Blimey - the Army fired only 1,200 rounds at Loughgall in 1987.
Was that with the FN SLR? Because that was self loading single shot. Maybe it's memories of islandwana that make the brass hats worry about running out of ammunition
Apparently with M16 and H&K G3 rifles and L7A2 general-purpose machine guns
Angela Merkel for now is, to use one of her words, alternativeless. As Nick Palmer says, this is on the whole a good thing for David Cameron since her small c conservatism will lead her to seek to accommodate his wishes so far as reasonably possible. The disruptiveness of losing Britain from the EU is something that she will wish to avoid.
AlastairMeeks to retain credibility you must spend the rest of the winter in a natural cave. Take plenty of water and rather less food and then hibernate for 5 months. On awakening, crawl out of the cave then spread your arms and proclaim yourself AntiFrank.
Do I have to be naked at the point of proclamation?
"Much of the Left has been eaten alive by Islamism. This truly regressive and oppressive political philosophy has all but destroyed a movement that once desired nothing less than the emancipation of the human race. The campaigns for equality that were right and good and brave in the 1960s have been exploited to within an inch of their lives, and actually probably far beyond that, by a political movement that hates everything those campaigns were fighting for. Women’s rights, children’s rights, gay rights, free speech, rejection of religious power over our lives, integration, free expression, music, art, freedom, love: the defence of every one of them given up bit by bit by a Left which has ceased to be worthy of the name."
What we are seeing from Mssrs Corbyn & Livingstone suggest strongly that their politics never really included a desire for that emancipation to start with.
Neither of them have shifted their views by an inch in 30 years. What they're showing us now are their true colours.
No wonder they've no problem with segregated audiences. As we see, it chimes with their real views nicely.
Gosh, that has really got under your skin, hasn't it. As a man I don't have as strong a reaction (probably should, mind you) but I can still see it's pretty a pretty offensive and obvious move to undermine and isolate her.
JC is not that clever, or devious. I wonder who is orchestrating this, and Momentum, and other moves to purify the party? Every day he seems more of a puppet for someone else...
The article linked by AndyJS is excellently written. I'd very much like to hear a left-winger try to defend - or refute the existence of - the situation that is described.
The guy whose flat the terrorists were holed up in has an interesting tale to tell.
Would you go letting your flat to friends of friends, who you have never met and didn't realise who they were, when two of the worlds most wanted men are on the run in your city, their mug shots are all over the media, oh and your flat just happens to have specially reinforced doors etc.
"We cannot outsource our interests to a Russian veto in the security council" says Cameron
In which case what's the security council veto for? And no one uses it more than the Americans in the interests of Israel. Probably time to disband it
As Cameron said - Russia has different aims to us and that is why we should not wait for any UN resolution. Russia want to protect Assad. You might be a push over but I do not see why the British government should be.
So you are agreeing that the UN Security Council no longer serves a useful function and should henceforth be ignored? I would suggest that is a very slippery slope. All the more so given the likelihood of accidents with two sets of aircraft operating in the same airspace carrying out operations.
If the UN is being manipulated then why should we hang about to defend ourselves against terrorists who clearly have plans to attack us, as they so clearly did in France. Why should we go out of our way to keep Assad in power when we regard him as a big problem in the region and is an obstruction to a democratic Syria. I'm sure you are quite upset that our poor defence forces are still capable of providing the only ship in Europe able to give air defence to the French fleet.
If Merkel is replaced it will be in an internal CDU coup not at the ballot box. The Afd are now the third most popular party in Germany in the latest poll, if that trend continues she could be ousted by her Finance Minister, Wolfgang Schauble who has been notably critical of her open welcome to Syrian refugees
Schauble is well-likewd - he's the only CDU politiican with higher peersonal ratings than Merkel (54 to 49). But he's not thought to be keen to be Chancellor
5000 more than if Jezza was in charge...they would have come out quietly after having a nice chat.
I wonder if the Russian would have stood there and engaged with them like that? Or just flattened the building?
I am sure the terrorists mum's will be along shortly and say the guns only went off because they got stressed.
Read it again.
*Both sides fired 5000 rounds in total*.
“The terrorists fired 5,000 rounds,”
AK47 rate of fire is 600 rounds a minute. Although they are only 30 round magazines (giving you a continuous rate of fire of only 2-3 seconds) you can easily fire off that many rounds very quickly if you are well supplied with clips.
Patrick Wintour @patrickwintour · 37s38 seconds ago Peers vote 293-211 to let 16 and 17 year olds vote in the European Union referendum. Government will seek to overturn in Commons.
I just don't understand the House of Lords at the moment. They seem to be choosing the most bizarre subjects on which to take a stand against the Commons.
The point is that they're taking a stand. In the absence of a functioning opposition in the House of Commons, they're taking it on themselves to provide one.
Taking a stand? I'd abolish them tomorrow. This isn't the government trying to get something through that they didn't have in their manifesto. This is the losers trampling all over our democracy.
If Merkel is replaced it will be in an internal CDU coup not at the ballot box. The Afd are now the third most popular party in Germany in the latest poll, if that trend continues she could be ousted by her Finance Minister, Wolfgang Schauble who has been notably critical of her open welcome to Syrian refugees
Schauble is well-likewd - he's the only CDU politiican with higher peersonal ratings than Merkel (54 to 49). But he's not thought to be keen to be Chancellor
INSA have them n 10.5 points with the CDU/CSU alliance down to 35 points. In the European election AfD outperformed their poll rating quite significantly and the CDU underperformed.
Patrick Wintour @patrickwintour · 37s38 seconds ago Peers vote 293-211 to let 16 and 17 year olds vote in the European Union referendum. Government will seek to overturn in Commons.
I just don't understand the House of Lords at the moment. They seem to be choosing the most bizarre subjects on which to take a stand against the Commons.
The point is that they're taking a stand. In the absence of a functioning opposition in the House of Commons, they're taking it on themselves to provide one.
Oh please that's just rubbish. They are being willfully and unconstitutionally obstructive for party partisan reasons. I continue to have my belief reinforced, namely that we should abolish the house of Lords and in the process revoke all life peerages.
Patrick Wintour @patrickwintour · 37s38 seconds ago Peers vote 293-211 to let 16 and 17 year olds vote in the European Union referendum. Government will seek to overturn in Commons.
I just don't understand the House of Lords at the moment. They seem to be choosing the most bizarre subjects on which to take a stand against the Commons.
The point is that they're taking a stand. In the absence of a functioning opposition in the House of Commons, they're taking it on themselves to provide one.
Aside from perhaps a handful of crossbenchers, I don't think they'd be any less obstructive if the Commons had a sensible and credible Labour opposition doing its job.
Such is the mathematics almost all of these measures would have still passed and got to the Lords. And they would do whatever they could to block them.
Patrick Wintour @patrickwintour · 37s38 seconds ago Peers vote 293-211 to let 16 and 17 year olds vote in the European Union referendum. Government will seek to overturn in Commons.
I just don't understand the House of Lords at the moment. They seem to be choosing the most bizarre subjects on which to take a stand against the Commons.
The point is that they're taking a stand. In the absence of a functioning opposition in the House of Commons, they're taking it on themselves to provide one.
Taking a stand? I'd abolish them tomorrow. This isn't the government trying to get something through that they didn't have in their manifesto. This is the losers trampling all over our democracy.
It's the Lib Dems innit.
Unable to accept that they were soundly thrashed in May, and determined to stick the boot in whenever they can, regardless of what the electorate wanted.
Patrick Wintour @patrickwintour · 37s38 seconds ago Peers vote 293-211 to let 16 and 17 year olds vote in the European Union referendum. Government will seek to overturn in Commons.
Right opinion in my view, but politically it seems like the ship has sailed on that one, they might as well let it go.
Cameron needs to just appoint 40-50 more Tory peers pronto, with a handful of others.
The Guardian and Independent will go ape for a week or two. The BBC will run a story or two, and then everyone else who's not in the anti-Cameron camp already will forget about it and cease to care.
I wonder if any of the noble Lords have had cause to mark or moderate the work of 16 and 18 year olds, some of them might even be amazed how big a difference two years of schooling makes.
Mu understanding is not that they sent the dog in first as such but that the dog went in with the handler and other police and when they saw the target the dog was released to take them down. This appears to be pretty standard practice for police forces with dogs. WHen the woman blew herself up she killed the dog but also injured 5 other police who were approaching her.
Paddy Power Politics @pppolitics 3m3 minutes ago What will be the turnout in the Oldham West & Royton By-Election?Bet here: http://pdy.pr/RuyPsh
It'll be around 40-45% IMO.
I think that's spot on
Why so high? That's higher than Heywood & Middleton, Manchester Central and Wythenshawe & Sale East. Of by-elections in the last Parliament in the area, only Oldham East & Saddleworth broke 40%.
Who are all these voters who are going to be trooping out to the ballot box on a dank December night?
Oldham East is right next door, maybe turnout will be similar?
Manchester Central and Heywood & Middleton are also adjacent to Oldham West & Royton. Oldham East & Saddleworth was a previous marginal while the other three were all previously safe Labour seats.
I'm with you antifrank (old habits die hard)
It will be dark until 8am and from 4.30pm. Almost anyone who works will have to make a conscious decision to vote in the dark.
Apart from the retired and very politically motivated, who will be arsed?
Patrick Wintour @patrickwintour · 37s38 seconds ago Peers vote 293-211 to let 16 and 17 year olds vote in the European Union referendum. Government will seek to overturn in Commons.
I just don't understand the House of Lords at the moment. They seem to be choosing the most bizarre subjects on which to take a stand against the Commons.
The point is that they're taking a stand. In the absence of a functioning opposition in the House of Commons, they're taking it on themselves to provide one.
Taking a stand? I'd abolish them tomorrow. This isn't the government trying to get something through that they didn't have in their manifesto. This is the losers trampling all over our democracy.
It's the Lib Dems innit.
Unable to accept that they were soundly thrashed in May, and determined to stick the boot in whenever they can, regardless of what the electorate wanted.
I think it is time for a Tory surge in the Lords. 150 extra peers all aged 40 and under.
"I am sure Jezza will be along to tell us that was totally the wrong thing. That they should have tried harder to reason with him to give himself up."
I understand the first casualty of the siege was a police dog. I could well understand why they would send a dog in first but I'm sure there there are many animal lovers who wouldn't approve perhaps even 'Jezza'
Kay Burley tweeted #JeSuisChien as a sort-of-joke. Kicked off a minor twitterstorm. Twittersquall?
Bush is surely dead now and Rubio is the last serious politician standing. The GOP base can't be insane enough to actually make Trump their candidate.
We all thought that about Labour and Jeremy Corbyn. Compared to the Jezziah, Trump is a model of experience, sanity, restraint and intelligence, who would have a broad appeal to a wide electorate.
Admittedly at this moment that is the equivalent of saying someone is less paranoid than Stalin.
I think even Corbyn's supporters are now realising what anyone half sane knew already. And that is that regardless of his politics he is third rate (at best). He is simply not capable of leadership. It is also clearly apparent that his closest supporters are almost all 1970s/80s London leftists. This will begin to piss off the (remaining) working class membership in the north and some of the unions pretty soon as well. The PLP has to play it carefully. But 80% of his supporters didn't vote for Corbyn, they voted for a Corbyn 'avatar' of 'labour's soul'. And that he ain't.
I disagree with every word of that - I voted specifically for Corbyn, where there are quite a few on the left who I wouldn't have supported (I voted Tessa for Mayor). One of the central attractions of Corbyn to members is that he doesn't lead in the traditional "follow me chaps" way that has become the norm in every party. He believes in debate. Setting up a defence review co-chaired by a supporter and an opponent of Trident makes sense if it's not to be a stitch-up. And the curt instruction to Livingstone to back down over his abusive comment shows he means the civil politics stuff too.
He's clearly not doing well in terms of getting good coverage and I'd quibble over how he puts some issues across. But I'd vote for him again if needed, and so, I think, would the great majority of the 60%. We are nowhere near the point where people feel he's had a fair shot at it.
Patrick Wintour @patrickwintour · 37s38 seconds ago Peers vote 293-211 to let 16 and 17 year olds vote in the European Union referendum. Government will seek to overturn in Commons.
I just don't understand the House of Lords at the moment. They seem to be choosing the most bizarre subjects on which to take a stand against the Commons.
The point is that they're taking a stand. In the absence of a functioning opposition in the House of Commons, they're taking it on themselves to provide one.
Taking a stand? I'd abolish them tomorrow. This isn't the government trying to get something through that they didn't have in their manifesto. This is the losers trampling all over our democracy.
It's the Lib Dems innit.
Unable to accept that they were soundly thrashed in May, and determined to stick the boot in whenever they can, regardless of what the electorate wanted.
The Lib Dems want revenge, and aren't shy of admitting it.
On another subject, the source is biased here, but if the article is correct then Leave do have a problem. Has Pickles really endorsed the UKIP-dominated faction?
"I am sure Jezza will be along to tell us that was totally the wrong thing. That they should have tried harder to reason with him to give himself up."
I understand the first casualty of the siege was a police dog. I could well understand why they would send a dog in first but I'm sure there there are many animal lovers who wouldn't approve perhaps even 'Jezza'
Kay Burley tweeted #JeSuisChien as a sort-of-joke. Kicked off a minor twitterstorm. Twittersquall?
I think even Corbyn's supporters are now realising what anyone half sane knew already. And that is that regardless of his politics he is third rate (at best). He is simply not capable of leadership. It is also clearly apparent that his closest supporters are almost all 1970s/80s London leftists. This will begin to piss off the (remaining) working class membership in the north and some of the unions pretty soon as well. The PLP has to play it carefully. But 80% of his supporters didn't vote for Corbyn, they voted for a Corbyn 'avatar' of 'labour's soul'. And that he ain't.
I disagree with every word of that - I voted specifically for Corbyn, where there are quite a few on the left who I wouldn't have supported (I voted Tessa for Mayor). One of the central attractions of Corbyn to members is that he doesn't lead in the traditional "follow me chaps" way that has become the norm in every party. He believes in debate. Setting up a defence review co-chaired by a supporter and an opponent of Trident makes sense if it's not to be a stitch-up. And the curt instruction to Livingstone to back down over his abusive comment shows he means the civil politics stuff too.
He's clearly not doing well in terms of getting good coverage and I'd quibble over how he puts some issues across. But I'd vote for him again if needed, and so, I think, would the great majority of the 60%. We are nowhere near the point where people feel he's had a fair shot at it.
Do you think Ken has still got to go? If what Luciana Berger says is true and it is on-par with racism or sexism, then surely he has to resign. An apology wouldn't be enough to remain in a post for a racist or a sexist. At the moment it's not civil politics - not without real consequences.
"We cannot outsource our interests to a Russian veto in the security council" says Cameron
In which case what's the security council veto for? And no one uses it more than the Americans in the interests of Israel. Probably time to disband it
As Cameron said - Russia has different aims to us and that is why we should not wait for any UN resolution. Russia want to protect Assad. You might be a push over but I do not see why the British government should be.
So you are agreeing that the UN Security Council no longer serves a useful function and should henceforth be ignored? I would suggest that is a very slippery slope. All the more so given the likelihood of accidents with two sets of aircraft operating in the same airspace carrying out operations.
If the UN is being manipulated then why should we hang about to defend ourselves against terrorists who clearly have plans to attack us, as they so clearly did in France. Why should we go out of our way to keep Assad in power when we regard him as a big problem in the region and is an obstruction to a democratic Syria. I'm sure you are quite upset that our poor defence forces are still capable of providing the only ship in Europe able to give air defence to the French fleet.
The UN is always being manipulated. The US and Israelis do it all the time. So do the Russians and in case you forget so did we for the Iraq War.
And Assad is by far the least of the two evils at the moment. We have spent the last 5 centuries playing one side off against the other and allying with dodgy governments to win what we consider to be the more important battles. It is how Britain does business. We did it with all sorts of people we didn't like in WW2 and have spent the whole of the post war period backing up dictatorships around the world because it served our interests at the time. Indeed it is really only since we decided to start getting rid of dictators in the Middle East that we have seen the whole place fall apart.
And if you are going to make snide ill informed comments then do please pick the right target. I have never criticised our armed forces nor said we should not work with our closest neighbour if they need our help. I am confident they would do the same for us. Indeed they did by feeding us all the info they had on Argentine capabilities during the Falklands War and blocking the sale of more missiles. We owe them big time for their help.
I think even Corbyn's supporters are now realising what anyone half sane knew already. And that is that regardless of his politics he is third rate (at best). He is simply not capable of leadership. It is also clearly apparent that his closest supporters are almost all 1970s/80s London leftists. This will begin to piss off the (remaining) working class membership in the north and some of the unions pretty soon as well. The PLP has to play it carefully. But 80% of his supporters didn't vote for Corbyn, they voted for a Corbyn 'avatar' of 'labour's soul'. And that he ain't.
I disagree with every word of that - I voted specifically for Corbyn, where there are quite a few on the left who I wouldn't have supported (I voted Tessa for Mayor). One of the central attractions of Corbyn to members is that he doesn't lead in the traditional "follow me chaps" way that has become the norm in every party. He believes in debate. Setting up a defence review co-chaired by a supporter and an opponent of Trident makes sense if it's not to be a stitch-up. And the curt instruction to Livingstone to back down over his abusive comment shows he means the civil politics stuff too.
He's clearly not doing well in terms of getting good coverage and I'd quibble over how he puts some issues across. But I'd vote for him again if needed, and so, I think, would the great majority of the 60%. We are nowhere near the point where people feel he's had a fair shot at it.
All of which would have some validity if anyone genuinely believed he would change his stance on the basis of the review. Will he? Or will he simply say, when it disagrees with him, that they are wrong and he is right?
Many years ago I sang in a large choir under a well-known conductor. He was famous for his 'do as I say, not as I do' attitude coupled with temper tantrums. He was criticised for not being sufficiently attentive to our desires when it came to choosing music, so he set up a committee to help him choose. He would always listen, carefully and politely, to our advice. Then he would go off and choose whatever he wanted anyway. I always got on well with him on a personal level (and not just because I was holding the bass line together so I was a valuable property from his point of view). But he was a bit of a nightmare to work with.
But I'd vote for him again if needed, and so, I think, would the great majority of the 60%. We are nowhere near the point where people feel he's had a fair shot at it.
And there, ladies and gentlemen, is the problem which the sane wing of the party has.
The question is, how long will it take before the Corbynistas are at that point? And, when they get there, what will they feel was the reason why the 'fair shot' didn't work? Not authentically left-wing enough, perhaps?
On another subject, the source is biased here, but if the article is correct then Leave do have a problem. Has Pickles really endorsed the UKIP-dominated faction?
Pickles made thee claims more than a week ago. He is just playing politics because he sees Vote Leave as a bigger threat than the Farage backed Leave.EU
On another subject, the source is biased here, but if the article is correct then Leave do have a problem. Has Pickles really endorsed the UKIP-dominated faction?
"Much of the Left has been eaten alive by Islamism. This truly regressive and oppressive political philosophy has all but destroyed a movement that once desired nothing less than the emancipation of the human race. The campaigns for equality that were right and good and brave in the 1960s have been exploited to within an inch of their lives, and actually probably far beyond that, by a political movement that hates everything those campaigns were fighting for. Women’s rights, children’s rights, gay rights, free speech, rejection of religious power over our lives, integration, free expression, music, art, freedom, love: the defence of every one of them given up bit by bit by a Left which has ceased to be worthy of the name."
What we are seeing from Mssrs Corbyn & Livingstone suggest strongly that their politics never really included a desire for that emancipation to start with.
Neither of them have shifted their views by an inch in 30 years. What they're showing us now are their true colours.
No wonder they've no problem with segregated audiences. As we see, it chimes with their real views nicely.
Gosh, that has really got under your skin, hasn't it. As a man I don't have as strong a reaction (probably should, mind you) but I can still see it's pretty a pretty offensive and obvious move to undermine and isolate her.
JC is not that clever, or devious. I wonder who is orchestrating this, and Momentum, and other moves to purify the party? Every day he seems more of a puppet for someone else...
The article linked by AndyJS is excellently written. I'd very much like to hear a left-winger try to defend - or refute the existence of - the situation that is described.
I feel betrayed by an organisation I've always thought were supporters of equality. That is why I am so angry.
I always used to wonder why Ms Harman didn't put herself up for election as leader. She was always Labour's fall-back whenever someone had to be thrown to the press to defend dodgy stuff.
Now, it's all too clear why she didn't. She knew she had no chance & contented herself with All-Women Short Lists and gender-balanced leadership rules. All that equality effort was really aimed at Labour itself, not society in general.
The puzzle to me now is why so many women are attracted by the left wing of Labour.
Do they like having a glass ceiling? Is it a sort of comfort blanket to them? Are they so absorbed by the exciting protests that they can't see there's no scope for them to fulfil their potential?
If Merkel is replaced it will be in an internal CDU coup not at the ballot box. The Afd are now the third most popular party in Germany in the latest poll, if that trend continues she could be ousted by her Finance Minister, Wolfgang Schauble who has been notably critical of her open welcome to Syrian refugees
Schauble is well-likewd - he's the only CDU politiican with higher peersonal ratings than Merkel (54 to 49). But he's not thought to be keen to be Chancellor
As I said he may feel he has no choice if the Afd further
Labour's cowardice when it comes to regicide has been remarked upon many times.
Mr. Eagles, the red nose of Rudolf is almost certainly indicative that Santa has his reindeer rendered subservient by giving them only powerful vodka to drink, reducing them to alcoholic obedience (as he is the only man in Lapland who can offer them grog, booze and so forth).
The man's a monster.
I do feel sorry for Santa.
He gets to empty his sack once a year, and that's usually down a chimney.
#ICanAlwaysLowerTheTone
Why the sympathy? The relief must be huge after so much restraint.
Not speaking from personal experience, but from conversations with friends who do it after a long break, apparently they go off quicker than a cheap Chinese firework
"Much of the Left has been eaten alive by Islamism. This truly regressive and oppressive political philosophy has all but destroyed a movement that once desired nothing less than the emancipation of the human race. The campaigns for equality that were right and good and brave in the 1960s have been exploited to within an inch of their lives, and actually probably far beyond that, by a political movement that hates everything those campaigns were fighting for. Women’s rights, children’s rights, gay rights, free speech, rejection of religious power over our lives, integration, free expression, music, art, freedom, love: the defence of every one of them given up bit by bit by a Left which has ceased to be worthy of the name."
Not going to change my opinion that there is the need for a UN resolution for political cover in any middle eastern military operations to deny islamists of the religious war card.
Which I will fully support once it is adopted. If Cameron doesn't want a UN resolution there is nothing to stop France from obtaining one.
Cameron has not said he does not want a UN resolution. He has simply said that he does not accept that such a resolution is a precondition of action. That must be right. We are under attack here.
One of the central attractions of Corbyn to members is that he doesn't lead in the traditional "follow me chaps" way that has become the norm in every party. He believes in debate. Setting up a defence review co-chaired by a supporter and an opponent of Trident makes sense if it's not to be a stitch-up. And the curt instruction to Livingstone to back down over his abusive comment shows he means the civil politics stuff too.
He's clearly not doing well in terms of getting good coverage and I'd quibble over how he puts some issues across. But I'd vote for him again if needed, and so, I think, would the great majority of the 60%. We are nowhere near the point where people feel he's had a fair shot at it.
When he was running for president, FDR asked his Brains Trust to 'weave together' the pro-free trade and pro-tariff positions. It was a nonsensical position economically, but a totally logical one politically. FDR didn't really regard trade as key issue, so wanted to draft an acceptable compromise, even if it made little sense. Illiterate vagueness in a bigger cause is justifiable.
Unfortunately, this isn't a case where such incoherence is useful. First, everyone knows what Corbyn thinks. He's a unilateralist, a passionate and convinced one. He offers a review not because he doesn't have a view, but because pressing his view now would be problematic.
Second, there's no fudge - not even compared to FDR's on free trade. Either you think it's reasonable to have nuclear weapons or you don't. How on earth can Eagle and Livingstone produce a compromise?
This is what is so odd about the Corbyn support. Nick says 'he believes in debate'. I'm sure he does. But he also has very strongly held moral views. If the Labour party adopted a pro-Nuclear position and Jeremy Corbyn was Prime Minister, would Jeremy be willing to follow a Conference motion on the use of nuclear weapons? Of course not. So why debate?
If the party decided for multilateralism, we would be asking the British people to spend billions of pounds on something our leader regarded as fundamentally immoral and would in no circumstance use. So let's not pretend he is merely hoping for guidance from the movement. He isn't. He would never use such weapons and believes them a monstrosity, and as such must see them as a waste of money. How can he tax people to fund it, rather than build housing, or cut taxes?
That's why I don't know what Corbyn having a fair go means. On issues like this, it isn't about him getting a chance to listen and agree a compromise. This is an issue he regards as fundamental to his politics. Rejecting it would be rejecting him. So if you know you disagree, you have to be prepared to reject him as leader. Or he has to be willing to breach his own morality, which he has said he won't do.
Comments
Was votes at 16 in the lib dem manifesto? you know, the one that was overwhelmingly rejected by the electorate a few short months ago?
Only Wednesday and I ran out of popcorn by lunchtime.
JC is not that clever, or devious. I wonder who is orchestrating this, and Momentum, and other moves to purify the party? Every day he seems more of a puppet for someone else...
The article linked by AndyJS is excellently written. I'd very much like to hear a left-winger try to defend - or refute the existence of - the situation that is described.
http://s3.amazonaws.com/media.wbur.org/wordpress/1/files/2015/11/Topline-WBUR-NH-Primary-4-Republicans.pdf
Trump 23 (+5)
Rubio 13 (+2)
Carson 13 (-3)
Cruz 8 (+2)
Bush 7 (0)
Kasich 7 (-3)
Christie 6 (-2)
Paul 5 (+2)
Fiorina 4 (-2)
Florida:
http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/the-buzz-florida-politics/fla-poll-trump-36-rubio-18-carson-15-cruz-10-bush-9/2254421
Trump 36 (+4)
Rubio 18 (-1)
Carson 15 (+5)
Cruz 10 (+4)
Bush 9 (-2)
Paul 4 (+1)
Connecticut
http://media.wix.com/ugd/3bebb2_985dbffed8754f57a2a9638e22611ad6.pdf
Trump 25 (first time from this pollster)
Rubio 14
Kasich 10
Bush 10
Carson 9
Paul 6
Cruz 6
Fiorina 4
Colorado
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/colorado/release-detail?ReleaseID=2303
Carson 25 (first time from this pollster)
Rubio 19
Trump 17
Cruz 14
Fiorina 5
Colorado is the first and only poll that Trump is not in the first 2 places.
New Jersey (last poll was from June)
http://publicmind.fdu.edu/2015/151117/final.pdf
Trump 31 (+20)
Rubio 18 (+12)
Carson 11(+5)
Christie 9 (-9)
Cruz 6 (+3)
Fiorina 5 (+5)
Bush 5 (-13)
Would you go letting your flat to friends of friends, who you have never met and didn't realise who they were, when two of the worlds most wanted men are on the run in your city, their mug shots are all over the media, oh and your flat just happens to have specially reinforced doors etc.
What are the chances of that?
I'm sure you are quite upset that our poor defence forces are still capable of providing the only ship in Europe able to give air defence to the French fleet.
http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/forsa.htm
Schauble is well-likewd - he's the only CDU politiican with higher peersonal ratings than Merkel (54 to 49). But he's not thought to be keen to be Chancellor
I continue to have my belief reinforced, namely that we should abolish the house of Lords and in the process revoke all life peerages.
Such is the mathematics almost all of these measures would have still passed and got to the Lords. And they would do whatever they could to block them.
Unable to accept that they were soundly thrashed in May, and determined to stick the boot in whenever they can, regardless of what the electorate wanted.
It will be dark until 8am and from 4.30pm. Almost anyone who works will have to make a conscious decision to vote in the dark.
Apart from the retired and very politically motivated, who will be arsed?
Admittedly at this moment that is the equivalent of saying someone is less paranoid than Stalin.
He's clearly not doing well in terms of getting good coverage and I'd quibble over how he puts some issues across. But I'd vote for him again if needed, and so, I think, would the great majority of the 60%. We are nowhere near the point where people feel he's had a fair shot at it.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/18/dominic-cummings-farage-anti-eu-vote-leave
And Assad is by far the least of the two evils at the moment. We have spent the last 5 centuries playing one side off against the other and allying with dodgy governments to win what we consider to be the more important battles. It is how Britain does business. We did it with all sorts of people we didn't like in WW2 and have spent the whole of the post war period backing up dictatorships around the world because it served our interests at the time. Indeed it is really only since we decided to start getting rid of dictators in the Middle East that we have seen the whole place fall apart.
And if you are going to make snide ill informed comments then do please pick the right target. I have never criticised our armed forces nor said we should not work with our closest neighbour if they need our help. I am confident they would do the same for us. Indeed they did by feeding us all the info they had on Argentine capabilities during the Falklands War and blocking the sale of more missiles. We owe them big time for their help.
Your rock awaits. Please crawl back under it.
Many years ago I sang in a large choir under a well-known conductor. He was famous for his 'do as I say, not as I do' attitude coupled with temper tantrums. He was criticised for not being sufficiently attentive to our desires when it came to choosing music, so he set up a committee to help him choose. He would always listen, carefully and politely, to our advice. Then he would go off and choose whatever he wanted anyway. I always got on well with him on a personal level (and not just because I was holding the bass line together so I was a valuable property from his point of view). But he was a bit of a nightmare to work with.
I see a lot of David in Jeremy Corbyn.
The question is, how long will it take before the Corbynistas are at that point? And, when they get there, what will they feel was the reason why the 'fair shot' didn't work? Not authentically left-wing enough, perhaps?
If Leave do win it'll be because of events, not the campaign.
I always used to wonder why Ms Harman didn't put herself up for election as leader. She was always Labour's fall-back whenever someone had to be thrown to the press to defend dodgy stuff.
Now, it's all too clear why she didn't. She knew she had no chance & contented herself with All-Women Short Lists and gender-balanced leadership rules. All that equality effort was really aimed at Labour itself, not society in general.
The puzzle to me now is why so many women are attracted by the left wing of Labour.
Do they like having a glass ceiling? Is it a sort of comfort blanket to them? Are they so absorbed by the exciting protests that they can't see there's no scope for them to fulfil their potential?
If Cameron doesn't want a UN resolution there is nothing to stop France from obtaining one.
Cameron has not said he does not want a UN resolution. He has simply said that he does not accept that such a resolution is a precondition of action. That must be right. We are under attack here.
Unfortunately, this isn't a case where such incoherence is useful. First, everyone knows what Corbyn thinks. He's a unilateralist, a passionate and convinced one. He offers a review not because he doesn't have a view, but because pressing his view now would be problematic.
Second, there's no fudge - not even compared to FDR's on free trade. Either you think it's reasonable to have nuclear weapons or you don't. How on earth can Eagle and Livingstone produce a compromise?
This is what is so odd about the Corbyn support. Nick says 'he believes in debate'. I'm sure he does. But he also has very strongly held moral views. If the Labour party adopted a pro-Nuclear position and Jeremy Corbyn was Prime Minister, would Jeremy be willing to follow a Conference motion on the use of nuclear weapons? Of course not. So why debate?
If the party decided for multilateralism, we would be asking the British people to spend billions of pounds on something our leader regarded as fundamentally immoral and would in no circumstance use. So let's not pretend he is merely hoping for guidance from the movement. He isn't. He would never use such weapons and believes them a monstrosity, and as such must see them as a waste of money. How can he tax people to fund it, rather than build housing, or cut taxes?
That's why I don't know what Corbyn having a fair go means. On issues like this, it isn't about him getting a chance to listen and agree a compromise. This is an issue he regards as fundamental to his politics. Rejecting it would be rejecting him. So if you know you disagree, you have to be prepared to reject him as leader. Or he has to be willing to breach his own morality, which he has said he won't do.