Having spent a little bit of time at the Labour conference, Dan Jarvis was easily the most mentioned name in discussions about the next leader that I had with a few well-informed people.
Lisa Nandy also got a lot of mentions in the context of a person that Corbyn could endorse as a successor.
Owen Smith was also very well touted. Interestingly Damian McBride tipped him even before last May.
Did anyone suggest any qualities that Jervis might bring?
Who are the plausible Labour candidates for mayor of the new Sheffield regional authority?
Blunkett has retired from active politics, but perhaps he could be tempted back. The only other Sheffield MP with much name recognition is Nick Clegg, but he's the wrong party to have any chance of winning, though he could be the Lib Dem candidate.
In principle, Labour could always go for some celebrity with a Sheffield connection, but that would probably upset Labour's Sheffield members.
Sean Bean?
When I saw him earlier today, he was too busy sneaking message into a photograph being sent to a German astronaut.
So whilst i have been enjoying the sunshine i see charlotte church has been proving yeto again her lack of education and why she is a spoilt brat and why she shoud be ignored.painful to watch really.
Who are the plausible Labour candidates for mayor of the new Sheffield regional authority?
Blunkett has retired from active politics, but perhaps he could be tempted back. The only other Sheffield MP with much name recognition is Nick Clegg, but he's the wrong party to have any chance of winning, though he could be the Lib Dem candidate.
In principle, Labour could always go for some celebrity with a Sheffield connection, but that would probably upset Labour's Sheffield members.
Sean Bean?
When I saw him earlier today, he was too busy sneaking message into a photograph being sent to a German astronaut.
Oh, and he's aged. And he's fatter.
He's also at new levels of fame and success after a killer performance in Game of Thrones. I can't see why he would give all that up to be Mayor of Greater Sheffield.
Having spent a little bit of time at the Labour conference, Dan Jarvis was easily the most mentioned name in discussions about the next leader that I had with a few well-informed people.
Lisa Nandy also got a lot of mentions in the context of a person that Corbyn could endorse as a successor.
Owen Smith was also very well touted. Interestingly Damian McBride tipped him even before last May.
Did anyone suggest any qualities that Jervis might bring?
Basically, I think he's just a blank slate with the right personal qualities and a very marketable background.
Having spent a little bit of time at the Labour conference, Dan Jarvis was easily the most mentioned name in discussions about the next leader that I had with a few well-informed people.
Lisa Nandy also got a lot of mentions in the context of a person that Corbyn could endorse as a successor.
Owen Smith was also very well touted. Interestingly Damian McBride tipped him even before last May.
Did anyone suggest any qualities that Jervis might bring?
Basically, I think he's just a blank slate with the right personal qualities and a very marketable background.
Er, how can a 15-year-old have been sentenced to life imprisonment? Wouldn't it be "detained at Her Majesty's pleasure" at his age? Are the media just being lazy and inaccurate, or has the law changed?
I think Corbyn will stay on. If he attributes any failures to internal dissent (ironic) or the evil media, then going would be, in his mind, tantamount to betraying the 59% who elected him, giving in to the wicked media barons and electoral losers (within the party's leadership).
Having spent a little bit of time at the Labour conference, Dan Jarvis was easily the most mentioned name in discussions about the next leader that I had with a few well-informed people.
Lisa Nandy also got a lot of mentions in the context of a person that Corbyn could endorse as a successor.
Owen Smith was also very well touted. Interestingly Damian McBride tipped him even before last May.
Did anyone suggest any qualities that Jervis might bring?
The main quality that Jarvis brings is the ability to get Labour a hearing in places where it needs a hearing. It does not matter what people like Miliband and Corbyn say, they are not going to be listened to by large sections of the voting public - especially those in swing constituencies. If Labour decides ever to be serious about getting power again being able to engage with the average voter is going to be a pre-requisite.
Politically, it seems to me that he swings Blue Labour; again, I'd argue that is exactly where a Labour leader needs to be. He is certainly decidedly un-metropolitan. Whether he can give a speech or look the real deal on the telly has yet to be seen. And he needs to build some kind of a base in Labour itself.
Interesting, but from which direction would a more hard line independence party emerge? The SNP have, at present, all sectors sewn up in a straight jacket of control. If, however, the butterfly emerges from the left, while it will get strength from Glasgow and Fife, it will lose the North East, similarly, if from the right, it will win Edinburgh, the North East, the Borders and probably the South West, but lose Glasgow, Fife and most of the central belt.
Agreed, that at the moment, the SNP are riding high, but being on the back of a tiger puts you uncomfortably close to some rather sharp teeth. Thomson has been thrown to the press to distract them from Sturgeon's even more long term friend, Hyslop. And, I can't really help thinking that this is just the start.
Anyone any idea of where I can get some money on Salmond returning as FM, yet again, to save the SNP at Holyrood?
When a party has all the power, it has no-one else to blame. At the moment, SNP try to overcome that problem by blaming Westminster or the English. But the longer the SNP are in power, the less convincing that argument becomes, particularly on issues where they have fully devolved power. And if Independence is achieved, there will be no-one else to blame.
At some point, then, all the blame for failure to achieve Utopia will fall on the SNP. At that point their current monopoly will fail and another challenger will arise. If it arises on the Left, either the SNP will perforce move to the Right, or another party on the Right will arise. And vice versa. In the medium term, the SNP will face a credible electoral challenge and will have to adapt.
Political monopoly is unnatural in a democracy and can only be transitory.
Mr. Jessop, it can be quite entertaining to watch the first Game of Thrones episode and see just how many of the original cast are dead. I'd advise against it as a drinking game, though, unless one's liver is made of concrete.
Interesting to see in an Labour Friends of Israel press release that Israel and Russia are now consulting on strikes on ISIS. Netanyahu was in Moscow last week to discuss details. Not sure that was widely reported here.
Having spent a little bit of time at the Labour conference, Dan Jarvis was easily the most mentioned name in discussions about the next leader that I had with a few well-informed people.
Lisa Nandy also got a lot of mentions in the context of a person that Corbyn could endorse as a successor.
Owen Smith was also very well touted. Interestingly Damian McBride tipped him even before last May.
Did anyone suggest any qualities that Jervis might bring?
The main quality that Jarvis brings is the ability to get Labour a hearing in places where it needs a hearing. It does not matter what people like Miliband and Corbyn say, they are not going to be listened to by large sections of the voting public - especially those in swing constituencies. If Labour decides ever to be serious about getting power again being able to engage with the average voter is going to be a pre-requisite.
Politically, it seems to me that he swings Blue Labour; again, I'd argue that is exactly where a Labour leader needs to be. He is certainly decidedly un-metropolitan. Whether he can give a speech or look the real deal on the telly has yet to be seen. And he needs to build some kind of a base in Labour itself.
According to the YouGov subsamples, the Lib Dems have only held onto half of their already-abysmal 2015 vote. Tories and Lab have taken a quarter of the LD vote each.
Having spent a little bit of time at the Labour conference, Dan Jarvis was easily the most mentioned name in discussions about the next leader that I had with a few well-informed people.
Lisa Nandy also got a lot of mentions in the context of a person that Corbyn could endorse as a successor.
Owen Smith was also very well touted. Interestingly Damian McBride tipped him even before last May.
Did anyone suggest any qualities that Jervis might bring?
The main quality that Jarvis brings is the ability to get Labour a hearing in places where it needs a hearing. It does not matter what people like Miliband and Corbyn say, they are not going to be listened to by large sections of the voting public - especially those in swing constituencies. If Labour decides ever to be serious about getting power again being able to engage with the average voter is going to be a pre-requisite.
Politically, it seems to me that he swings Blue Labour; again, I'd argue that is exactly where a Labour leader needs to be. He is certainly decidedly un-metropolitan. Whether he can give a speech or look the real deal on the telly has yet to be seen. And he needs to build some kind of a base in Labour itself.
A pretty thin quality. There is no one else?
It's the first step. And if he has it and no-one else does, that puts him ahead of the rest. Ideas-wise, my sense is that he is very much a part of the Jon Cruddas school of thinking. That's where Labour needs to be in my opinion. But will not be for many years. If ever.
Having spent a little bit of time at the Labour conference, Dan Jarvis was easily the most mentioned name in discussions about the next leader that I had with a few well-informed people.
Lisa Nandy also got a lot of mentions in the context of a person that Corbyn could endorse as a successor.
Owen Smith was also very well touted. Interestingly Damian McBride tipped him even before last May.
Did anyone suggest any qualities that Jervis might bring?
The main quality that Jarvis brings is the ability to get Labour a hearing in places where it needs a hearing. It does not matter what people like Miliband and Corbyn say, they are not going to be listened to by large sections of the voting public - especially those in swing constituencies. If Labour decides ever to be serious about getting power again being able to engage with the average voter is going to be a pre-requisite.
Politically, it seems to me that he swings Blue Labour; again, I'd argue that is exactly where a Labour leader needs to be. He is certainly decidedly un-metropolitan. Whether he can give a speech or look the real deal on the telly has yet to be seen. And he needs to build some kind of a base in Labour itself.
A pretty thin quality. There is no one else?
It's the first step. And if he has it and no-one else does, that puts him ahead of the rest. Ideas-wise, my sense is that he is very much a part of the Jon Cruddas school of thinking. That's where Labour needs to be in my opinion. But will not be for many years. If ever.
By all accounts, Jarvis does not really know himself what his political views are.
Clive Lewis matches Jarvis's USP of being an ex-soldier, but is a better media performer and has more Labactivist-friendly views to boot.
Interesting, but from which direction would a more hard line independence party emerge? The SNP have, at present, all sectors sewn up in a straight jacket of control. If, however, the butterfly emerges from the left, while it will get strength from Glasgow and Fife, it will lose the North East, similarly, if from the right, it will win Edinburgh, the North East, the Borders and probably the South West, but lose Glasgow, Fife and most of the central belt.
Agreed, that at the moment, the SNP are riding high, but being on the back of a tiger puts you uncomfortably close to some rather sharp teeth. Thomson has been thrown to the press to distract them from Sturgeon's even more long term friend, Hyslop. And, I can't really help thinking that this is just the start.
Anyone any idea of where I can get some money on Salmond returning as FM, yet again, to save the SNP at Holyrood?
When a party has all the power, it has no-one else to blame. At the moment, SNP try to overcome that problem by blaming Westminster or the English. But the longer the SNP are in power, the less convincing that argument becomes, particularly on issues where they have fully devolved power. And if Independence is achieved, there will be no-one else to blame.
At some point, then, all the blame for failure to achieve Utopia will fall on the SNP. At that point their current monopoly will fail and another challenger will arise. If it arises on the Left, either the SNP will perforce move to the Right, or another party on the Right will arise. And vice versa. In the medium term, the SNP will face a credible electoral challenge and will have to adapt.
Political monopoly is unnatural in a democracy and can only be transitory.
Though the SNP are rather in a win-win position at the moment.
Gain independence and their lifelong ambition is fulfilled. A return to pendulum politics would be a price worth paying.
Fail to win independence and they don't have a political monopoly and can indefinitely blame Westminster and the English. Cf Wales and 17 years and counting of Labour rule.
To me it looks like there are around 5% of voters who will move to and from UKIP depending on their mood, but the rest is pretty static. The fear for Labour is that they have already reached their ceiling of possible voters in the early thirties and will trundle along for a few years without making progress.
Having spent a little bit of time at the Labour conference, Dan Jarvis was easily the most mentioned name in discussions about the next leader that I had with a few well-informed people.
Lisa Nandy also got a lot of mentions in the context of a person that Corbyn could endorse as a successor.
Owen Smith was also very well touted. Interestingly Damian McBride tipped him even before last May.
Did anyone suggest any qualities that Jervis might bring?
The main quality that Jarvis brings is the ability to get Labour a hearing in places where it needs a hearing. It does not matter what people like Miliband and Corbyn say, they are not going to be listened to by large sections of the voting public - especially those in swing constituencies. If Labour decides ever to be serious about getting power again being able to engage with the average voter is going to be a pre-requisite.
Politically, it seems to me that he swings Blue Labour; again, I'd argue that is exactly where a Labour leader needs to be. He is certainly decidedly un-metropolitan. Whether he can give a speech or look the real deal on the telly has yet to be seen. And he needs to build some kind of a base in Labour itself.
A pretty thin quality. There is no one else?
It's the first step. And if he has it and no-one else does, that puts him ahead of the rest. Ideas-wise, my sense is that he is very much a part of the Jon Cruddas school of thinking. That's where Labour needs to be in my opinion. But will not be for many years. If ever.
The only way Labour will be taken seriously again is if they confront the multicultural lobby. They are still unwilling to call out extremists in their own ranks if they are black or brown.
Having spent a little bit of time at the Labour conference, Dan Jarvis was easily the most mentioned name in discussions about the next leader that I had with a few well-informed people.
Lisa Nandy also got a lot of mentions in the context of a person that Corbyn could endorse as a successor.
Owen Smith was also very well touted. Interestingly Damian McBride tipped him even before last May.
Did anyone suggest any qualities that Jervis might bring?
The main quality that Jarvis brings is the ability to get Labour a hearing in places where it needs a hearing. It does not matter what people like Miliband and Corbyn say, they are not going to be listened to by large sections of the voting public - especially those in swing constituencies. If Labour decides ever to be serious about getting power again being able to engage with the average voter is going to be a pre-requisite.
Politically, it seems to me that he swings Blue Labour; again, I'd argue that is exactly where a Labour leader needs to be. He is certainly decidedly un-metropolitan. Whether he can give a speech or look the real deal on the telly has yet to be seen. And he needs to build some kind of a base in Labour itself.
A pretty thin qualit?y. There is no one else?
It's the first step. And if he has it and no-one else does, that puts him ahead of the rest. Ideas-wise, my sense is that he is very much a part of the Jon Cruddas school of thinking. That's where Labour needs to be in my opinion. But will not be for many years. If ever.
By all accounts, Jarvis does not really know himself what his political views are.
Clive Lewis matches Jarvis's USP of being an ex-soldier, but is a better media performer and has more Labactivist-friendly views to boot.
If Lewis matches the USP then how can it be 'U'? Does it become a lowest common denominator or the highest common factor?
Otherwise I do take the points you are making.:-) But I fail to see what being a former soldier adds to anything (other than Labour members coming to stare, in the manner of visiting the Elephant Man.
Having spent a little bit of time at the Labour conference, Dan Jarvis was easily the most mentioned name in discussions about the next leader that I had with a few well-informed people.
Lisa Nandy also got a lot of mentions in the context of a person that Corbyn could endorse as a successor.
Owen Smith was also very well touted. Interestingly Damian McBride tipped him even before last May.
Did anyone suggest any qualities that Jervis might bring?
The main quality that Jarvis brings is the ability to get Labour a hearing in places where it needs a hearing. It does not matter what people like Miliband and Corbyn say, they are not going to be listened to by large sections of the voting public - especially those in swing constituencies. If Labour decides ever to be serious about getting power again being able to engage with the average voter is going to be a pre-requisite.
Politically, it seems to me that he swings Blue Labour; again, I'd argue that is exactly where a Labour leader needs to be. He is certainly decidedly un-metropolitan. Whether he can give a speech or look the real deal on the telly has yet to be seen. And he needs to build some kind of a base in Labour itself.
A pretty thin qualit?y. There is no one else?
It's the first step. And if he has it and no-one else does, that puts him ahead of the rest. Ideas-wise, my sense is that he is very much a part of the Jon Cruddas school of thinking. That's where Labour needs to be in my opinion. But will not be for many years. If ever.
By all accounts, Jarvis does not really know himself what his political views are.
Clive Lewis matches Jarvis's USP of being an ex-soldier, but is a better media performer and has more Labactivist-friendly views to boot.
If Lewis matches the USP then how can it be 'U'? Does it become a lowest common denominator or the highest common factor?
Otherwise I do take the points you are making.:-) But I fail to see what being a former soldier adds to anything (other than Labour members coming to stare, in the manner of visiting the Elephant Man.
Labour's defence reputation will be in tatters after another 3 months of Corbyn, if it isn't already. An ex-soldier at the top fixes it almost instantly.
Having spent a little bit of time at the Labour conference, Dan Jarvis was easily the most mentioned name in discussions about the next leader that I had with a few well-informed people.
Lisa Nandy also got a lot of mentions in the context of a person that Corbyn could endorse as a successor.
Owen Smith was also very well touted. Interestingly Damian McBride tipped him even before last May.
Did anyone suggest any qualities that Jervis might bring?
The main quality that Jarvis brings is the ability to get Labour a hearing in places where it needs a hearing. It does not matter what people like Miliband and Corbyn say, they are not going to be listened to by large sections of the voting public - especially those in swing constituencies. If Labour decides ever to be serious about getting power again being able to engage with the average voter is going to be a pre-requisite.
Politically, it seems to me that he swings Blue Labour; again, I'd argue that is exactly where a Labour leader needs to be. He is certainly decidedly un-metropolitan. Whether he can give a speech or look the real deal on the telly has yet to be seen. And he needs to build some kind of a base in Labour itself.
A pretty thin quality. There is no one else?
It's the first step. And if he has it and no-one else does, that puts him ahead of the rest. Ideas-wise, my sense is that he is very much a part of the Jon Cruddas school of thinking. That's where Labour needs to be in my opinion. But will not be for many years. If ever.
The only way Labour will be taken seriously again is if they confront the multicultural lobby. They are still unwilling to call out extremists in their own ranks if they are black or brown.
They're unwilling to call out extremists in their own ranks if they are white too.
Having spent a little bit of time at the Labour conference, Dan Jarvis was easily the most mentioned name in discussions about the next leader that I had with a few well-informed people.
Lisa Nandy also got a lot of mentions in the context of a person that Corbyn could endorse as a successor.
Owen Smith was also very well touted. Interestingly Damian McBride tipped him even before last May.
Did anyone suggest any qualities that Jervis might bring?
The main quality that Jarvis brings is the ability to get Labour a hearing in places where it needs a hearing. It does not matter what people like Miliband and Corbyn say, they are not going to be listened to by large sections of the voting public - especially those in swing constituencies. If Labour decides ever to be serious about getting power again being able to engage with the average voter is going to be a pre-requisite.
Politically, it seems to me that he swings Blue Labour; again, I'd argue that is exactly where a Labour leader needs to be. He is certainly decidedly un-metropolitan. Whether he can give a speech or look the real deal on the telly has yet to be seen. And he needs to build some kind of a base in Labour itself.
A pretty thin qualit?y. There is no one else?
It's the first step. And if he has it and no-one else does, that puts him ahead of the rest. Ideas-wise, my sense is that he is very much a part of the Jon Cruddas school of thinking. That's where Labour needs to be in my opinion. But will not be for many years. If ever.
By all accounts, Jarvis does not really know himself what his political views are.
Clive Lewis matches Jarvis's USP of being an ex-soldier, but is a better media performer and has more Labactivist-friendly views to boot.
If Lewis matches the USP then how can it be 'U'? Does it become a lowest common denominator or the highest common factor?
Otherwise I do take the points you are making.:-) But I fail to see what being a former soldier adds to anything (other than Labour members coming to stare, in the manner of visiting the Elephant Man.
Labour's defence reputation will be in tatters after another 3 months of Corbyn, if it isn't already. An ex-soldier at the top fixes it almost instantly.
Interesting to see in an Labour Friends of Israel press release that Israel and Russia are now consulting on strikes on ISIS. Netanyahu was in Moscow last week to discuss details. Not sure that was widely reported here.
Is that why the Russians are not bombing Al-Nusra, Israel's friend ?
Interesting, but from which direction would a more hard line independence party emerge? The SNP have, at present, all sectors sewn up in a straight jacket of control. If, however, the butterfly emerges from the left, while it will get strength from Glasgow and Fife, it will lose the North East, similarly, if from the right, it will win Edinburgh, the North East, the Borders and probably the South West, but lose Glasgow, Fife and most of the central belt.
Agreed, that at the moment, the SNP are riding high, but being on the back of a tiger puts you uncomfortably close to some rather sharp teeth. Thomson has been thrown to the press to distract them from Sturgeon's even more long term friend, Hyslop. And, I can't really help thinking that this is just the start.
Anyone any idea of where I can get some money on Salmond returning as FM, yet again, to save the SNP at Holyrood?
When a party has all the power, it has no-one else to blame. At the moment, SNP try to overcome that problem by blaming Westminster or the English. But the longer the SNP are in power, the less convincing that argument becomes, particularly on issues where they have fully devolved power. And if Independence is achieved, there will be no-one else to blame.
At some point, then, all the blame for failure to achieve Utopia will fall on the SNP. At that point their current monopoly will fail and another challenger will arise. If it arises on the Left, either the SNP will perforce move to the Right, or another party on the Right will arise. And vice versa. In the medium term, the SNP will face a credible electoral challenge and will have to adapt.
Political monopoly is unnatural in a democracy and can only be transitory.
Though the SNP are rather in a win-win position at the moment.
Gain independence and their lifelong ambition is fulfilled. A return to pendulum politics would be a price worth paying.
Fail to win independence and they don't have a political monopoly and can indefinitely blame Westminster and the English. Cf Wales and 17 years and counting of Labour rule.
Agreed, if they win Independence, then there is no reason for the various wings of the party to stick together.
According to the YouGov subsamples, the Lib Dems have only held onto half of their already-abysmal 2015 vote. Tories and Lab have taken a quarter of the LD vote each.
No surprise the party is in a death spiral.
Decades of Winning Here crashed and burned in May. Even amongst political obsessives here there were many people who had bet on LD seats in the 11-20 band thinking it would be a very poor result who lost as the Lib Dems did worse than even that.
The party Kennedy led died on May 7 and why should voters who hadn't realised it yet stick with them now? The party may rise again like a phoenix but there's little evidence of it yet.
For the record I predict both the Lib Dems and UKIP will poll a lower share of the vote than they did this year next time.
Having spent a little bit of time at the Labour conference, Dan Jarvis was easily the most mentioned name in discussions about the next leader that I had with a few well-informed people.
Lisa Nandy also got a lot of mentions in the context of a person that Corbyn could endorse as a successor.
Owen Smith was also very well touted. Interestingly Damian McBride tipped him even before last May.
Did anyone suggest any qualities that Jervis might bring?
The main quality that Jarvis brings is the ability to get Labour a hearing in places where it needs a hearing. It does not matter what people like Miliband and Corbyn say, they are not going to be listened to by large sections of the voting public - especially those in swing constituencies. If Labour decides ever to be serious about getting power again being able to engage with the average voter is going to be a pre-requisite.
Politically, it seems to me that he swings Blue Labour; again, I'd argue that is exactly where a Labour leader needs to be. He is certainly decidedly un-metropolitan. Whether he can give a speech or look the real deal on the telly has yet to be seen. And he needs to build some kind of a base in Labour itself.
A pretty thin qualit?y. There is no one else?
It's the first step. And if he has it and no-one else does, that puts him ahead of the rest. Ideas-wise, my sense is that he is very much a part of the Jon Cruddas school of thinking. That's where Labour needs to be in my opinion. But will not be for many years. If ever.
By all accounts, Jarvis does not really know himself what his political views are.
Clive Lewis matches Jarvis's USP of being an ex-soldier, but is a better media performer and has more Labactivist-friendly views to boot.
If Lewis matches the USP then how can it be 'U'? Does it become a lowest common denominator or the highest common factor?
Otherwise I do take the points you are making.:-) But I fail to see what being a former soldier adds to anything (other than Labour members coming to stare, in the manner of visiting the Elephant Man.
Labour's defence reputation will be in tatters after another 3 months of Corbyn, if it isn't already. An ex-soldier at the top fixes it almost instantly.
Eric Joyce was an ex soldier too.
So was IDS. Being an ex-solider doesn't do a leader any harm but it doesn't come with any guarantees either.
According to the YouGov subsamples, the Lib Dems have only held onto half of their already-abysmal 2015 vote. Tories and Lab have taken a quarter of the LD vote each.
No surprise the party is in a death spiral.
Decades of Winning Here crashed and burned in May. Even amongst political obsessives here there were many people who had bet on LD seats in the 11-20 band thinking it would be a very poor result who lost as the Lib Dems did worse than even that.
I remember when I first joined in 2013, I was being scoffed at when I predicted the Lib Dems would only get around 10% in 2015, and would fall below 20 seats.
So was IDS. Being an ex-solider doesn't do a leader any harm but it doesn't come with any guarantees either.
In recent US history, being a professional soldier has not helped at all - I can only think of Ike since WWII who has made it to great prominence on the political scene. Plenty in Congress, but beyond that ...
According to the YouGov subsamples, the Lib Dems have only held onto half of their already-abysmal 2015 vote. Tories and Lab have taken a quarter of the LD vote each.
No surprise the party is in a death spiral.
Decades of Winning Here crashed and burned in May. Even amongst political obsessives here there were many people who had bet on LD seats in the 11-20 band thinking it would be a very poor result who lost as the Lib Dems did worse than even that.
I remember when I first joined in 2013, I was being scoffed at when I predicted the Lib Dems would only get around 10% in 2015, and would fall below 20 seats.
Fortunately no one remembers that I did a thread header in 2013 talking about the possibility of Lib Dem net gains in 2015.
MTimT...most definitely pythonesque..two up two down terrace..outside toilet..no bathroom..only cold water ..no electricity.. only gas mantles with a coin meter..I lived there until I was 21..sharing a room with my younger sister..difficult times ... maybe that is why I am a little puzzled when MPs and others bang on about poverty today.
According to the YouGov subsamples, the Lib Dems have only held onto half of their already-abysmal 2015 vote. Tories and Lab have taken a quarter of the LD vote each.
No surprise the party is in a death spiral.
Decades of Winning Here crashed and burned in May. Even amongst political obsessives here there were many people who had bet on LD seats in the 11-20 band thinking it would be a very poor result who lost as the Lib Dems did worse than even that.
I remember when I first joined in 2013, I was being scoffed at when I predicted the Lib Dems would only get around 10% in 2015, and would fall below 20 seats.
Fortunately no one remembers that I did a thread header in 2013 talking about the possibility of Lib Dem net gains in 2015.
Tbf, at the same time I was forecasting LibDemageddon, I was also predicting a Lab Majority so I shouldn't be too cocky.
So was IDS. Being an ex-solider doesn't do a leader any harm but it doesn't come with any guarantees either.
In recent US history, being a professional soldier has not helped at all - I can only think of Ike since WWII who has made it to great prominence on the political scene. Plenty in Congress, but beyond that ...
Many appear to think it's the Holy Grail.
'Dan Jarvis, ex soldier. The Daily Mail brigade will love him, they always like soldiers. He's a shoo in.'
'But what else does he offer?'
'Err ... doesn't matter, did I tell you he was in the military?'
The main thing I draw from that is that every section of the population from left to right is more likely to think they are morally superior than morally inferior by a margin of somewhere between 8 to 1 and 12 to 1.
The only plausible alternative to Corbyn pre 2020 is Hilary Benn, an experienced senior Shadow Cabinet Minister acceptable to the left through his father. Younger candidates would only enter post election defeat
Come on, spin us a positive message from SLABs disastrous by election results last night/today.
Corybn is really helping them... to oblivion.
Tories looking good for second place at Holyrood.
Dair -
Do you think there is (still) a group of people who'd vote Labour at Westminster but not at Holyrood? i.e. if we were holding a GE next year instead of Holyrood, Labour's odds would be shorter?
I really doubt it. SLAB are as dead as the Tories and Liberals. One might show face as a second place but none show any ability to go beyond that. Westminster or Holyrood doesn't matter any more. It's all about when Independence is won.
Scotland is far more comparable to what happened in Ireland than Quebec from what I can see. There is effectively no opposition and none of them seem capable of putting together an offer the electorate are interested in which could rescue the union.
Either the SNP get independence or at some point a more hardline Independence party emerges and wipes them aside.
You're trying to convince yourself here. The reality is people gave a clear verdict that they didn't want independence. They also gave a clear verdict that they did want the SNP. You may see those two things as contradictory; but they're not. It's an elegantly simple solution.
It's self-reporting on moral virtue. If you're holier-than-thou, would you recognise it? People often have an inaccurate perception of their own self. Self-diagnosis of psych conditions is notoriously prone to being wrong.
It's of general populations. Not of party members, activists or MPs.
How are right-, left-wing and centre defined?
We define ourselves as normal, in the same maps (with the odd notable exception) centre on home turf. So that skews things significantly. You might work in a charity shop part-time as a volunteer, but consider the full-time workers morally superior, and feel a shade of guilt about that.
According to the YouGov subsamples, the Lib Dems have only held onto half of their already-abysmal 2015 vote. Tories and Lab have taken a quarter of the LD vote each.
No surprise the party is in a death spiral.
Decades of Winning Here crashed and burned in May. Even amongst political obsessives here there were many people who had bet on LD seats in the 11-20 band thinking it would be a very poor result who lost as the Lib Dems did worse than even that.
I remember when I first joined in 2013, I was being scoffed at when I predicted the Lib Dems would only get around 10% in 2015, and would fall below 20 seats.
Me also - it was extreme heresy to question the incumbency factor for LD MPs in any way. The implication was that they simply couldn't be beaten, especially by Conservative challengers. And now all they can do is mutter bitterly about hubris.
Having spent a little bit of time at the Labour conference, Dan Jarvis was easily the most mentioned name in discussions about the next leader that I had with a few well-informed people.
Lisa Nandy also got a lot of mentions in the context of a person that Corbyn could endorse as a successor.
Owen Smith was also very well touted. Interestingly Damian McBride tipped him even before last May.
Did anyone suggest any qualities that Jervis might bring?
The main quality that Jarvis brings is the ability to get Labour a hearing in places where it needs a hearing. It does not matter what people like Miliband and Corbyn say, they are not going to be listened to by large sections of the voting public - especially those in swing constituencies. If Labour decides ever to be serious about getting power again being able to engage with the average voter is going to be a pre-requisite.
Politically, it seems to me that he swings Blue Labour; again, I'd argue that is exactly where a Labour leader needs to be. He is certainly decidedly un-metropolitan. Whether he can give a speech or look the real deal on the telly has yet to be seen. And he needs to build some kind of a base in Labour itself.
A pretty thin qualit?y. There is no one else?
It's the first step. And if he has it and no-one else does, that puts him ahead of the rest. Ideas-wise, my sense is that he is very much a part of the Jon Cruddas school of thinking. That's where Labour needs to be in my opinion. But will not be for many years. If ever.
By all accounts, Jarvis does not really know himself what his political views are.
Clive Lewis matches Jarvis's USP of being an ex-soldier, but is a better media performer and has more Labactivist-friendly views to boot.
If Lewis matches the USP then how can it be 'U'? Does it become a lowest common denominator or the highest common factor?
Otherwise I do take the points you are making.:-) But I fail to see what being a former soldier adds to anything (other than Labour members coming to stare, in the manner of visiting the Elephant Man.
Labour's defence reputation will be in tatters after another 3 months of Corbyn, if it isn't already. An ex-soldier at the top fixes it almost instantly.
When I read this initially, I thought Corbyn had gone. I checked BBC News and it was obvious from the lack of hysterical headlines that he was still in post and arguing about Trident.
Off topic: The lyrics of the song "A jump to the left, then a step to the right" may describe Labour at the moment, but maybe we should hope that they do not do the next few lines
With your hand on your hips. You bring your knees in tight. But it's the pelvic thrust. They really drive you insane
The main thing I draw from that is that every section of the population from left to right is more likely to think they are morally superior than morally inferior by a margin of somewhere between 8 to 1 and 12 to 1.
Certainly, on the basis of what is presented, the YouGov comment is overstated.
On the face of it, it would not surprise me that, over the whole spectrum of self-described respondees, the right thinks it has the moral high ground. However, I doubt very much whether there is any significant difference on this parameter if you go to those who are either passionate about their politics, or fall more to the extremes of right or left views.
In short, interesting but something that raises far more questions than it gives real information.
At 5:25: "They're all the same ain't they...you don't know who to vote for, don't know which party's which"
CU Two women talking about the difficulty of managing on £4.10. a week and saying it means starvation (they go as far as saying that they will shoot Cripps !). CU Woman saying she wants a nice lump of steak when asked about meat price increase. CU Two women talking about price of children's clothes, pan down to baby in pram, pan up again to mother. CU Woman agreeing with the budget if it is for good of country and saying Cripps has a lot of courage in view of pending election. another woman carries on talking about children's shoes.
CU Man says he is killing himself laughing when asked if he is happy about penny off beer. Goes on to say that Cripps should have reduced the price of razor blades and cut his darn throat. CU Woman carrying baby says budget hits the housewives and the children. CU Retake of above. Interviewer says 'you can't have your cake and eat it can you?' Pan down to small boy saying. 'What is cake mum!' CU Small boy asking 'What is Cake Mum?'
CU Two women talking. asking what the poor mice are going to do now, there's no cheese for mouse traps. CU Man and woman talking, saying budget will affect the voting and that they're all the same and you don't know who to vote for. CU Group of women talking. One says her daughter won't pay her more than 25/- a week, Another says she's been waiting for the budget to come out before she bought new curtains and now she'll have to wait longer. CU Woman talking in completely irrelevant manner about canteens.
Good grief. Reckon Osborne got off lightly with being booed at the Olympics...
According to the YouGov subsamples, the Lib Dems have only held onto half of their already-abysmal 2015 vote. Tories and Lab have taken a quarter of the LD vote each.
No surprise the party is in a death spiral.
Decades of Winning Here crashed and burned in May. Even amongst political obsessives here there were many people who had bet on LD seats in the 11-20 band thinking it would be a very poor result who lost as the Lib Dems did worse than even that.
I remember when I first joined in 2013, I was being scoffed at when I predicted the Lib Dems would only get around 10% in 2015, and would fall below 20 seats.
Fortunately no one remembers that I did a thread header in 2013 talking about the possibility of Lib Dem net gains in 2015.
MTimT...most definitely pythonesque..two up two down terrace..outside toilet..no bathroom..only cold water ..no electricity.. only gas mantles with a coin meter..I lived there until I was 21..sharing a room with my younger sister..difficult times ... maybe that is why I am a little puzzled when MPs and others bang on about poverty today.
With you on the poverty thing. I saw that in Yemen. And I know we do not want to compare ourselves to them, but "you don't know how lucky you are" springs to mind very frequently when I hear most Western sob stories. Someone with a smart phone and Nike shoes does not meet my definition of poverty.
At 5:25: "They're all the same ain't they...you don't know who to vote for, don't know which party's which"
CU Two women talking about the difficulty of managing on £4.10. a week and saying it means starvation (they go as far as saying that they will shoot Cripps !). CU Woman saying she wants a nice lump of steak when asked about meat price increase. CU Two women talking about price of children's clothes, pan down to baby in pram, pan up again to mother. CU Woman agreeing with the budget if it is for good of country and saying Cripps has a lot of courage in view of pending election. another woman carries on talking about children's shoes.
CU Man says he is killing himself laughing when asked if he is happy about penny off beer. Goes on to say that Cripps should have reduced the price of razor blades and cut his darn throat. CU Woman carrying baby says budget hits the housewives and the children. CU Retake of above. Interviewer says 'you can't have your cake and eat it can you?' Pan down to small boy saying. 'What is cake mum!' CU Small boy asking 'What is Cake Mum?'
CU Two women talking. asking what the poor mice are going to do now, there's no cheese for mouse traps. CU Man and woman talking, saying budget will affect the voting and that they're all the same and you don't know who to vote for. CU Group of women talking. One says her daughter won't pay her more than 25/- a week, Another says she's been waiting for the budget to come out before she bought new curtains and now she'll have to wait longer. CU Woman talking in completely irrelevant manner about canteens.
Good grief. Reckon Osborne got off lightly with being booed at the Olympics...
So was IDS. Being an ex-solider doesn't do a leader any harm but it doesn't come with any guarantees either.
In recent US history, being a professional soldier has not helped at all - I can only think of Ike since WWII who has made it to great prominence on the political scene. Plenty in Congress, but beyond that ...
Many appear to think it's the Holy Grail.
'Dan Jarvis, ex soldier. The Daily Mail brigade will love him, they always like soldiers. He's a shoo in.'
'But what else does he offer?'
'Err ... doesn't matter, did I tell you he was in the military?'
I think it's a common fallacy at the moment. Labour need ideas that can form the basis of policies that can actually be executed when they're in government, not daft dreams about rainbows, kittens and unicorns. Then they need someone who isn't actually crazier than a box of frogs to sell them to the electorate. They need to do it in that order .
Mr. T, must admit to being amused when various do-gooder organisations have definitions of poverty which suggest I had a deprived childhood (no foreign holidays, small bedroom etc).
MTimT...most definitely pythonesque..two up two down terrace..outside toilet..no bathroom..only cold water ..no electricity.. only gas mantles with a coin meter..I lived there until I was 21..sharing a room with my younger sister..difficult times ... maybe that is why I am a little puzzled when MPs and others bang on about poverty today.
I was born in a three room flat above a garage next to a bomb site...
Mr. T, must admit to being amused when various do-gooder organisations have definitions of poverty which suggest I had a deprived childhood (no foreign holidays, small bedroom etc).
Minor detail for a story: anybody know what sort of wine a young lady might have with lamb chops?
Setting stories in the real world always trips me up with details like this. Any help is much appreciated.
Alas, in the US the truthful answer might be a white zinfandel, but please don't encourage such aberrant behaviour. Given lamb is fatty and strongly flavored, I'd suggest a robust red: Shiraz, Malbec, red Rhone, red zin or a good Cab - or pretty much any traditional Italian or Spanish red. As Europeans tend not to know Zin so well, probably not that in a European setting.
Minor detail for a story: anybody know what sort of wine a young lady might have with lamb chops?
Setting stories in the real world always trips me up with details like this. Any help is much appreciated.
How young is the lady in question? Young women usually start with very sweet wine before graduating to better stuff. My eldest started on Lambrini .....
Mr. T, must admit to being amused when various do-gooder organisations have definitions of poverty which suggest I had a deprived childhood (no foreign holidays, small bedroom etc).
My mother and I did get thrown out by my father when I was 14. Back in those days only the man signed the mortgage deeds and so it was his house not ours and the courts were happy with that. Females were chattels.
So he sold the house and swanned off abroad with his fancy-woman and left us with nothing. I never forgave the S.o.B. He died 15 years ago and I do not miss him one bit.
Mr. T, hmm. Well, I'll see if more suggestions are made, and may amend my choice. It's very much a minor detail, though.
Quite re minor detail. Wine used to be a hobby of mine, if you couldn't tell. But on reflection, depending on the time of year, Beaujolais nouveau would probably best fit with gender, age and meal.
Mr. T, must admit to being amused when various do-gooder organisations have definitions of poverty which suggest I had a deprived childhood (no foreign holidays, small bedroom etc).
My mother and I did get thrown out by my father when I was 14. Back in those days only the man signed the mortgage deeds and so it was his house not ours and the courts were happy with that. Females were chattels.
So he sold the house and swanned off abroad with his fancy-woman and left us with nothing. I never forgave the S.o.B. He died 15 years ago and I do not miss him one bit.
Obviously DRC is the best, but I am a great fan of Les Suchots personally. My Dad prefers Grands Echezeaux with lamb, but that's a little beyond my budget.
Comments
Oh, and he's aged. And he's fatter.
@TMScotExpress: ... Scots Language Centre apologises "for any offence caused." Promises "firmer editorial control of future content". (2/2)
Though despite Corbyn's low polling, it's encouraging that Lab still only 6pts behind: CON 37%(-2), LAB 31%(nc), LDEM 7%(+1), UKIP 17%(+1)
You know you're fecked when being only 6 points behind during your honeymoon is encouraging
(It's the YouGov she's talking about)
(See also Benn; Miliband; Straw, Blair.....)
I think Corbyn will stay on. If he attributes any failures to internal dissent (ironic) or the evil media, then going would be, in his mind, tantamount to betraying the 59% who elected him, giving in to the wicked media barons and electoral losers (within the party's leadership).
'The Martian' has the best casting ever, if only for one throwaway joke to do with Bean.
Politically, it seems to me that he swings Blue Labour; again, I'd argue that is exactly where a Labour leader needs to be. He is certainly decidedly un-metropolitan. Whether he can give a speech or look the real deal on the telly has yet to be seen. And he needs to build some kind of a base in Labour itself.
Getting dangerously close to "aw....bless......"
At some point, then, all the blame for failure to achieve Utopia will fall on the SNP. At that point their current monopoly will fail and another challenger will arise. If it arises on the Left, either the SNP will perforce move to the Right, or another party on the Right will arise. And vice versa. In the medium term, the SNP will face a credible electoral challenge and will have to adapt.
Political monopoly is unnatural in a democracy and can only be transitory.
Clive Lewis matches Jarvis's USP of being an ex-soldier, but is a better media performer and has more Labactivist-friendly views to boot.
http://www.britishpathe.com/video/opinions-on-budget/
At 5:25: "They're all the same ain't they...you don't know who to vote for, don't know which party's which"
Gain independence and their lifelong ambition is fulfilled. A return to pendulum politics would be a price worth paying.
Fail to win independence and they don't have a political monopoly and can indefinitely blame Westminster and the English. Cf Wales and 17 years and counting of Labour rule.
Otherwise I do take the points you are making.:-)
But I fail to see what being a former soldier adds to anything (other than Labour members coming to stare, in the manner of visiting the Elephant Man.
He'll need to win with only 2-4 years in Parliament and he currently isn't even in the Shadow Administration.
That is not a good place to start after Wile E Corbynote has landed at the bottom of the cliff they just ran off at full tilt.
They will need someone who can climb out of the hole and apply bandages which is more like Watson.
Unless the Zoomers are even more resolutely off beam than even I have allowed for.
I'm arranging a PB meet in Manchester on Monday.
Will be in the centre of Manchester, near Piccadilly Train Station from 4 pm onwards
If you need any further information email me at
PBMeet@yahoo.co.uk
Decades of Winning Here crashed and burned in May. Even amongst political obsessives here there were many people who had bet on LD seats in the 11-20 band thinking it would be a very poor result who lost as the Lib Dems did worse than even that.
The party Kennedy led died on May 7 and why should voters who hadn't realised it yet stick with them now? The party may rise again like a phoenix but there's little evidence of it yet.
For the record I predict both the Lib Dems and UKIP will poll a lower share of the vote than they did this year next time.
she should retweet some baby eating stats from eion and it'll all be better
'Dan Jarvis, ex soldier. The Daily Mail brigade will love him, they always like soldiers. He's a shoo in.'
'But what else does he offer?'
'Err ... doesn't matter, did I tell you he was in the military?'
This is brilliant o/t
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-34425092
It's self-reporting on moral virtue. If you're holier-than-thou, would you recognise it? People often have an inaccurate perception of their own self. Self-diagnosis of psych conditions is notoriously prone to being wrong.
It's of general populations. Not of party members, activists or MPs.
How are right-, left-wing and centre defined?
We define ourselves as normal, in the same maps (with the odd notable exception) centre on home turf. So that skews things significantly. You might work in a charity shop part-time as a volunteer, but consider the full-time workers morally superior, and feel a shade of guilt about that.
Certainly, the history of Liberal Democrats and:
Fidelity
Perversions
Homophobia
Perversion of the cause of justice
Honesty
Would suggest that centrists are right not to take the moral highground.
Conservatives define themselves as centrists much more than Labour voters.
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/49yn6fsx1u/Left-right_scale_150929_Website_V2.pdf
I'm waiting for the "Only Lib Dems can be morally superior here" bar chart.
Off topic: The lyrics of the song "A jump to the left, then a step to the right" may describe Labour at the moment, but maybe we should hope that they do not do the next few lines
With your hand on your hips.
You bring your knees in tight.
But it's the pelvic thrust.
They really drive you insane
On the face of it, it would not surprise me that, over the whole spectrum of self-described respondees, the right thinks it has the moral high ground. However, I doubt very much whether there is any significant difference on this parameter if you go to those who are either passionate about their politics, or fall more to the extremes of right or left views.
In short, interesting but something that raises far more questions than it gives real information.
Who is the most Moral of all ?
Setting stories in the real world always trips me up with details like this. Any help is much appreciated.
Not a proper teetotaller, but I only drink very rarely, so my knowledge of such things is not great.
Went for burgundy.
His personal approval rating is minus 8
http://www.sunnation.co.uk/corbyn-is-most-unpopular-opposition-leader/
Mr. T, I shall avoid the zinfandel menace.
Edited extra bit: Mr. K, at least he isn't behind Joffrey in the approval ratings.
Yet.
So he sold the house and swanned off abroad with his fancy-woman and left us with nothing. I never forgave the S.o.B. He died 15 years ago and I do not miss him one bit.
Known as Noble Wine
Obviously DRC is the best, but I am a great fan of Les Suchots personally. My Dad prefers Grands Echezeaux with lamb, but that's a little beyond my budget.
new thread
Cheers to you, and others who've replied.