politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The GOP nomination race: Unless the mainstream politicians

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The GOP nomination race: Unless the mainstream politicians make inroads soon Trump could become unassailable

Above is the latest Real Clear Politics Polling Average and the big story remains. None of the mainstream politicians have managed to gain real traction while Trump remains very strong.

Read the full story here

GeoffM

First! Good morning!

OldKingCole

I wonder if the average GOP voter is connecting with reality yet! I like the idea of Jeremy Corbyn, but whether, when it came to the ballot box and his PM’ship was a real possibility, would I vote Labour? Could well be different

Innocent_Abroad

OKC - primary voters aren't "average" by General Election standards.

FPT - are the policy positions in the UKIP spoof inaccurate? When I knew JC (before he became an MP) he certainly did support the return of Las Malvinas to Argentina, he did support unlimited immigration, and he was a republican (with a small "r"). And because I agreed with none of those positions he strained every sinew to have me excluded from the approved list of Labour candidates for Haringey council in 1978, and he failed by one vote!

If he has changed his mind, fair do's, but I'd like to know when and where. He's written enough in the meantime for there to be some evidence, surely. If it's in the comments to the previous thread, please someone give me a time-stamp - there's a lot to wade through

NickPalmer

The thing is that there is an anti-Trump majority even among GOP voters, but unless it coalesces around someone, he'll win. He appears to have a Teflon quality for his supporters, able to ride out things that would kill off most of us.

Potentially there is scope for two of the pack of alternatives to agree a pact endorsing one. But it may take some defeats to make it happen. What is the current balance of states with PR in primaries and states with FPTP? I know it varies, and if the early states elect delegates proportionately, there may be more scope for late alliances.

Incidentally, I think that a President Trump would have even more troulbe with Congress than Obama does. It's hard to think of a single Congressional ally.

OldKingCole

Innocent_Abroad said:

OKC - primary voters aren't "average" by General Election standards.

FPT - are the policy positions in the UKIP spoof inaccurate? When I knew JC (before he became an MP) he certainly did support the return of Las Malvinas to Argentina, he did support unlimited immigration, and he was a republican (with a small "r"). And because I agreed with none of those positions he strained every sinew to have me excluded from the approved list of Labour candidates for Haringey council in 1978, and he failed by one vote!

If he has changed his mind, fair do's, but I'd like to know when and where. He's written enough in the meantime for there to be some evidence, surely. If it's in the comments to the previous thread, please someone give me a time-stamp - there's a lot to wade through

Thanlks Mr IA. Useful to have the opinion who has debated/crossed swords with JC. That was 40 years ago, of course,

Take yoy point about Trump’s primary voters too; however doesn’t the comparison with JC stand? Sounds good, but when it comes to a “real” election .........

Scott_P

@dylsharpe: "Any idiot can imagine solutions in a simpler world that does not exist" @TheSun on Corbyn's response to ISIS > https://t.co/JOJIPoYzGl

david_herdson

NickPalmer said:

The thing is that there is an anti-Trump majority even among GOP voters, but unless it coalesces around someone, he'll win. He appears to have a Teflon quality for his supporters, able to ride out things that would kill off most of us.

Potentially there is scope for two of the pack of alternatives to agree a pact endorsing one. But it may take some defeats to make it happen. What is the current balance of states with PR in primaries and states with FPTP? I know it varies, and if the early states elect delegates proportionately, there may be more scope for late alliances.

Incidentally, I think that a President Trump would have even more troulbe with Congress than Obama does. It's hard to think of a single Congressional ally.

Is that true about there being an anti-Trump majority? How many of the 70% currently supporting someone else are viscerally opposed to him? I remember similar arguments about Romney last time but while he was stuck sub-30 for a long time, each time he won somewhere or an opponent dropped out, he edged up. I think we'd see the same here. Trump certainly has scope for putting a lot of people off but I think there are quite a few undecided all the same, perhaps not so much about him as about (1) whether he could win in November and (2) whether he has what it takes as a president.

I'm not sure whether it's viable for two candidates to form a pact. If one drops out, how do they control, or even influence, where their former support goes? They can make an endorsement but does that have that much effect? They could pledge their delegates to the other candidate should they go out, but to announce that simply looks weak; as if they are considering exiting (which they are).

IIRC, all the early states are PR but in practice it's likely to be irrelevant. The purpose of the early contests is to whittle the field down to one through political momentum. The late contests will deliver enough delegates to push the candidate remaining over the line.

david_herdson

On topic, I agree. The one to watch for in the pack is Cruz. I remain of the view that Carson is vulnerable and Cruz is the most likely beneficiary if he does crash. That said, I'd expect Trump to pick up some of Carson's twenty percent too. All the same, a Cruz surge off the back of a Carson slump could come just at the right time for him in terms of Iowa and NH.

david_herdson

OldKingCole said:

Innocent_Abroad said:

OKC - primary voters aren't "average" by General Election standards.

FPT - are the policy positions in the UKIP spoof inaccurate? When I knew JC (before he became an MP) he certainly did support the return of Las Malvinas to Argentina, he did support unlimited immigration, and he was a republican (with a small "r"). And because I agreed with none of those positions he strained every sinew to have me excluded from the approved list of Labour candidates for Haringey council in 1978, and he failed by one vote!

If he has changed his mind, fair do's, but I'd like to know when and where. He's written enough in the meantime for there to be some evidence, surely. If it's in the comments to the previous thread, please someone give me a time-stamp - there's a lot to wade through

Thanlks Mr IA. Useful to have the opinion who has debated/crossed swords with JC. That was 40 years ago, of course,

Take yoy point about Trump’s primary voters too; however doesn’t the comparison with JC stand? Sounds good, but when it comes to a “real” election .........

Trump polls reasonably well against Hillary in the head-to-heads. She is ahead but only by small margins. As things stand, I'd probably make it about a 63-37 shot in her favour were they the two in November but that still gives Trump better than one in three. Hillary and Trump both have their vulnerabilities which the other could exploit. To professionals, Trump's are the bigger weaknesses with the sole exception - but a critical exception - that Hillary is just Beltway Central.

DavidL

The republicans desperately need a clearing out of the field. If they got rid of the bottom 5 candidates we might get a better idea who the main candidates are. At the moment they risk being lost in the noise.

The one who can rise above that noise, because of his media profile, is Trump. He also has a major advantage in name recognition. Unfortunately, he is entirely unsuitable to be President and nominating him would give the Presidency to the Democrats on a plate.

There are echoes of the Corbyn situation in that a lot of his supporters seem to know that but not care. It's weird.

logical_song

DavidL said:

The republicans desperately need a clearing out of the field. If they got rid of the bottom 5 candidates we might get a better idea who the main candidates are. At the moment they risk being lost in the noise.

The one who can rise above that noise, because of his media profile, is Trump. He also has a major advantage in name recognition. Unfortunately, he is entirely unsuitable to be President and nominating him would give the Presidency to the Democrats on a plate.

There are echoes of the Corbyn situation in that a lot of his supporters seem to know that but not care. It's weird.

Will the GOP come to its senses or is Trump the new Goldwater?

david_herdson

DavidL said:

The republicans desperately need a clearing out of the field. If they got rid of the bottom 5 candidates we might get a better idea who the main candidates are. At the moment they risk being lost in the noise.

The one who can rise above that noise, because of his media profile, is Trump. He also has a major advantage in name recognition. Unfortunately, he is entirely unsuitable to be President and nominating him would give the Presidency to the Democrats on a plate.

There are echoes of the Corbyn situation in that a lot of his supporters seem to know that but not care. It's weird.

People keep saying this but the polls suggest otherwise. Recent head-to-head polling gives Hillary a 4.4% lead, and that's boosted by what looks like an outlying 15% in the last poll:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

4.4% would clearly be enough for a comfortable win (it's more than Obama managed in 2012) but there's nearly a year to go and the margin of error to project from here through to next November is huge, on both sides.

mobydick

Good morning, long-time lurker breaking the habit. Re: Paris: surprised nobody seems to have mentioned Tariq Ali's "The West is NOT morally superior to the jihadis" contribution on the Paris aftermath: http://www.versobooks.com/blogs/2336-isis-in-paris-by-tariq-ali

Actually, have probably lost a FB lefty friend for satirically needling him on his whataboutery over Paris - Tariq the multi-millionaire Marxist from North London is one of his gurus. Tant pis.

DavidL

logical_song said:

DavidL said:

The republicans desperately need a clearing out of the field. If they got rid of the bottom 5 candidates we might get a better idea who the main candidates are. At the moment they risk being lost in the noise.

The one who can rise above that noise, because of his media profile, is Trump. He also has a major advantage in name recognition. Unfortunately, he is entirely unsuitable to be President and nominating him would give the Presidency to the Democrats on a plate.

There are echoes of the Corbyn situation in that a lot of his supporters seem to know that but not care. It's weird.

Will the GOP come to its senses or is Trump the new Goldwater?

Usually they come to their senses. All of their candidates since Goldwater have been from the more mainstream and conventional politician parts of the party. But, as I said, Trump has advantages that few outsiders have in terms of profile and media interest. I used to be very confident that his bubble would burst, I am less so now.

logical_song

david_herdson said:

On topic, I agree. The one to watch for in the pack is Cruz. I remain of the view that Carson is vulnerable and Cruz is the most likely beneficiary if he does crash. That said, I'd expect Trump to pick up some of Carson's twenty percent too. All the same, a Cruz surge off the back of a Carson slump could come just at the right time for him in terms of Iowa and NH.

"He was instrumental in bringing about the government shutdown" which may not help him win against Clinton. His links with Palin and the Tea Party wouldn't help either.
Of course that doesn't mean he won't do well with registered Republicans.

Morris_Dancer

Good morning, everyone.

Welcome to the site, Mr. Moby. I did see that but, er, forgot to mention it. On the plus side, me forgetting means we have a new poster.

DavidL

Dan Hodges faces up to reality:

"David Cameron is right. Jeremy Corbyn is indeed a threat to our nation’s security. And whilst he remains leader, so is the Labour Party."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11998631/Jeremy-Corbyn-must-pick-his-side-in-the-war-on-terror.html

I'm afraid this is what it has come to. And unless the PLP discover a backbone the situation for Labour could become terminal. So that's it really.

Scrapheap_as_was

i used to think that the day would never come...

This is a bit of a curve-ball though

David Skelton Retweeted
Andy Burnham ‏@andyburnhammp 8 hrs8 hours ago
Uplifting to see New Order at Brixton Academy tonight. Arrived on stage with tricolor backdrop & first words: "Vive la France". #BlueMonday

rottenborough

logical_song said:

david_herdson said:

On topic, I agree. The one to watch for in the pack is Cruz. I remain of the view that Carson is vulnerable and Cruz is the most likely beneficiary if he does crash. That said, I'd expect Trump to pick up some of Carson's twenty percent too. All the same, a Cruz surge off the back of a Carson slump could come just at the right time for him in terms of Iowa and NH.

"He was instrumental in bringing about the government shutdown" which may not help him win against Clinton. His links with Palin and the Tea Party wouldn't help either.
Of course that doesn't mean he won't do well with registered Republicans.

I don't see Cruz staying ahead of Rubio in the long run.

david_herdson

logical_song said:

david_herdson said:

On topic, I agree. The one to watch for in the pack is Cruz. I remain of the view that Carson is vulnerable and Cruz is the most likely beneficiary if he does crash. That said, I'd expect Trump to pick up some of Carson's twenty percent too. All the same, a Cruz surge off the back of a Carson slump could come just at the right time for him in terms of Iowa and NH.

"He was instrumental in bringing about the government shutdown" which may not help him win against Clinton. His links with Palin and the Tea Party wouldn't help either.
Of course that doesn't mean he won't do well with registered Republicans.

I agree. That's why I think he's one to watch, although I think his potential ceiling is a good deal lower than Trump's, unless he ends as last man standing.

If Cruz does wind up with the nomination, I find it difficult to see Hillary not winning (subject to any court action), and probably winning very comfortably.

Scrapheap_as_was

Sounds like Benn is basically saying we should just ignore what his leader says...

norman smith ✔ @BBCNormanS
"It was right to take the action..no immediate prospect of him being arrested" - @hilarybennmp supports drone strike killing of Jihadi John

PoliticsHome ✔ @politicshome
"There was no prospect of going into the middle of Raqqa to arrest him [Jihadi John]" says Hilary Benn #R4Today

norman smith ✔ @BBCNormanS
"I am clear when immediate threat to life it is perfectly reasonable to use lethal force" - @hilarybennmp @BBCr4today

James Tapsfield ‏@JamesTapsfield 1m1 minute ago
Benn refuses to say he will stay on as shadow foreign sec if a Corbyn goes to Stop The War event next month #today

rottenborough

david_herdson said:

DavidL said:

The republicans desperately need a clearing out of the field. If they got rid of the bottom 5 candidates we might get a better idea who the main candidates are. At the moment they risk being lost in the noise.

The one who can rise above that noise, because of his media profile, is Trump. He also has a major advantage in name recognition. Unfortunately, he is entirely unsuitable to be President and nominating him would give the Presidency to the Democrats on a plate.

There are echoes of the Corbyn situation in that a lot of his supporters seem to know that but not care. It's weird.

People keep saying this but the polls suggest otherwise. Recent head-to-head polling gives Hillary a 4.4% lead, and that's boosted by what looks like an outlying 15% in the last poll:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

4.4% would clearly be enough for a comfortable win (it's more than Obama managed in 2012) but there's nearly a year to go and the margin of error to project from here through to next November is huge, on both sides.

A 4% lead would probably result in another comfortable win for Democrats on the all-important electoral vote. Its a state by state election in US.

This guy has great maps of the states and results:

http://uselectionatlas.org/

rottenborough

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Sounds like Benn is basically saying we should just ignore what his leader says...

Why should we. He is the one who would be PM not Benn. The final call on war or other major interventions would be Corbyn's.

kle4

Trump surely has maxed out his support?

FPT

Luckyguy1983 said:

HYUFD said:

It is either that or ISISland in Sunni Syria, there is no alternative!

There is an alternative - leave the place the F alone. Stop funding and training dubious 'rebels' and then being shocked when the results blow up in our faces, and support the country to get back on its feet with whomsoever in control that the Syrian people choose. It really is that simple. This 'we must re-draw the map to stop x attacking y' really is the most patronising rubbish when the country was bloody fine until the US had the bright idea of riding the 'Arab Spring' to rid itself of every awkward regime in the region. And can easily be fine again if it stops.

Meddling doesn't seem to help any, but your view that outside forces are essentially wholly to blame is also a patronising, infantilising one. These problems don't persist without massive genuine grievance in the places in question, even if outside forces are stirring things up too. A lid was clearly kept on the tensions but it is also clear those tensions were the there or things would not have deteriorated. Your view seems to remove the responsibility for the situation from the Syrians on all sides, treating them like children who had no choices or opinions that contributed to this. That may not be what you meant, but suggesting these places are or were fine if we were not involved leads to that conclusion.

It is also leads to the situation where we are blamed when we act and when we don't. Unless it was a real war to fight IS I don't see how involvement could be effective, not that a proper war would be guaranteed to be one, but the problem I have is your view seems instinctual and automatic, unchanging. I just fail to see how us not being involved would eliminate the underlying tensions, some of which go back centuries, which led to this conflict.

rottenborough

Another Monday evening, another disastrous PLP meeting:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/11/16/jeremy-corbyn-attacked-by_n_8578184.html?1447743391

kle4

Didn't someone suggest Bloomberg might run as an independent if Trump won the nomination, or was that only in the event of a simultaneous Sanders nomination? Would be fun though.

HYUFD

Indeed, presently Carson and Trump are tied in Iowa and it is Trump followed by Cruz in New Hampshire. Even Obama was a strong second in polls in Iowa and New Hampshire by this stage, Romney was leading New Hampshire in 2012 and McCain was rising in the state in 2008 so an establishment figure needs to start making a move soon

Morris_Dancer

I wonder if Cameron might just read his 2015 speech at next year's conference.

There was quite a lot of outrage about describing Corbyn as security-threatening and terrorist-sympathising, but it seems a very accurate way to describe a man who opposes shoot to kill for terrorists seeking to carry out suicide bombings or a Mumbai/Paris style attack.

I hope Labour axes Corbyn. It's saddening, even infuriating, that the Opposition is led by such a damned fool.

rottenborough

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Sounds like Benn is basically saying we should just ignore what his leader says...

norman smith ✔ @BBCNormanS
"It was right to take the action..no immediate prospect of him being arrested" - @hilarybennmp supports drone strike killing of Jihadi John

PoliticsHome ✔ @politicshome
"There was no prospect of going into the middle of Raqqa to arrest him [Jihadi John]" says Hilary Benn #R4Today

norman smith ✔ @BBCNormanS
"I am clear when immediate threat to life it is perfectly reasonable to use lethal force" - @hilarybennmp @BBCr4today

James Tapsfield ‏@JamesTapsfield 1m1 minute ago
Benn refuses to say he will stay on as shadow foreign sec if a Corbyn goes to Stop The War event next month #today

We'll need more popcorn folks.

david_herdson

rottenborough said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Sounds like Benn is basically saying we should just ignore what his leader says...

Why should we. He is the one who would be PM not Benn. The final call on war or other major interventions would be Corbyn's.

That's not entirely true but may be for practical purposes in *not* going to war. A PM couldn't go to war against the strong opinion of his cabinet, his parliamentary party, or the Commons as a whole. However, I think it would be extremely difficult - probably close to practically impossible - for any of those three to force a PM into action he doesn't want to take.

Pulpstar

The republican race is becoming the ultimate "But he can't win it" vs "He looks credible but his price is too short for his polling".

Tbh I've got them all backed, I'll be out of pocket if they go for Mitt Romney - and Rubio is a negative right now, but I've got him backed to be POTUS at enough odds to square up (And more) if and when we get to that position.

Scrapheap_as_was

Morris_Dancer said:

I wonder if Cameron might just read his 2015 speech at next year's conference.

There was quite a lot of outrage about describing Corbyn as security-threatening and terrorist-sympathising, but it seems a very accurate way to describe a man who opposes shoot to kill for terrorists seeking to carry out suicide bombings or a Mumbai/Paris style attack.

I hope Labour axes Corbyn. It's saddening, even infuriating, that the Opposition is led by such a damned fool.

Same emotions here actually - start with delight but now move on those two...

Some of course still think he's a breath of fresh air and would vote for him again tomorrow,

The only conclusion is that perhaps JC knows how to do the imperius curse?
.

kle4

rottenborough said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Sounds like Benn is basically saying we should just ignore what his leader says...

norman smith ✔ @BBCNormanS
"It was right to take the action..no immediate prospect of him being arrested" - @hilarybennmp supports drone strike killing of Jihadi John

PoliticsHome ✔ @politicshome
"There was no prospect of going into the middle of Raqqa to arrest him [Jihadi John]" says Hilary Benn #R4Today

norman smith ✔ @BBCNormanS
"I am clear when immediate threat to life it is perfectly reasonable to use lethal force" - @hilarybennmp @BBCr4today

James Tapsfield ‏@JamesTapsfield 1m1 minute ago
Benn refuses to say he will stay on as shadow foreign sec if a Corbyn goes to Stop The War event next month #today

We'll need more popcorn folks.

Why would he resign if Corbyn attended a Stop the war event? If Corbyn's apparently well known and unchanging views on foreign affairs were a deal breaker surely Benn should not have joined his shadow cabinet in the first place. Corbyn is allowed to attend these things isn't he?

rottenborough

Pulpstar said:

The republican race is becoming the ultimate "But he can't win it" vs "He looks credible but his price is too short for his polling".

Tbh I've got them all backed, I'll be out of pocket if they go for Mitt Romney - and Rubio is a negative right now, but I've got him backed to be POTUS at enough odds to square up (And more) if and when we get to that position.

Very sensible. I have backed all what I consider credible candidates. Can't face backing Trump or Carson. If things continue like this then I am scuppered, but I just can't believe that when we actually get some proper primary voting that normality will not return.

DavidL

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Sounds like Benn is basically saying we should just ignore what his leader says...

norman smith ✔ @BBCNormanS
"It was right to take the action..no immediate prospect of him being arrested" - @hilarybennmp supports drone strike killing of Jihadi John

PoliticsHome ✔ @politicshome
"There was no prospect of going into the middle of Raqqa to arrest him [Jihadi John]" says Hilary Benn #R4Today

norman smith ✔ @BBCNormanS
"I am clear when immediate threat to life it is perfectly reasonable to use lethal force" - @hilarybennmp @BBCr4today

James Tapsfield ‏@JamesTapsfield 1m1 minute ago
Benn refuses to say he will stay on as shadow foreign sec if a Corbyn goes to Stop The War event next month #today

What I don't understand is how he can remain in the Shadow Cabinet now. Right now. Every day that buffoon remains as leader Labour suffer the sort of reputational damage that can hang around for decades.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Scrapheap, not sure I was ever delighted, though I was certainly bemused. For democracy to function the electorate needs a viable alternative. Corbyn's off his bloody rocker.

Scrapheap_as_was

kle4 said:

rottenborough said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Sounds like Benn is basically saying we should just ignore what his leader says...

norman smith ✔ @BBCNormanS
"It was right to take the action..no immediate prospect of him being arrested" - @hilarybennmp supports drone strike killing of Jihadi John

PoliticsHome ✔ @politicshome
"There was no prospect of going into the middle of Raqqa to arrest him [Jihadi John]" says Hilary Benn #R4Today

norman smith ✔ @BBCNormanS
"I am clear when immediate threat to life it is perfectly reasonable to use lethal force" - @hilarybennmp @BBCr4today

James Tapsfield ‏@JamesTapsfield 1m1 minute ago
Benn refuses to say he will stay on as shadow foreign sec if a Corbyn goes to Stop The War event next month #today

We'll need more popcorn folks.

Why would he resign if Corbyn attended a Stop the war event? If Corbyn's apparently well known and unchanging views on foreign affairs were a deal breaker surely Benn should not have joined his shadow cabinet in the first place. Corbyn is allowed to attend these things isn't he?

Nick Robinson ‏@bbcnickrobinson 8m8 minutes ago
Revealing that Hilary Benn would not answer question about resigning as Shadow Foreign Sec if his leader goes to Stop the War party #R4Today

kle4

mobydick said:

Good morning, long-time lurker breaking the habit. Re: Paris: surprised nobody seems to have mentioned Tariq Ali's "The West is NOT morally superior to the jihadis" contribution on the Paris aftermath: http://www.versobooks.com/blogs/2336-isis-in-paris-by-tariq-ali

Actually, have probably lost a FB lefty friend for satirically needling him on his whataboutery over Paris - Tariq the multi-millionaire Marxist from North London is one of his gurus. Tant pis.

Well, it's a free country I suppose, he can say what he likes. Wait! That proves the West is morally superior. Foiled by his own stupidity is mr ali it would seem.

Scrapheap_as_was

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Scrapheap, not sure I was ever delighted, though I was certainly bemused. For democracy to function the electorate needs a viable alternative. Corbyn's off his bloody rocker.

I'm afraid I was - the thought of Labour being near the Treasury again is always too depressing for me so the fact it's getting ever further away from doing so is pleasing. I'd rather the Lib Dems took their place.

AlastairMeeks

We're still some way from even the first primary. A winnowing of candidates will take place. Donald a Trump still looks very opposable to me. As others have said, I would be very wary of opposing Ted Cruz. He looks like the right mix of firebrand and professional politician for the Republicans' present mood.

kle4

Scrapheap_as_was said:

kle4 said:

rottenborough said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Sounds like Benn is basically saying we should just ignore what his leader says...

norman smith ✔ @BBCNormanS
"It was right to take the action..no immediate prospect of him being arrested" - @hilarybennmp supports drone strike killing of Jihadi John

PoliticsHome ✔ @politicshome
"There was no prospect of going into the middle of Raqqa to arrest him [Jihadi John]" says Hilary Benn #R4Today

norman smith ✔ @BBCNormanS
"I am clear when immediate threat to life it is perfectly reasonable to use lethal force" - @hilarybennmp @BBCr4today

James Tapsfield ‏@JamesTapsfield 1m1 minute ago
Benn refuses to say he will stay on as shadow foreign sec if a Corbyn goes to Stop The War event next month #today

We'll need more popcorn folks.

Why would he resign if Corbyn attended a Stop the war event? If Corbyn's apparently well known and unchanging views on foreign affairs were a deal breaker surely Benn should not have joined his shadow cabinet in the first place. Corbyn is allowed to attend these things isn't he?

Nick Robinson ‏@bbcnickrobinson 8m8 minutes ago
Revealing that Hilary Benn would not answer question about resigning as Shadow Foreign Sec if his leader goes to Stop the War party #R4Today

I get he didn't answer, I just don't get why not. Corbyn would only go if he wanted to. If him wanting to is a problem for Benn it is not something Corbyn concealed, that it is the sort of thing he would go to, so jointing in the first place would be dishonest, as he would always have intended resignation.

CD13

This Syrian passport is causing the tin foil brigade to go into hyperdrive. It's all a cunning plan by IS to mislead public opinion. Obviously they are the Professor Moriarty of crime. It must be conspiracy and not cock-up.

I suspect IS don't give a monkey's toss about Western public opinion - we are decadent Kufar and lower than dogs. However, if I were IS, and wanting to get trained terrorists into the heart of Europe, hiding them in the migrant stream looks logical. No great thought needed there.

But it doesn't fit the media narrative so it must be wrong.

Jezza is an honest man. Totally bonkers but honest. Suck it up, Labour, it's what you voted for.

Pulpstar

Morris_Dancer said:

I hope Labour axes Corbyn. It's saddening, even infuriating, that the Opposition is led by such a damned fool.

Am I the only one backing him to stay in post for a while :P ?!

Scrapheap_as_was

BBC Tory

norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS 8m8 minutes ago
So...is there anything Hilary Benn actually agrees with Jeremy Corbyn over on Syria ? #justchecking

AlastairMeeks

Pulpstar said:

Morris_Dancer said:

I hope Labour axes Corbyn. It's saddening, even infuriating, that the Opposition is led by such a damned fool.

Am I the only one backing him to stay in post for a while :P ?!

Financially it looks like a good bet. No one in the Labour party has the minerals to take him on. If they did, we'd be seeing a slew of resignations from the shadow cabinet today.

Scott_P

DavidL said:

unless the PLP discover a backbone

I think I see a small problem with this plan...

ThomasNashe

Scrapheap_as_was said:

BBC Tory

norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS 8m8 minutes ago
So...is there anything Hilary Benn actually agrees with Jeremy Corbyn over on Syria ? #justchecking

It's in the Middle-East, and probably not an advisable holiday location at the moment?

JackW

PBers should be mindful that if Trump is the GOP nominee then Hillary Clinton will win by a landslide in the Electoral College.

Trump is literally the reality TV star that flickers over the consciousness of a nation and fades to dust in time. Deep red states in the south and west will remain in his column but the swathe of tight swing states and less marginal states will fall as Trumps's negatives come the general election campaign proper will be deeper than the hole that Corbyn's Labour party has dug for themselves.

Scott_P

antifrank said:

No one in the Labour party has the minerals to take him on. If they did, we'd be seeing a slew of resignations from the shadow cabinet today.

That is the sad and sorry truth

They will all line up behind him at PMQs and shout at the Tories.

AlastairMeeks

Prime Minister's Questions tomorrow are going to be a blood sport, surely?

DecrepitJohnL

Pulpstar said:

The republican race is becoming the ultimate "But he can't win it" vs "He looks credible but his price is too short for his polling".

Tbh I've got them all backed, I'll be out of pocket if they go for Mitt Romney - and Rubio is a negative right now, but I've got him backed to be POTUS at enough odds to square up (And more) if and when we get to that position.

Paris might change things if it brings foreign and defence policy into play. Unhelpfully, that statement of the bleeding obvious is as far as I've got since I cannot work out who it favours on the GOP side or even if it helps or hinders Hillary who was Secretary of State in Obama's first term.

SimonStClare

Scrapheap_as_was said:

BBC Tory

norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS 8m8 minutes ago
So...is there anything Hilary Benn actually agrees with Jeremy Corbyn over on Syria ? #justchecking

Has a party leader ever been at such odds with his shadow Foreign Secretary so early into his reign? – Benn’s unhelpful comment that we should just ignore Corbyn’s opinion would, under normal circumstances, be grounds for a sideways shuffle.

felix

ThomasNashe said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

BBC Tory

norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS 8m8 minutes ago
So...is there anything Hilary Benn actually agrees with Jeremy Corbyn over on Syria ? #justchecking

It's in the Middle-East, and probably not an advisable holiday location at the moment?

Time for Jezza and Diane to reprise the infamous cycling holiday perhaps?

DavidL

antifrank said:

Pulpstar said:

Morris_Dancer said:

I hope Labour axes Corbyn. It's saddening, even infuriating, that the Opposition is led by such a damned fool.

Am I the only one backing him to stay in post for a while :P ?!

Financially it looks like a good bet. No one in the Labour party has the minerals to take him on. If they did, we'd be seeing a slew of resignations from the shadow cabinet today.

This really has to start today, but it almost certainly won't.

The Huffpost says the PLP have moved from hot fury to cold rage. All too soon they may scream and scream until they are sick. Its pathetic.

Innocent_Abroad

Scott_P said:

antifrank said:

No one in the Labour party has the minerals to take him on. If they did, we'd be seeing a slew of resignations from the shadow cabinet today.

That is the sad and sorry truth

They will all line up behind him at PMQs and shout at the Tories.

Because they know JC has the support of the activists. The activists have seen Labour in office for 13 years, delivering Tory policies at home and abroad - particularly abroad - and they didn't like it. The Party wasn't set up to manage capitalism - and now that class (or economic interest, if you prefer) is no longer the chief source of political cleavage, it belongs in the dustbin of history.

The history of Japan suggests that representative democracy can easily survive one Party being in power for two generations or even longer.

SquareRoot

If enough Labour Mp's resigned the Labour whip, wouldn't the SNP become the official opposition..

Slackbladder

SquareRoot said:

If enough Labour Mp's resigned the Labour whip, wouldn't the SNP become the official opposition..

would have to be an awful lot of labour MPs to do that!

surbiton

Russia says it was a bomb - official

SimonStClare

SquareRoot said:

If enough Labour Mp's resigned the Labour whip, wouldn't the SNP become the official opposition..

If that were to happen, there would be enough ‘independents’ to form their own party...

Slackbladder

antifrank said:

Prime Minister's Questions tomorrow are going to be a blood sport, surely?

Problem is Corbyn HAS to gow with ISIS or Syria, if he starts asking questions from Maureen in King's Lynn about the NHS he's a laughing stock.

kle4

antifrank said:

Prime Minister's Questions tomorrow are going to be a blood sport, surely?

Corbyn and co can bat back any direct attack as playing politics with a tragedy. Plenty will support that.

DavidL

Slackbladder said:

antifrank said:

Prime Minister's Questions tomorrow are going to be a blood sport, surely?

Problem is Corbyn HAS to gow with ISIS or Syria, if he starts asking questions from Maureen in King's Lynn about the NHS he's a laughing stock.

He already is.

But its not funny.

Scott_P

SquareRoot said:

If enough Labour Mp's resigned the Labour whip, wouldn't the SNP become the official opposition..

if a single Labour MP resigned the whip it would be a bloody miracle

surbiton

SimonStClare said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

BBC Tory

norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS 8m8 minutes ago
So...is there anything Hilary Benn actually agrees with Jeremy Corbyn over on Syria ? #justchecking

Has a party leader ever been at such odds with his shadow Foreign Secretary so early into his reign? – Benn’s unhelpful comment that we should just ignore Corbyn’s opinion would, under normal circumstances, be grounds for a sideways shuffle.

Benn is also playing a game. Those who think he is not interested in the top job must think again. Benn is almost inviting to be sacked.

Scott_P

Slackbladder said:

he's a laughing stock.

He is

SquareRoot

Slackbladder said:

SquareRoot said:

If enough Labour Mp's resigned the Labour whip, wouldn't the SNP become the official opposition..

would have to be an awful lot of labour MPs to do that!

Great sport tho, Corbyn leading a few nutters, would crystallize it perfectly.,

Morris_Dancer

Mr. kle4, maybe.

I think Corbyn's comments will make most people think he's unacceptably soft on terrorism, and will want it raised. Only Corbynistas and tribal Labour supporters, I would guess, will think otherwise (and perhaps Islamists too).

AlastairMeeks

How do the £3 Tories feel today?

kle4

surbiton said:

SimonStClare said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

BBC Tory

norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS 8m8 minutes ago
So...is there anything Hilary Benn actually agrees with Jeremy Corbyn over on Syria ? #justchecking

Has a party leader ever been at such odds with his shadow Foreign Secretary so early into his reign? – Benn’s unhelpful comment that we should just ignore Corbyn’s opinion would, under normal circumstances, be grounds for a sideways shuffle.

Benn is also playing a game. Those who think he is not interested in the top job must think again. Benn is almost inviting to be sacked.

Best way to get establish as the natural candidate should Corbyn later fall I guess.

Good day everyone,

SquareRoot

kle4 said:

antifrank said:

Prime Minister's Questions tomorrow are going to be a blood sport, surely?

Corbyn and co can bat back any direct attack as playing politics with a tragedy. Plenty will support that.

Easy to bat that away, Dave just launches at Corbyn for not being prepared to protect British citizens.

Scott_P

SquareRoot said:

Great sport tho, Corbyn leading a few nutters, would crystallize it perfectly.,

They could achieve the same effect by boycotting PMQs leaving the front bench on their own.

But they won't

Pulpstar

Jez will probably give up the leadership once all the placemen are set. Maybe 2018, maybe 2020... I'm not sure.

The PLP will try and stop to McDonnell (They'll feel they've won a victory stopping him)... he'll bow out the race and Lisa Nandy will be crowned Queen. Of course Jez and the activists will be very happy with that

Razedabode

Even I didn't think Corbyn would be THIS bad.....

DavidL

surbiton said:

SimonStClare said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

BBC Tory

norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS 8m8 minutes ago
So...is there anything Hilary Benn actually agrees with Jeremy Corbyn over on Syria ? #justchecking

Has a party leader ever been at such odds with his shadow Foreign Secretary so early into his reign? – Benn’s unhelpful comment that we should just ignore Corbyn’s opinion would, under normal circumstances, be grounds for a sideways shuffle.

Benn is also playing a game. Those who think he is not interested in the top job must think again. Benn is almost inviting to be sacked.

Corbyn wouldn't dare. The risk that half the shadow cabinet would follow him out is too great. I agree Benn is showing more ambition though.

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/lordskipvc/status/666385844358524928

HYUFD

surbiton said:

SimonStClare said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

BBC Tory

norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS 8m8 minutes ago
So...is there anything Hilary Benn actually agrees with Jeremy Corbyn over on Syria ? #justchecking

Has a party leader ever been at such odds with his shadow Foreign Secretary so early into his reign? – Benn’s unhelpful comment that we should just ignore Corbyn’s opinion would, under normal circumstances, be grounds for a sideways shuffle.

Benn is also playing a game. Those who think he is not interested in the top job must think again. Benn is almost inviting to be sacked.

Benn can afford to wait, he is the only viable alternative to Corbyn before the election. He has also said he had reservations about airstrikes alone in Syria so is not miles from Corbyn

kle4

SquareRoot said:

kle4 said:

antifrank said:

Prime Minister's Questions tomorrow are going to be a blood sport, surely?

Corbyn and co can bat back any direct attack as playing politics with a tragedy. Plenty will support that.

Easy to bat that away, Dave just launches at Corbyn for not being prepared to protect British citizens.

My point was Corbyn will retain plenty of internal support among his base, not necessarily how it will play with the wider public. He and labour have clearly gambled the Tories will become very unpopular nd mere differentiation is enough, and have no intention of chasing votes, thinking the votes will come to them. Bold.

surbiton

JackW said:

PBers should be mindful that if Trump is the GOP nominee then Hillary Clinton will win by a landslide in the Electoral College.

Trump is literally the reality TV star that flickers over the consciousness of a nation and fades to dust in time. Deep red states in the south and west will remain in his column but the swathe of tight swing states and less marginal states will fall as Trumps's negatives come the general election campaign proper will be deeper than the hole that Corbyn's Labour party has dug for themselves.

Just look up the Goldwater states - that's it.

Plato_Says

Where Syrian refugees have been placed in the US so far http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11999927/Paris-France-terror-attacks-isil-Belgium-Molenbeek-suspects-Syria-Raqqa-bombing-live.html#update-20151117-0106

US states that don't want any Syrian refugees http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11999927/Paris-France-terror-attacks-isil-Belgium-Molenbeek-suspects-Syria-Raqqa-bombing-live.html#update-20151117-0500

Scrapheap_as_was

kle4 said:

antifrank said:

Prime Minister's Questions tomorrow are going to be a blood sport, surely?

Corbyn and co can bat back any direct attack as playing politics with a tragedy. Plenty will support that.

I agree - the tone for pbtories and i'd hope at PMQs is not glee in any form at Labour's position but a mix of sadness and fury.

DecrepitJohnL

Slackbladder said:

antifrank said:

Prime Minister's Questions tomorrow are going to be a blood sport, surely?

Problem is Corbyn HAS to gow with ISIS or Syria, if he starts asking questions from Maureen in King's Lynn about the NHS he's a laughing stock.

There is scope for Corbyn there: welcome additional spending and contrast it with recent defence cuts; welcome Osborne's commitment to cybersecurity and so on but ask why Chancellor is usurping the appropriate Secretaries of State; perhaps even a question about the magic money tree.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. kle4, sounds plausible.

Miliband went for a 35% strategy. What did he end up with? 31% or so?

Corbyn's true believers will turn out, but they don't have the numbers by themselves, and everyone who isn't dyed-in-the-wool Labour will not take kindly to having such a damned fool as their leader.

Edited extra bit: Mr. L, if Corbyn goes on Defence a couple of days after saying he opposes shoot to kill should we suffer a Mumbai/Paris style attack he'll get bloody slaughtered, and rightly so.

Edited extra bit 2: saw the interview on the news last night. Corbyn said he thought such a policy would be dangerous.

That is rather the point...

Slackbladder

DecrepitJohnL said:

Slackbladder said:

antifrank said:

Prime Minister's Questions tomorrow are going to be a blood sport, surely?

Problem is Corbyn HAS to gow with ISIS or Syria, if he starts asking questions from Maureen in King's Lynn about the NHS he's a laughing stock.

There is scope for Corbyn there: welcome additional spending and contrast it with recent defence cuts; welcome Osborne's commitment to cybersecurity and so on but ask why Chancellor is usurping the appropriate Secretaries of State; perhaps even a question about the magic money tree.

The problem is he's already posted links for 'input' for PMQs, so is he going with other peoples questions, or ones of his own?

And Corbyn wanting more spending on defence?? Good luck with getting that one to fly.

Plato_Says

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3320356/Fake-Syrian-passport-used-MailOnline-shocking-frailty-migrant-registration-used-suspected-Paris-terrorist-travel-Europe.html

Passport to terror: MailOnline reporter bought an IDENTICAL Syrian passport that ISIS bomber used to sneak into Europe before Paris attacks

MailOnline reporter obtained forged Syrian passport for $2,000 in four days
Investigation exposed security flaws where terrorists buy fake passports to get into Europe undetected
Passport of 'Ahmad Almohammad' found at Paris Stade de France terror
Believed Ahmad Almohammad got into Europe via Greek island of Leros
See full coverage of ISIS bombers at www.dailymail.co.uk/isis

AlastairMeeks

kle4 said:

antifrank said:

Prime Minister's Questions tomorrow are going to be a blood sport, surely?

Corbyn and co can bat back any direct attack as playing politics with a tragedy. Plenty will support that.

Too often when David Cameron treats Prime Minister's Questions as a bloodsport he comes across as the huntsman. Tomorrow he could be the hounds.

DavidL

Scrapheap_as_was said:

kle4 said:

antifrank said:

Prime Minister's Questions tomorrow are going to be a blood sport, surely?

Corbyn and co can bat back any direct attack as playing politics with a tragedy. Plenty will support that.

I agree - the tone for pbtories and i'd hope at PMQs is not glee in any form at Labour's position but a mix of sadness and fury.

It will be very straightforward for Cameron to point out that the first duty of the Government is to protect its own people. That there is a clear and present danger that what happened in Paris could happen in a UK city. That the existence of ISIL as a quasi state with a base from which to plan such attacks is a threat to the citizens of this country and that we will be backing the French resolution and that he will be recommending British participation in any approved action to the House. Will the LOTO support such a recommendation?

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Slackbladder, and why would he want more spending anyway? He'll never use a nuke, ever, in any circumstances. He can't see any circumstances in which he'd commit British ground troops. He opposes shoot to kill for terrorist attacks.

So what's the bloody point of having any guns or bullets or bombs or armed forces for Corbyn? He's like a eunuch buying a season ticket to a brothel.

Innocent_Abroad

Razedabode said:

Even I didn't think Corbyn would be THIS bad.....

I did.

DecrepitJohnL

Slackbladder said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

Slackbladder said:

antifrank said:

Prime Minister's Questions tomorrow are going to be a blood sport, surely?

Problem is Corbyn HAS to gow with ISIS or Syria, if he starts asking questions from Maureen in King's Lynn about the NHS he's a laughing stock.

There is scope for Corbyn there: welcome additional spending and contrast it with recent defence cuts; welcome Osborne's commitment to cybersecurity and so on but ask why Chancellor is usurping the appropriate Secretaries of State; perhaps even a question about the magic money tree.

The problem is he's already posted links for 'input' for PMQs, so is he going with other peoples questions, or ones of his own?

And Corbyn wanting more spending on defence?? Good luck with getting that one to fly.

The point is that Corbyn can make mischief by exploiting defence cuts under Cameron.

Theuniondivvie

antifrank said:

How do the £3 Tories feel today?

http://tinyurl.com/prk2jl7

MarqueeMark

Scrapheap_as_was said:

kle4 said:

antifrank said:

Prime Minister's Questions tomorrow are going to be a blood sport, surely?

Corbyn and co can bat back any direct attack as playing politics with a tragedy. Plenty will support that.

I agree - the tone for pbtories and i'd hope at PMQs is not glee in any form at Labour's position but a mix of sadness and fury.

Sad that Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition should be reduced to a sixth form pantomime.

Furious to forward-project to a time under Prime Minister Jeremy Corbyn when I happen to have picked the same day as ISIL to go about my business in Oxford Street, waiting in line in Selfridges to be shot, knowing that no-one is coming to rescue me because the PM won't authorise the potential loss of life of these bastards.

chestnut

Slackbladder said:

antifrank said:

Prime Minister's Questions tomorrow are going to be a blood sport, surely?

Problem is Corbyn HAS to gow with ISIS or Syria, if he starts asking questions from Maureen in King's Lynn about the NHS he's a laughing stock.

He wouldn't be that silly. It will be tax credits.

blackburn63

pb tories quite rightly attacking Corbyn but it only diverts from the ineffective Cameron led govt, one which has cut police and armed forces spending at this most dangerous time. Now the Home Secretary has said Paris is nothing to do with religion, imagine if a labour stooge had said that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QH9fvLiGTXI&app=desktop

Have a look at that, Nigel speaking honestly, reflecting how so many of us feel.

Plato_Says

He also praised Costa Rica for disbanding its own army.

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Slackbladder, and why would he want more spending anyway? He'll never use a nuke, ever, in any circumstances. He can't see any circumstances in which he'd commit British ground troops. He opposes shoot to kill for terrorist attacks.

So what's the bloody point of having any guns or bullets or bombs or armed forces for Corbyn? He's like a eunuch buying a season ticket to a brothel.

surbiton

What if Corbyn starts with "Mary from Sandhurst wants to know why the army troop numbers were cut from 120,000 to 84,000 ? She further adds that her husband received his P45 two days after he returned from Afghanistan"

Slackbladder

DecrepitJohnL said:

Slackbladder said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

Slackbladder said:

antifrank said:

Prime Minister's Questions tomorrow are going to be a blood sport, surely?

Problem is Corbyn HAS to gow with ISIS or Syria, if he starts asking questions from Maureen in King's Lynn about the NHS he's a laughing stock.

There is scope for Corbyn there: welcome additional spending and contrast it with recent defence cuts; welcome Osborne's commitment to cybersecurity and so on but ask why Chancellor is usurping the appropriate Secretaries of State; perhaps even a question about the magic money tree.

The problem is he's already posted links for 'input' for PMQs, so is he going with other peoples questions, or ones of his own?

And Corbyn wanting more spending on defence?? Good luck with getting that one to fly.

The point is that Corbyn can make mischief by exploiting defence cuts under Cameron.

So Corbyn's going to boost spending on defence right?

chestnut

surbiton said:

SimonStClare said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

BBC Tory

norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS 8m8 minutes ago
So...is there anything Hilary Benn actually agrees with Jeremy Corbyn over on Syria ? #justchecking

Has a party leader ever been at such odds with his shadow Foreign Secretary so early into his reign? – Benn’s unhelpful comment that we should just ignore Corbyn’s opinion would, under normal circumstances, be grounds for a sideways shuffle.

Benn is also playing a game. Those who think he is not interested in the top job must think again. Benn is almost inviting to be sacked.

Maybe, just maybe, he's simply saying what sane people think.

SouthamObserver

These are Corbyn's friends, the people whose Xmas party he is attending:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:UGy6WqTARkAJ:stopwar.org.uk/index.php/news/paris-reaps-the-whirlwind-of-western-support-for-extremist-violence-in-the-middle-east+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

This is what Nick and his mates voted to associate Labour with when they voted for Corbyn.

This is why I will never vote Labour while Corbyn and his crew run Labour. And it's why millions of others won't consider it either.

I hope and pray Labour loses in Oldham. Constant and humiliating defeat is what it needs and deserves until members develop the intelligence to see what they are doing to a party they profess to care about. They have abandoned the British mainstream. They are contemptible.

Jonathan

Corbyn is bad at politics.

Scott_P

No wonder, then, that Corbyn has suggested his party will henceforth ‘consult’ Stop The War on matters of foreign policy. If this seems a redundant notion it is only because Stop The War already run the Labour party. It is not just Corbyn, it is Seumas Milne and John McDonnell too.

Hillary Benn, like other members of the Shadow Cabinet, has signed up to this. That’s their prerogative but they cannot reasonably claim they did not know what they were signing up to. Nor can they argue any of this is a surprise. They still chose to ‘serve’ even though the nature and worldview of those they serve was abundantly obvious all along to anyone with the wit to acknowledge reality.

http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2015/11/why-is-anyone-surprised-by-jeremy-corbyns-foreign-policy-views/