anomaly which fuels disillusionment with British politics. It exists purely on a democratic deficit which has been allowed to evolve unchecked for centuries… the fact is that people are fed up with an out-of-touch political class and the growing sense that Westminster is failing us all.”

    Yes, you have remembered correctly it was Peter Hain, who has just accepted a peerage. Given Hain's relationship with money, I am sure the attendance allowance and travel expenses had no part in his overcoming his socialist principles to accept the honour.
    To be fair, Hain is correct! But if your house is burning down you may as well warm your hands...
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,166
    kle4 said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    The Lords is the world's only Upper House bigger than its respective Lower House!

    120% before yesterday's shenanigans, now 127% larger than the Commons!

    That it is larger or smaller speaks nothing as to its effectiveness at its purpose, or lack thereof. It could be 1600 or 20 members if it does the job right.
    Comrade kle4

    The global average (ie. nations with bicameral parliaments) is having an Upper House only 44% the size of the Lower House.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,983
    Isn't this what you'd expect? I wouldn't think too many ex Labour voters were 'ex labour' because the party wasn't left wing enough for them. Labour need to regroup and offer something that voters see as NEW. Odd as it may seem in this particular contest 67 year old Corbyn is the only victor who'd even make it onto the front pages if he won.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    kle4 said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    The Lords is the world's only Upper House bigger than its respective Lower House!

    120% before yesterday's shenanigans, now 127% larger than the Commons!

    That it is larger or smaller speaks nothing as to its effectiveness at its purpose, or lack thereof. It could be 1600 or 20 members if it does the job right.
    Comrade kle4

    The global average (ie. nations with bicameral parliaments) is having an Upper House only 44% the size of the Lower House.
    Doesn't mean it couldn't work even though it's larger! The UK breaks the mould!
  • flightpath01flightpath01 Posts: 4,903
    kle4 said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    Daniel Hannan MEP: Cameron’s peerages are helping to discredit the Lords

    Hannan doesn't like a lot of things Cameron does, it lessens even those times one might agree with him because it seems so expected that who knows how much he feeels strongly about.

    More seriously, I don't see that Cameron's appointments are that much worse than usual are they, moat man hogg and a few others notwithstanding? If one is already against the Lords it is pretty much same old same old, and if you support it it's still not egregiously bad in term of appointments is it?
    Yes but funnily enough Cameron himself is against the Lords. But how do you get agreement about reforming it? Tory backbenchers voted against reform (admittedly Clegg's proposals were botched).
    So meantime there needs to be appointments.
    Hannan cannot see beyond the end of his nose.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,166
    kle4 said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    kle4 said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    The Lords is the world's only Upper House bigger than its respective Lower House!

    120% before yesterday's shenanigans, now 127% larger than the Commons!

    That it is larger or smaller speaks nothing as to its effectiveness at its purpose, or lack thereof. It could be 1600 or 20 members if it does the job right.
    Comrade kle4

    The global average (ie. nations with bicameral parliaments) is having an Upper House only 44% the size of the Lower House.
    Doesn't mean it couldn't work even though it's larger! The UK breaks the mould!
    Cammo should reduce the size of the Lords, not the Commons!

    44% of 650 = 286
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    edited August 2015
    antifrank said:

    She should think of the long game and aim to be queen over the water. Some short term heat is less damaging than looking unprincipled.

    Her line should be "while I respect that Jeremy is sincere in his beliefs, I disagree with too many of his policy preferences to be able to serve in his shadow Cabinet with integrity. I remain a loyal Labour supporter and will continue to argue for pragmatic progressive policies constructively."

    And of course she won't be alone. It won't be a case of the queen over the water, it will an entire Flying Dutchman's worth of ghostly grandees and other lost souls, "ordained still to traverse the ocean ... till the period of their penance expire."
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,175
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    felix said:

    On topic - the Labour party since May has presented a pretty deplorable demeanour of bitter bad losers - blaming everyone but themselves and then turning on each other in aself-indulgent orgy of of lefty political puritanism which has demeaned them in the eyes of most rational onlookers.

    A number of people not least one of them prominent on here have joined in with the most pathetic of self-justifications I have ever seen. the country does need a credible opposition but they are not about to get it from the Labour party.

    Bourgeois propaganda!

    Corbyn is the only antidote to the puffed-up Bullingdon posh-boy Cameron!
    How dare you call me bourgeois - I'm ancien regime!!
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,166
    felix said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    felix said:

    On topic - the Labour party since May has presented a pretty deplorable demeanour of bitter bad losers - blaming everyone but themselves and then turning on each other in aself-indulgent orgy of of lefty political puritanism which has demeaned them in the eyes of most rational onlookers.

    A number of people not least one of them prominent on here have joined in with the most pathetic of self-justifications I have ever seen. the country does need a credible opposition but they are not about to get it from the Labour party.

    Bourgeois propaganda!

    Corbyn is the only antidote to the puffed-up Bullingdon posh-boy Cameron!
    How dare you call me bourgeois - I'm ancien regime!!
    Ancien Regime Propaganda, then!
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    edited August 2015
    As for the focus groups: what on earth else would one expect?
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,834
    flightpath01 said:

    kle4 said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    Daniel Hannan MEP: Cameron’s peerages are helping to discredit the Lords

    Hannan doesn't like a lot of things Cameron does, it lessens even those times one might agree with him because it seems so expected that who knows how much he feeels strongly about.

    More seriously, I don't see that Cameron's appointments are that much worse than usual are they, moat man hogg and a few others notwithstanding? If one is already against the Lords it is pretty much same old same old, and if you support it it's still not egregiously bad in term of appointments is it?
    Yes but funnily enough Cameron himself is against the Lords. But how do you get agreement about reforming it? Tory backbenchers voted against reform (admittedly Clegg's proposals were botched).
    So meantime there needs to be appointments.
    Hannan cannot see beyond the end of his nose.
    It's a myth that Tory backbenchers voted against reform.

    Clegg withdrew his entire bill because he was faced with a Tory backbench rebellion on a timetabling motion. Even if he'd lost that - which he probably would have - all it would have meant was longer discussion, which given the dog's breakfast he put forward would have been no bad thing.

    Clegg could almost certainly have got his bill through had he had the tenacity to grind it out. He didn't because he wanted an excuse to dump on the constituency boundary reform, though fat lot of good it did him in the end.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,175
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    As for the focus groups: what on earth else would one expect?

    Quite - part of the lunacy since May has been for Labour to talk to itself, listen to no-one else and condemn all waverers as 'Red Tories' - it has all been utterly childish and degrading.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,723
    bigjohnowls said:

    Daniel Hannan MEP: Cameron’s peerages are helping to discredit the Lords

    Usual story - easy to criticise from the sidelines when you don't have to worry about the practicalities.

    Is he seriously suggesting that Darling, Blunkett, Hain, Jowell, Primarilo, Bruce, Beith, Campbell etc should not have got peerages? It's obvious that they would be automatic choices.

    Given 11 LDs and 8 Lab what is Cameron meant to do - appoint fewer Con Peers so he loses even more Lords votes?

    It was agreed by the powers that be that he could have 30 Con Peers - in the event he's only got 26 as when 5 were rejected he didn't take up the option of replacing them all - he only replaced one.

    In contrast when Clegg had Laws rejected he added Stunell to ensure he didn't lose out on even one single place.

    Cameron has done what any rational person would have done in his situation. But of course it's great fun to have a go so that is what lots of people do.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,038
    tyson said:

    On the Lab leadership- the Radio 5 Hustings yesterday Burnham was by far the best, and Corbyn the worst- which is saying alot to be outperformed by Liz Kendell, but there you go. It kind of says to me that when Corbyn is leader his tenure will be short lived. Even his Corbynites might soon find out he's a bit dour and humourless and not great at thinking on his feet which the Radio 5 coverage showed.

    I didn't hear all of it but I heard a good hour and came to the opposite views. I can't stand Corbyn, the company the man keeps disgusts me, he is spectacularly ignorant and economically illiterate and sometimes this shone through his answers but I thought he came across as a disciplined debater with his lines to take (basically "invest" in everything for every problem).

    In contrast I thought Burnham was all over the place. He did not even seem to notice when he had contradictory ideas. He was sincere in saying 2 different things if that is what he thought people wanted to hear.

    Cooper really struggled to find her voice, as she has largely done throughout this interminable election. She wants big ideas but she doesn't even seem to have small ones herself.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,834
    antifrank said:

    david_herdson said:

    NickPalmer said:

    I think lack of solid second preference transfers between the others is going to doom whoever comes second. What I can't figure out is who that's going to be. Nearly all the non-Corbyn voters who I know have gone for Cooper (like most of those on PB), but Burnham is shown by multiple polls to be more popular both with Labour voters and the wider public, and he's close to the traditional choice of members as "inside left". As my circle is mainly Guardianista, I wonder if there's a bigger Burnham vote out there that I'm not seeing.

    If Burnham comes second then he'll probably get his choice of Shadow roles. If Cooper comes second - especially if it's close - it'll be an important test for both Corbyn and Cooper whether she joins the Shadow Cabinet or not.

    She surely doesn't have a meaningful choice. To turn down an offer when Burnham accepts one would be to openly declare herself the queen-over-the-water, which won't go down well with party loyalists.
    She should think of the long game and aim to be queen over the water. Some short term heat is less damaging than looking unprincipled.

    Her line should be "while I respect that Jeremy is sincere in his beliefs, I disagree with too many of his policy preferences to be able to serve in his shadow Cabinet with integrity. I remain a loyal Labour supporter and will continue to argue for pragmatic progressive policies constructively."
    That's fair enough but doesn't that simply invite her to become the stalking horse for Burnham to use once she (or events) have damaged Corbyn sufficiently?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,008
    Newsnight focus group pretty evenly split between Cooper and Burnham with Cooper just having the edge, little support for Corbyn or Kendall
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,338
    edited August 2015
    The Lancaster and Fleetwood MP is giving every impression of being an absolute thicko.
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    Bless, Cat Smith. She put a labour poster asking people to voter for her 100 miles north of her constituency. She then got completely burnt by the PM by trying to take a pop at him in PMQs.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Labour MP Cat Smith totally clueless on Newsnight.
  • flightpath01flightpath01 Posts: 4,903
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    RobD said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    RobD said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    ThomasNashe said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Could the party be making a terrible mistake?

    Nay! Nay! And Thrice Nay!

    We Commend their Indefatigability!

    I know you're a tory. Fair enough. But do you not feel even a little worried about the probability that there isn't going to be an effective opposition for the next five years?
    Actually, yes - its a very bad idea - bad for the country - every government needs a good opposition to keep it on its toes - and bad for Labour - which I thought had left this nonsense behind in the eighties. Thatcher was lucky in her enemies, looks like Cameron is going to be too.
    Just waiting for Cameron to take his man purse to the European Commission.
    On EasyJet?
    Wonder how close to Brussels you can get on EasyJet. Probably somewhere in France, while still advertised as Brussels!
    London Oxford Airport :lol:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_Airport
    Well you could easily call it Blenheim Airport so it can be classed as relatively close to Brussels without being in Belgium.
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-32333596
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,983
    edited August 2015
    OT. I was taking a walk this afternoon when I came upon a dark suited man wearing sunglasses talking into his sleeve. He told me to wait. I noticed thirty yards further on there was another man similarly dressed. I took my camera out and was told to put it away. A hellicopter then landed in the garden of the house these men were standing in front of and I was told I could now pass.

    I later discovered that the house was one of the finest on Cap Ferrat worth over 500 million dollars and owned by a man called Curt Englehorn a multi billionaire who is little know and very secretive.

    My simple thought was this; Wouldn't it be nice to live in a world where the patronage of the wealthy wasn't so overbearing that they could hijack a public footpath in order to fly their hellicopters into their gardens without being seen.......
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    Maybe she is the 'dead cat' that labour are putting on the table...
  • john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @Barnesian

    'I think Cooper will join Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet whether she is second or third'

    Seriously you think that Copper will serve in a shadow cabinet with Abbott,Mcdonnell,Meacher & co with failed 1980's left wing policies thrown in for good measure ?

    I can't believe that she would be so desperate.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,834
    Roger said:

    OT. I was taking a walk this afternoon when I came upon a dark suited man wearing sunglasses talking into his sleeve. He told me to wait. I noticed thirty yards further on there was another man similarly dressed. I took my camera out and was told to put it away. A hellicopter then landed in the garden of the house these men were standing in front of and I was told I could now pass.

    I later discovered that the house was one of the finest on Cap Ferrat and worth over 500 million dollars and owned by a man called Curt Englehorn a multi billionaire who is little know and very secretive.

    My thought was this; Wouldn't it be nice to live in a world where the patronage of the wealthy wasn't so overbearing that they could hijack a public footpath in order to fly their hellicopters into their gardens without being seen.

    You should have told them that it's a free country and to get stuffed. They can only hijack the footpath with your permission.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    AndyJS said:

    Labour MP Cat Smith totally clueless on Newsnight.

    notme said:

    Bless, Cat Smith. She put a labour poster asking people to voter for her 100 miles north of her constituency. She then got completely burnt by the PM by trying to take a pop at him in PMQs.

    notme said:

    Maybe she is the 'dead cat' that labour are putting on the table...

    That was embarrassing......who is the presenter? Quite tenacious......
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    James O'Brien's Paxman impression is very annoying.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    david_herdson said:

    Roger said:

    OT. I was taking a walk this afternoon when I came upon a dark suited man wearing sunglasses talking into his sleeve. He told me to wait. I noticed thirty yards further on there was another man similarly dressed. I took my camera out and was told to put it away. A hellicopter then landed in the garden of the house these men were standing in front of and I was told I could now pass.

    I later discovered that the house was one of the finest on Cap Ferrat and worth over 500 million dollars and owned by a man called Curt Englehorn a multi billionaire who is little know and very secretive.

    My thought was this; Wouldn't it be nice to live in a world where the patronage of the wealthy wasn't so overbearing that they could hijack a public footpath in order to fly their hellicopters into their gardens without being seen.

    You should have told them that it's a free country and to get stuffed. They can only hijack the footpath with your permission.
    Is France a free country in these things?
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,571
    david_herdson said:

    NickPalmer said:

    I think lack of solid second preference transfers between the others is going to doom whoever comes second. What I can't figure out is who that's going to be. Nearly all the non-Corbyn voters who I know have gone for Cooper (like most of those on PB), but Burnham is shown by multiple polls to be more popular both with Labour voters and the wider public, and he's close to the traditional choice of members as "inside left". As my circle is mainly Guardianista, I wonder if there's a bigger Burnham vote out there that I'm not seeing.

    If Burnham comes second then he'll probably get his choice of Shadow roles. If Cooper comes second - especially if it's close - it'll be an important test for both Corbyn and Cooper whether she joins the Shadow Cabinet or not.

    She surely doesn't have a meaningful choice. To turn down an offer when Burnham accepts one would be to openly declare herself the queen-over-the-water, which won't go down well with party loyalists.
    Speaking as a loyalist, I agree - if we had to choose again in due course, I'd go for someone who'd done their best to be loyally supportive in a tricky moment.

    Incidentally, the fact that the focus group thought highly of Tony Blair suggests that they aren't necessarily representative, as polling suggests that's now an unusual view.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,008
    Roger said:

    OT. I was taking a walk this afternoon when I came upon a dark suited man wearing sunglasses talking into his sleeve. He told me to wait. I noticed thirty yards further on there was another man similarly dressed. I took my camera out and was told to put it away. A hellicopter then landed in the garden of the house these men were standing in front of and I was told I could now pass.

    I later discovered that the house was one of the finest on Cap Ferrat worth over 500 million dollars and owned by a man called Curt Englehorn a multi billionaire who is little know and very secretive.

    My simple thought was this; Wouldn't it be nice to live in a world where the patronage of the wealthy wasn't so overbearing that they could hijack a public footpath in order to fly their hellicopters into their gardens without being seen.......

    Surely a public footpath is a public footpath, billionaire or not, provided you did not trespass on his property as he flew into it you would have been perfectly entitled to continue on
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,170
    notme said:

    Bless, Cat Smith. She put a labour poster asking people to voter for her 100 miles north of her constituency. She then got completely burnt by the PM by trying to take a pop at him in PMQs.

    In that case, how crap was her predecessor?
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,723
    It's a big shame for Cooper and Burnham that this focus group was not done a few weeks earlier.
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    CarlottaVance said:

    AndyJS said:

    Labour MP Cat Smith totally clueless on Newsnight.

    notme said:

    Bless, Cat Smith. She put a labour poster asking people to voter for her 100 miles north of her constituency. She then got completely burnt by the PM by trying to take a pop at him in PMQs.

    notme said:

    Maybe she is the 'dead cat' that labour are putting on the table...

    That was embarrassing......who is the presenter? Quite tenacious......
    It was a bit 'The Day, Today'.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,175
    NickPalmer said:

    david_herdson said:

    NickPalmer said:

    I think lack of solid second preference transfers between the others is going to doom whoever comes second. What I can't figure out is who that's going to be. Nearly all the non-Corbyn voters who I know have gone for Cooper (like most of those on PB), but Burnham is shown by multiple polls to be more popular both with Labour voters and the wider public, and he's close to the traditional choice of members as "inside left". As my circle is mainly Guardianista, I wonder if there's a bigger Burnham vote out there that I'm not seeing.

    If Burnham comes second then he'll probably get his choice of Shadow roles. If Cooper comes second - especially if it's close - it'll be an important test for both Corbyn and Cooper whether she joins the Shadow Cabinet or not.

    She surely doesn't have a meaningful choice. To turn down an offer when Burnham accepts one would be to openly declare herself the queen-over-the-water, which won't go down well with party loyalists.
    Speaking as a loyalist, I agree - if we had to choose again in due course, I'd go for someone who'd done their best to be loyally supportive in a tricky moment.

    Incidentally, the fact that the focus group thought highly of Tony Blair suggests that they aren't necessarily representative, as polling suggests that's now an unusual view.
    'Speaking as a loyalist' lol.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,723
    My prediction: If Lab choose Khan for London mayor the party will then explode next May when he loses to Goldsmith.

    If they pick Jowell she'll win easily and Corbyn will then remain as leader - at least for a while longer.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Theuniondivvie said:

    notme said:

    Bless, Cat Smith. She put a labour poster asking people to voter for her 100 miles north of her constituency. She then got completely burnt by the PM by trying to take a pop at him in PMQs.

    In that case, how crap was her predecessor?
    He was an electoral wizard in many ways: defending a majority of just 333 he lost by only 1,265 in a seat packed with university students, lecturers and public sector workers.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,983
    HYUFD

    "Surely a public footpath is a public footpath, billionaire or not, provided you did not trespass on his property as he flew into it you would have been perfectly entitled to continue on"

    Indeed but I felt in order to try out your theory I'd probably better be armed which I wasn't. I also suspected at the time he was probably Russian and who know what rules they abide by.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,008
    edited August 2015
    NickPalmer said:

    david_herdson said:

    NickPalmer said:

    I think lack of solid second preference transfers between the others is going to doom whoever comes second. What I can't figure out is who that's going to be. Nearly all the non-Corbyn voters who I know have gone for Cooper (like most of those on PB), but Burnham is shown by multiple polls to be more popular both with Labour voters and the wider public, and he's close to the traditional choice of members as "inside left". As my circle is mainly Guardianista, I wonder if there's a bigger Burnham vote out there that I'm not seeing.

    If Burnham comes second then he'll probably get his choice of Shadow roles. If Cooper comes second - especially if it's close - it'll be an important test for both Corbyn and Cooper whether she joins the Shadow Cabinet or not.

    She surely doesn't have a meaningful choice. To turn down an offer when Burnham accepts one would be to openly declare herself the queen-over-the-water, which won't go down well with party loyalists.
    Speaking as a loyalist, I agree - if we had to choose again in due course, I'd go for someone who'd done their best to be loyally supportive in a tricky moment.

    Incidentally, the fact that the focus group thought highly of Tony Blair suggests that they aren't necessarily representative, as polling suggests that's now an unusual view.
    Remember Blair is unpopular with leftwingers and the right, but these were centrist floating voters who had voted Labour under Blair but voted for Cameron in 2015 ie exactly the type of group where Blair would be most popular and exactly the type of voters Labour has to win back to win another general election
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,834
    foxinsoxuk said:

    david_herdson said:

    Roger said:

    OT. I was taking a walk this afternoon when I came upon a dark suited man wearing sunglasses talking into his sleeve. He told me to wait. I noticed thirty yards further on there was another man similarly dressed. I took my camera out and was told to put it away. A hellicopter then landed in the garden of the house these men were standing in front of and I was told I could now pass.

    I later discovered that the house was one of the finest on Cap Ferrat and worth over 500 million dollars and owned by a man called Curt Englehorn a multi billionaire who is little know and very secretive.

    My thought was this; Wouldn't it be nice to live in a world where the patronage of the wealthy wasn't so overbearing that they could hijack a public footpath in order to fly their hellicopters into their gardens without being seen.

    You should have told them that it's a free country and to get stuffed. They can only hijack the footpath with your permission.
    Is France a free country in these things?
    I believe the French can be bloody minded against authorities (legitimate ones, never mind the kind of jumped-up suit Roger experienced), when the mood takes them
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,008
    notme said:

    Bless, Cat Smith. She put a labour poster asking people to voter for her 100 miles north of her constituency. She then got completely burnt by the PM by trying to take a pop at him in PMQs.

    Cat Smith is bisexual I believe but marrying a man called Ben, she is also a sociology graduate who worked for Corbyn
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    edited August 2015
    NickPalmer said:



    Incidentally, the fact that the focus group thought highly of Tony Blair suggests that they aren't necessarily representative, as polling suggests that's now an unusual view.

    TBF, most of them didn't seem to be saying they liked him now, they were talking about how much they liked him back in the day (though more because "he spoke from the heart" and "he connected with people" rather than any policy reasons).
Sign In or Register to comment.