If you’re Jeremy Corbyn, you do something that is breathtaking in both its audacity and its simplicity. You just pretend the voters don’t exist. You simply ignore them. And you hope that if you do, perhaps they’ll just go away, and never bother you or your party again.
On Carmichael, presumably the court will be aware that it could create some very broad precedent. If it does, the election campaign process is going to be very different in the future and will affect all candidates in all parties. You'd have thought it would want to avoid that. This is UK law the court is deciding on, isn't it?
I doubt it will be plagiarism that does for Jezza.
It will be wanting to have his cake and eat it. Brushing Trident in under the carpet on the one hand but saying to his faithful that he is still opposed to it if in power.
His excuse for not supporting Trident seems wrong anyway - he claims it will take up 25% of defence budget, but that is plain wrong. He is stupid or a liar. Of course we do not know the total size of a Corbyn defence budget as yet.
On Carmichael, presumably the court will be aware that it could create some very broad precedent. If it does, the election campaign process is going to be very different in the future and will affect all candidates in all parties. You'd have thought it would want to avoid that. This is UK law the court is deciding on, isn't it?
Yes it is. The lack of detailed reference to the English authorities is quite surprising. It seems the judges have almost gone back to first principles and simple statutory interpretation. I am concerned about the breadth of the implications.
On Carmichael, presumably the court will be aware that it could create some very broad precedent. If it does, the election campaign process is going to be very different in the future and will affect all candidates in all parties. You'd have thought it would want to avoid that. This is UK law the court is deciding on, isn't it?
Yes it is. The lack of detailed reference to the English authorities is quite surprising. It seems the judges have almost gone back to first principles and simple statutory interpretation. I am concerned about the breadth of the implications.
Perhaps they are looking ahead to the time when Scotland is a foreign country and anticipating challenges that might arise from bringing in foreign authorities.
I only caught a smidgen of the speech in the car and it was the mollifying bit about nice politics and people being grown up enough to agree to disagree.
All fine, but then I thought to myself, this is a guy who's been married three times.
I'm still on my first marriage, so on that basis, I'm more willing to be be agreeable than Corbyn.
she is not named or involved at this stage in the investigation.
Thomson, who said she always acted within the law, has withdrawn from her role as the SNP’s Business, Innovation and Skills spokesperson in the House of Commons and as party whip while the investigation takes place.
An investigation she is not involved in...
Put down the Bucky, Malc, you've had enough for one night.
Always the sign of a loser, saddo if I was drinking it would be classier than that, I am not like you and your lowlife friends. I can afford real stuff. Now F Off and don't ever post to me again you cretin.
Isn't it extraordinary the attention the Labour conference is getting. Compare with the Lib's whose conference went unnoticed.
Carlotta mentioned advertising. The 4 aims of advertising and 'The Corbyn effect'
1. Get peoples attention -Check 2. Make your claims believable -check 3. Make your product desirable -check 4. Motivate your target market to do something -check
I only caught a smidgen of the speech in the car and it was the mollifying bit about nice politics and people being grown up enough to agree to disagree.
All fine, but then I thought to myself, this is a guy who's been married three times.
I'm still on my first marriage, so on that basis, I'm more willing to be be agreeable than Corbyn.
I would be only too keen to be swayed by a pleasant manner & soothing words, if I hadn't been around the last time and seen that what comes from the fellow-travellers is so very different.
Isn't it extraordinary the attention the Labour conference is getting. Compare with the Lib's whose conference went unnoticed.
Carlotta mentioned advertising. The 4 principles of advertising and 'The Corbyn effect'
1. Get peoples attention -Check 2. Make your claims believable -check 3. Make your product desirable -check 4. Motivate your target market to do something -check
1. Get peoples attention - Check 2. Make your claims believable - No. 3. Make your product desirable - No way. 4. Motivate your target market to do something - Vote Tory.
Isn't it extraordinary the attention the Labour conference is getting. Compare with the Lib's whose conference went unnoticed.
Carlotta mentioned advertising. The 4 principles of advertising and 'The Corbyn effect'
1. Get peoples attention -Check 2. Make your claims believable -check 3. Make your product desirable -check 4. Motivate your target market to do something -check
1. Get peoples attention - Check 2. Make your claims believable - No. 3. Make your product desirable - No way. 4. Motivate your target market to do something - Vote Tory.
Culture Secretary Fiona Hyslop is under increasing pressure for failing to answer questions on a Scottish Government payment of £150,000 to the T in the Park music festival.
Scottish Labour has called for Hyslop to make a full ministerial statement on the issue, while the Scottish Conservatives have called for First Minister Nicola Sturgeon to intervene.
Isn't it extraordinary the attention the Labour conference is getting. Compare with the Lib's whose conference went unnoticed.
Carlotta mentioned advertising. The 4 principles of advertising and 'The Corbyn effect'
1. Get peoples attention -Check 2. Make your claims believable -check 3. Make your product desirable -check 4. Motivate your target market to do something -check
ARE you bei9ng deliberately thick Roger? I guess you must be.. I mean why would the BBC have lots of coverage of the Oppositions first Party conference.
Corbytn got my attention, just like the local farmer has , ploughing in human excrement into the fields..
1) attention to nasty smell -check 2) Claims believable-- in your dreams 3)Product desirable- like a dose of the clap 4) motivate your target to do something- you need to wait, its coming
Do all such politicians nowadays use speech writers---part of the time or usually? Did Churchill use one? Cameron? The latter's delivery indicates to me that he could have a 2nd career on the stage or perhaps selling stuff.
Hajj deaths: Saudis say 769 died. They have sent over 1000 photos of victims to various countries.
They are saying that some of the over 1,000 photos are of people who died at the Hajj but not in the crush. It's not beyond the realms of belief that some people would die of other accidents and natural causes when there are two million people in an area, and that some are unidentified.
Whether it's true or not is a different matter ...
@holyroodmandy: Who is speaking for @theSNP on Michelle Thomson story? Phones ring out, no one knows anything, is it WM, Holyrood, HQ - times have changed.
Do all such politicians nowadays use speech writers---part of the time or usually? Did Churchill use one? Cameron? The latter's delivery indicates to me that he could have a 2nd career on the stage or perhaps selling stuff.
Yes they do use writers, just not normally ones from four years ago, which have been published on an obscure blog and turned down by multiple losers.
On Carmichael, presumably the court will be aware that it could create some very broad precedent. If it does, the election campaign process is going to be very different in the future and will affect all candidates in all parties. You'd have thought it would want to avoid that. This is UK law the court is deciding on, isn't it?
So prosecuting lying cheating politicians would be against English Law.
Evening, Malc and SO. Hope you are well.
From what I recall, it is the same law as the recent cases down Sarf so it is - de facto - Uk wide. I do seem to recall there was some incomprehension between the devotees of the two different systems) when Mr Carmichael was being prosecuted.
A very interesting posting by Lallans PW (as usual) if nobody has commented on it -
Do all such politicians nowadays use speech writers---part of the time or usually? Did Churchill use one? Cameron? The latter's delivery indicates to me that he could have a 2nd career on the stage or perhaps selling stuff.
Yes they do use writers, just not normally ones from four years ago, which have been published on an obscure blog and turned down by multiple losers.
I have no idea why your comment reminded me of a remark I heard the other day by a critic that he reckoned that foreigners "make better movies of Shakespeare plays" (for instance Kurosawa) because they didn't let language get in the way.
On Carmichael, presumably the court will be aware that it could create some very broad precedent. If it does, the election campaign process is going to be very different in the future and will affect all candidates in all parties. You'd have thought it would want to avoid that. This is UK law the court is deciding on, isn't it?
A Scottish judgement is not binding on a Court in England and Wales, or in Northern Ireland. But, it can be persuasive.
Today's written judgement certainly pays close attention to what has happened in past cases, as it happens, so it seems to be working the other way too.
On Carmichael, presumably the court will be aware that it could create some very broad precedent. If it does, the election campaign process is going to be very different in the future and will affect all candidates in all parties. You'd have thought it would want to avoid that. This is UK law the court is deciding on, isn't it?
A Scottish judgement is not binding on a Court in England and Wales, or in Northern Ireland. But, it can be persuasive.
Today's written judgement certainly pays close attention to what has happened in past cases, as it happens, so it seems to be working the other way too.
@AlanRoden: Confirmation from SNP: "Michelle Thomson’s decision to withdraw from the party whip means her party membership is also suspended.”
@camusson: Michelle Thomson MP suspended from party, SNP spokesman confirms
Say it's not so, Malcoholic, assured us it wasn't an issue and she would be vindicated. So it's strange, the snp have dropped her like somebody from West Monster.
On Carmichael, presumably the court will be aware that it could create some very broad precedent. If it does, the election campaign process is going to be very different in the future and will affect all candidates in all parties. You'd have thought it would want to avoid that. This is UK law the court is deciding on, isn't it?
A Scottish judgement is not binding on a Court in England and Wales, or in Northern Ireland. But, it can be persuasive.
Today's written judgement certainly pays close attention to what has happened in past cases, as it happens, so it seems to be working the other way too.
I went along to the IPSOS-MORI fringe event - mostly it was about the survey that was published a week or two ago (showing Tories 4 points ahead among all voters, 6 points among likely voters) but they added snippets from the focus group of 8 (yes, eight) voters. They liked Corbyn and thought him authentic and "one of us" but weren't "yet convinced enough" that he had the right policies.
Dan Hodges was there, and definitely not a fan - there was some amiable sparring with the audience which the IPSOS guy cut off: "New nicer politics, remember!"
I went along to the IPSOS-MORI fringe event - mostly it was about the survey that was published a week or two ago (showing Tories 4 points ahead among all voters, 6 points among likely voters) but they added snippets from the focus group of 8 (yes, eight) voters. They liked Corbyn and thought him authentic and "one of us" but weren't "yet convinced enough" that he had the right policies.
Dan Hodges was there, and definitely not a fan - there was some amiable sparring with the audience which the IPSOS guy cut off: "New nicer politics, remember!"
alexmassie @alexmassie 5 mins5 minutes ago @SamCoatesTimes So they go from "no similarity" to "Heller was cool"? 2 retweets 1 favourite Reply Retweet 2 Favourite 1 More
Sam Coates Times @SamCoatesTimes 5 mins5 minutes ago Brighton, England @alexmassie The initial utter denial was done by the spokesman, before he had checked the facts
So how comes the spokesman's denial counts as a denial, but the PM's Official Spokesman's denials don't?
On Carmichael, presumably the court will be aware that it could create some very broad precedent. If it does, the election campaign process is going to be very different in the future and will affect all candidates in all parties. You'd have thought it would want to avoid that. This is UK law the court is deciding on, isn't it?
So prosecuting lying cheating politicians would be against English Law.
Evening, Malc and SO. Hope you are well.
From what I recall, it is the same law as the recent cases down Sarf so it is - de facto - Uk wide. I do seem to recall there was some incomprehension between the devotees of the two different systems) when Mr Carmichael was being prosecuted.
A very interesting posting by Lallans PW (as usual) if nobody has commented on it -
That is an interesting piece, but I'm not at all convinced that the Judges are correct that Section 106 punishes lying about oneself, as opposed to lying about other candidates.
On Carmichael, presumably the court will be aware that it could create some very broad precedent. If it does, the election campaign process is going to be very different in the future and will affect all candidates in all parties. You'd have thought it would want to avoid that. This is UK law the court is deciding on, isn't it?
So prosecuting lying cheating politicians would be against English Law.
Evening, Malc and SO. Hope you are well.
From what I recall, it is the same law as the recent cases down Sarf so it is - de facto - Uk wide. I do seem to recall there was some incomprehension between the devotees of the two different systems) when Mr Carmichael was being prosecuted.
A very interesting posting by Lallans PW (as usual) if nobody has commented on it -
That is an interesting piece, but I'm not at all convinced that the Judges are correct that Section 106 punishes lying about oneself, as opposed to lying about other candidates.
On Carmichael, presumably the court will be aware that it could create some very broad precedent. If it does, the election campaign process is going to be very different in the future and will affect all candidates in all parties. You'd have thought it would want to avoid that. This is UK law the court is deciding on, isn't it?
So prosecuting lying cheating politicians would be against English Law.
Evening, Malc and SO. Hope you are well.
From what I recall, it is the same law as the recent cases down Sarf so it is - de facto - Uk wide. I do seem to recall there was some incomprehension between the devotees of the two different systems) when Mr Carmichael was being prosecuted.
A very interesting posting by Lallans PW (as usual) if nobody has commented on it -
That is an interesting piece, but I'm not at all convinced that the Judges are correct that Section 106 punishes lying about oneself, as opposed to lying about other candidates.
It's worth a look at the judgement on the Scottish Courts website if you haven't - the link will be in the Lallands PW article, I daresay. IIRC they say 'self-talking' (as they put it) is plainly within the remit of the law as it is worded.
On Carmichael, presumably the court will be aware that it could create some very broad precedent. If it does, the election campaign process is going to be very different in the future and will affect all candidates in all parties. You'd have thought it would want to avoid that. This is UK law the court is deciding on, isn't it?
So prosecuting lying cheating politicians would be against English Law.
Evening, Malc and SO. Hope you are well.
From what I recall, it is the same law as the recent cases down Sarf so it is - de facto - Uk wide. I do seem to recall there was some incomprehension between the devotees of the two different systems) when Mr Carmichael was being prosecuted.
A very interesting posting by Lallans PW (as usual) if nobody has commented on it -
That is an interesting piece, but I'm not at all convinced that the Judges are correct that Section 106 punishes lying about oneself, as opposed to lying about other candidates.
It's worth a look at the judgement on the Scottish Courts website if you haven't - the link will be in the Lallands PW article, I daresay. IIRC they say 'self-talking' (as they put it) is plainly within the remit of the law as it is worded.
I actually thought he was better than Miliband as Mili always seemed to be walking a tightrope between what he wanted to say and what he felt he ought to say to get elected. Corbyn didn't bother with the second at all so was more consistent.
I give him some credit as well for taking on the Saudis (although no mention of Wahhabism) and for making clear how the high cost of housing pushes up the benefits bill.
On the downside, there was a lot of waffle (you could easily cut 10 minutes out) and some areas such as the NHS hardly got a mention. I thought the defence section was unconvincing (retraining trident workers) as was foreign policy (making peace with ISIS). Wasn't there supposed to be something about loving Britain in there - if so I must have zoned out. Nothing in there for voters in Middle England.
He is the first British politician to criticise the Saudis openly.
About bloody time. But the Saudis, IS, Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, Al-Shabab, Muslim Brotherhood etc etc - they all drink from the same poisoned well. Criticise one, criticise all. Will Corbyn go that far or is he just doing the lefty version of "this group may be bastards but they're OUR bastards"?
"Israel may be bastards but they're OUR bastards"?
To be fair it was 1948 when the Israelis last attempted to blow up British soldiers or civilians. The others have more recent form.
Although the Israelis were the most recent country to destroy a US warship.
What more do they need to do to get Corbyn to like them?
Key snaps of Corbyn's speech tonight on 10pm BBC news, anti austerity, anti airstrikes on ISIS, anti Trident, anti selection in schools, not exactly a platform for floating voters even if they liked it in the hall. One of first reactions from Len McCluskey
Another inspirational speech from the new Labour leader,causing another 250 people to join the party during his speech.There is no doubt Jezza has the necessary kharma and mojo to fend off the negative waves.After this you have to be on Bernie Sanders to do the same.Are you feeling it? #FeelTheBern
So biggest gainers from that poll UKIP then Labour, but both still at general election levels, Tories down 2% but still up from their general election score, SNP on 4% down from 5% they got in May
Roger.. If you think tim was seriously funny then I think you may have a serious problem..you may have to cut back on something.. the man was a liar, obsessive and a total jerk
On Carmichael, presumably the court will be aware that it could create some very broad precedent. If it does, the election campaign process is going to be very different in the future and will affect all candidates in all parties. You'd have thought it would want to avoid that. This is UK law the court is deciding on, isn't it?
So prosecuting lying cheating politicians would be against English Law.
Lying, cheating politicians are not confined to one party. My guess is that even SNP MPs have been known to tell the odd fib.
The police announcement plunged the SNP into disarray. There were claims last night that Mrs Thomson had been kicked out of the party but these were denied.
Her media adviser said: “This is certainly news to her. So far as she knows, she is still a card-carrying member and paying her dues as normal.”
"Having tried to ignore these serious allegations for 48 hours, the SNP has hit the panic button. The SNP promised a new politics at Westminster. It has taken a matter of weeks for their shine to wear off."
A spokesman for Scottish Labour said: "It is now vital that the SNP come clean about this situation, and who knew what, when. Michelle Thomson was vetted by the SNP and deemed to be an acceptable candidate for an election. Senior cabinet ministers have backed her citing her business dealings."
A spokeswoman said: "Police Scotland can confirm that as a result of a complaint from the Scottish Solicitors' Disciplinary Tribunal, it has been instructed by the Crown Office to carry out an initial investigation into alleged irregularities relating to property deals in the year 2010-2011."
A spokesman for the SNP said: “In line with party rules Michelle Thomson’s decision to withdraw from the party whip means her party membership is also suspended.”
"Finally he began to confronted the really big issues facing the nation. Such as trolling on social media. It had to stop, he said. The conference rose in acclamation at his words. The Tories may be the people you turn to when you want things like the economy fixed. But someone swears at you on Twitter? Labour will be there."
No idea how he manages to be so consistently effective at getting to the heart of the issues de nos jours, wryly amusing (enough to smile over) every single day and still laugh-out-loud funny a couple of times a week. That sort of talent is gold-dust. I can't think of any other cartoonist - in fact, any kind of media commentator full stop - who reaches that kind of standard. Though I have a soft spot for Craig Brown.
(I get the feeling part of the reason I am so impressed is that his rival cartoonists in other papers are generally pretty poor, or take their personal politics too seriously.)
"Finally he began to confronted the really big issues facing the nation. Such as trolling on social media. It had to stop, he said. The conference rose in acclamation at his words. The Tories may be the people you turn to when you want things like the economy fixed. But someone swears at you on Twitter? Labour will be there."
Particularly as it is the lefties who seem to swear more on Twitter!
No idea how he manages to be so consistently effective at getting to the heart of the issues de nos jours, wryly amusing (enough to smile over) every single day and still laugh-out-loud funny a couple of times a week. That sort of talent is gold-dust. I can't think of any other cartoonist - in fact, any kind of media commentator full stop - who reaches that kind of standard. Though I have a soft spot for Craig Brown.
(I get the feeling part of the reason I am so impressed is that his rival cartoonists in other papers are generally pretty poor, or take their personal politics too seriously.)
Many years ago, I read an interview with Matt. One remark of his stuck in my mind: when he was at school, his teachers used to tell him he'd never get anywhere by sitting gazing out of the window .....
“It has also just increased suspicions that the grant was a done deal because of Ms Dempsie’s close connections to the SNP. The public will quite rightly be furious. T in the Park is a commercially viable festival supported by one of our largest breweries; the Scottish Government put on record today that it did not examine other possible funding sources in detail so this just increases the pressure on the cabinet secretary to explain why £150,000 of public money was required. It’s now time for the First Minister to step in and give us some straight answers.”
The most recent accounts filed at Companies House show that DF Concerts made a pre-tax profit of £5.2 million in 2011, £4.7 million in 2012 and £4.5 million in 2013. For the year ending December 2013, it paid out £3.35 million in dividends.
I actually thought he was better than Miliband as Mili always seemed to be walking a tightrope between what he wanted to say and what he felt he ought to say to get elected. Corbyn didn't bother with the second at all so was more consistent.
I give him some credit as well for taking on the Saudis (although no mention of Wahhabism) and for making clear how the high cost of housing pushes up the benefits bill.
On the downside, there was a lot of waffle (you could easily cut 10 minutes out) and some areas such as the NHS hardly got a mention. I thought the defence section was unconvincing (retraining trident workers) as was foreign policy (making peace with ISIS). Wasn't there supposed to be something about loving Britain in there - if so I must have zoned out. Nothing in there for voters in Middle England.
He is the first British politician to criticise the Saudis openly.
About bloody time. But the Saudis, IS, Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, Al-Shabab, Muslim Brotherhood etc etc - they all drink from the same poisoned well. Criticise one, criticise all. Will Corbyn go that far or is he just doing the lefty version of "this group may be bastards but they're OUR bastards"?
"Israel may be bastards but they're OUR bastards"?
To be fair it was 1948 when the Israelis last attempted to blow up British soldiers or civilians. The others have more recent form.
Although the Israelis were the most recent country to destroy a US warship.
What more do they need to do to get Corbyn to like them?
We've had Mike Bassett England Manager; now we have Jeremy Corbyn Labour Leader.
Corbyn is Eddie the Eagle.
Hopefully not; the nation took Eddie to their hearts for having a go. They completely overlooked that he was shite at what he was having a go at. Not a precedent for Prime Ministers, I hope....
Pretty good, though it just feels like he'll offer fewer opportunities for amusing photo expressions than Ed M. It feels awhile since I've seen an awkward Cameron photo though, there surely must be some good ones out there.
We've had Mike Bassett England Manager; now we have Jeremy Corbyn Labour Leader.
Corbyn is Eddie the Eagle.
Hopefully not; the nation took Eddie to their hearts for having a go. They completely overlooked that he was shite at what he was having a go at. Not a precedent for Prime Ministers, I hope....
It's not the winning its the taking part of course.....
Pretty much then what Labour were thinking and saying as they elected Corby as their leader.
Comments
http://www.snp.org/people/michelle-thomson
John McDonnell - a man so wise that he's the John McDonnell that we know.
How hard can it be to immediately identify these people as hopeless? They should both be drummed out of the UK for their presumption.
All fine, but then I thought to myself, this is a guy who's been married three times.
I'm still on my first marriage, so on that basis, I'm more willing to be be agreeable than Corbyn.
You've upset him now: he's a purple tin.
A good start for Sh1t or Bust Labour. So far, I think l did the right thing voting for JC.
Carlotta mentioned advertising. The 4 aims of advertising and 'The Corbyn effect'
1. Get peoples attention -Check
2. Make your claims believable -check
3. Make your product desirable -check
4. Motivate your target market to do something -check
@faisalislam: Another big breaking story of course is SNP MP @MichelleThomson ... @joncraig now reporting it...
1. Get peoples attention - Check
2. Make your claims believable - No.
3. Make your product desirable - No way.
4. Motivate your target market to do something - Vote Tory.
Corbytn got my attention, just like the local farmer has , ploughing in human excrement into the fields..
1) attention to nasty smell -check
2) Claims believable-- in your dreams
3)Product desirable- like a dose of the clap
4) motivate your target to do something- you need to wait, its coming
Whether it's true or not is a different matter ...
@camusson: Michelle Thomson MP suspended from party, SNP spokesman confirms
@GeeJayJon: @paulhutcheon @theSNP @mstewart_23 what's his property portfolio like?
From what I recall, it is the same law as the recent cases down Sarf so it is - de facto - Uk wide. I do seem to recall there was some incomprehension between the devotees of the two different systems) when Mr Carmichael was being prosecuted.
A very interesting posting by Lallans PW (as usual) if nobody has commented on it -
http://lallandspeatworrier.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/we-wish-to-hear-evidence.html
Welcome back!
but a reminder to some their "new" politics has been tried before?
Dan Hodges was there, and definitely not a fan - there was some amiable sparring with the audience which the IPSOS guy cut off: "New nicer politics, remember!"
(At least according to @putin'sluckyguy Yes! Finally found a use for my Theology A level!
They both involve screwing people for money
It really is like shooting fish in a barrel.
ROFL
Oh , Roger on the previous thread - not exactly a great advert for private education.
If you want a decent Labour party - well..........................
Con 39% (-3)
Lab 30% (+2)
LD 9% (+1)
UKIP 12% (+3)
Green 4% (-2)
SNP 4% (-1)
Other 3% (NC)
http://comres.co.uk/polls/daily-mail-september-political-poll/
Dreamily, he imagined a world in which thousands would spend their time the way he has spent the last 30 years.
That made me LOL.
Cameron is preferred to Corbyn as Prime Minister. But ratings similar to those of Cameron vs Miliband at GE2015
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CQFgS5GWgAAg0kp.jpg
Tories retain big leads on economic trust & defence. Labour are more trusted on health & benefits
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CQFf4KoWgAAkHox.jpg
http://comres.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Daily-Mail_Political-Poll_September-2015.pdf
They could always follow up by using all those left over " Fire up the Quattro " posters....
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CQGT-FkWEAE7gyU.jpg
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/?cartoon=11900306&cc=11838535
Cameron 54, Corbyn 30
Compared to
Cameron 52, Miliband 31 (pre election)
734 days since a Labour leader mentioned the deficit in their conference speech.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/multimedia/archive/00984/c3772486-66ea-11e5-_984753c.jpg http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4571569.ece http://m.heraldscotland.com/news/13791520.SNP_MP_Michelle_Thomson_suspended_from_party_as_police_launch_inquiry_into_property_deals/
"Finally he began to confronted the really big issues facing the nation. Such as trolling on social media. It had to stop, he said. The conference rose in acclamation at his words. The Tories may be the people you turn to when you want things like the economy fixed. But someone swears at you on Twitter? Labour will be there."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/?cartoon=11894116&cc=11838535
No idea how he manages to be so consistently effective at getting to the heart of the issues de nos jours, wryly amusing (enough to smile over) every single day and still laugh-out-loud funny a couple of times a week. That sort of talent is gold-dust. I can't think of any other cartoonist - in fact, any kind of media commentator full stop - who reaches that kind of standard. Though I have a soft spot for Craig Brown.
(I get the feeling part of the reason I am so impressed is that his rival cartoonists in other papers are generally pretty poor, or take their personal politics too seriously.)
https://twitter.com/alanroden/status/648802907874291712
@michaelsavage: Not a good end to the day for Corbyn... https://t.co/JKw0P7ViQC
@PickardJE: Am told that Corbyn didn't mention the word "Israel" at Labour Friends of Israel reception.
Pretty much then what Labour were thinking and saying as they elected Corby as their leader.
He just has to say "Corbyn represents a severe danger to this country; I have been asked to stay on and will do so to secure the country's future".
It is just totally inconceivable that he could lose to Corbyn.
Osborne should win but it would be a gamble.
How his friends at Hamas must have encouraged him.