''She was hinting that the principal concern of the Republican Establishment was to prevent Trump running as an Independent. I think that they are right to be concerned. He could easily do a Ross Perot and let a Clinton into the White House.''
The Obama coalition was, essentially, blacks+hispanics+blue collar whites.
Trump's tactic is to frighten the blue collar whites
This is clearly right - Trump has to calculate that the number of people who voted Republican last time that he's frightening away, is significantly smaller than the white working class vote he's stripping away from the Dems. It assumes the vast majority of Republicans will vote for him while holding their nose because the alternative is Clinton.
The fact that Clinton is the Democratic candidate (as good as) helps Trump. Moderate republicans might choose some Democrats over Trump, but (and even though she's a centrist) not Hillary.
While many centrists might chose a Republican over Clinton but not Trump.
''She was hinting that the principal concern of the Republican Establishment was to prevent Trump running as an Independent. I think that they are right to be concerned. He could easily do a Ross Perot and let a Clinton into the White House.''
The Obama coalition was, essentially, blacks+hispanics+blue collar whites.
Trump's tactic is to frighten the blue collar whites
This is clearly right - Trump has to calculate that the number of people who voted Republican last time that he's frightening away, is significantly smaller than the white working class vote he's stripping away from the Dems. It assumes the vast majority of Republicans will vote for him while holding their nose because the alternative is Clinton.
The fact that Clinton is the Democratic candidate (as good as) helps Trump. Moderate republicans might choose some Democrats over Trump, but (and even though she's a centrist) not Hillary.
While many centrists might chose a Republican over Clinton but not Trump.
DTWNBPOTUSA
Most likely not, but he may well be the Republican candidate.
Most political discussions, centred around the idea that positions is linear, operating around one Left right Axis. I thnk it is more complicated that that, but the best simple module is that of 2 axis, one for social attitudes and one for economic attitudes. crating a chess board square, or diamond shape, rather than I line.
I would recommend the 'Would smallest political quiz' where in 10 questions you can see where you stand on this square, link here: https://www.theadvocates.org/quiz/quiz.php#
It won't surprise anybody that I'm right in the Libertarian corner, Where are you?
''She was hinting that the principal concern of the Republican Establishment was to prevent Trump running as an Independent. I think that they are right to be concerned. He could easily do a Ross Perot and let a Clinton into the White House.''
The Obama coalition was, essentially, blacks+hispanics+blue collar whites.
Trump's tactic is to frighten the blue collar whites
This is clearly right - Trump has to calculate that the number of people who voted Republican last time that he's frightening away, is significantly smaller than the white working class vote he's stripping away from the Dems. It assumes the vast majority of Republicans will vote for him while holding their nose because the alternative is Clinton.
The fact that Clinton is the Democratic candidate (as good as) helps Trump. Moderate republicans might choose some Democrats over Trump, but (and even though she's a centrist) not Hillary.
While many centrists might chose a Republican over Clinton but not Trump.
DTWNBPOTUSA
Judging by the number of centrists, that's not very high, 9% of republicans would vote for Clinton over Trump, 7% of democrats would vote for Trump over Clinton:
@KarinBBC: Mayor of London Boris Johnson statement: "The only reason I wouldn't go to some parts of New York is the real risk of meeting Donald Trump."
@KarinBBC: Mayor of London Boris Johnson statement: "The only reason I wouldn't go to some parts of New York is the real risk of meeting Donald Trump."
The first meeting between PM Boris and POTUS Trump should be a humdinger.
I think CCHQ is gunning for the mayoralty AND his seat in Tooting in 2020.....
Do you really think it's effective to complain that the son of a bus driver should take £130,000 from the trade unions to help fund his mayoral campaign when the criticism comes from Zak Goldsmith who was bequeathed several billions by his late father?
@KarinBBC: Mayor of London Boris Johnson statement: "The only reason I wouldn't go to some parts of New York is the real risk of meeting Donald Trump."
The first meeting between PM Boris and POTUS Trump should be a humdinger.
That is a good question, how does a British PM meet with a President Trump, especially in London? The same applies for a Dutch PM Wilders, or a French President Le Pen.
''She was hinting that the principal concern of the Republican Establishment was to prevent Trump running as an Independent. I think that they are right to be concerned. He could easily do a Ross Perot and let a Clinton into the White House.''
The Obama coalition was, essentially, blacks+hispanics+blue collar whites.
Trump's tactic is to frighten the blue collar whites
This is clearly right - Trump has to calculate that the number of people who voted Republican last time that he's frightening away, is significantly smaller than the white working class vote he's stripping away from the Dems. It assumes the vast majority of Republicans will vote for him while holding their nose because the alternative is Clinton.
The fact that Clinton is the Democratic candidate (as good as) helps Trump. Moderate republicans might choose some Democrats over Trump, but (and even though she's a centrist) not Hillary.
Not sure how that works out in his favour given the US system e.g. places like Florida are vital to win in order to become President. The Republicans have won there in the past due to a big support from the likes of the Cuban communities, Obama managed to win them over.
Not sure how Trump going big time anti-immigrant with endear him to the Cubans.
Maybe the USA would be better governed if its politics were not so dominated by worrying about specific groups (e.g. Cubans, Hispanics etc etc). Maybe the UK would be wise to turn away from following the American example before it is too late.
A small example: TSE, gent of this parish, have different views on quite a lot of things and so will fall into different political camps. I think it quite legitimate for a political party to target their offering to us on the basis of our political views and how we may be persuaded to vote differently as a result. For a political party to target their message based on the fact that TSE likes red shoes and I prefer a more sober, but highly polished, black is as valid (but less offensive) than it should target on the fact that TSE and I have slightly different skin colours and come from different religious backgrounds.
Identity politics is as revolting as any other form of discrimination on the basis of involuntary characteristics.
Most political discussions, centred around the idea that positions is linear, operating around one Left right Axis. I thnk it is more complicated that that, but the best simple module is that of 2 axis, one for social attitudes and one for economic attitudes. crating a chess board square, or diamond shape, rather than I line.
I would recommend the 'Would smallest political quiz' where in 10 questions you can see where you stand on this square, link here: https://www.theadvocates.org/quiz/quiz.php#
It won't surprise anybody that I'm right in the Libertarian corner, Where are you?
''She was hinting that the principal concern of the Republican Establishment was to prevent Trump running as an Independent. I think that they are right to be concerned. He could easily do a Ross Perot and let a Clinton into the White House.''
The Obama coalition was, essentially, blacks+hispanics+blue collar whites.
Trump's tactic is to frighten the blue collar whites
This is clearly right - Trump has to calculate that the number of people who voted Republican last time that he's frightening away, is significantly smaller than the white working class vote he's stripping away from the Dems. It assumes the vast majority of Republicans will vote for him while holding their nose because the alternative is Clinton.
The fact that Clinton is the Democratic candidate (as good as) helps Trump. Moderate republicans might choose some Democrats over Trump, but (and even though she's a centrist) not Hillary.
Not sure how that works out in his favour given the US system e.g. places like Florida are vital to win in order to become President. The Republicans have won there in the past due to a big support from the likes of the Cuban communities, Obama managed to win them over.
Not sure how Trump going big time anti-immigrant with endear him to the Cubans.
Maybe the USA would be better governed if its politics were not so dominated by worrying about specific groups (e.g. Cubans, Hispanics etc etc). Maybe the UK would be wise to turn away from following the American example before it is too late.
A small example: TSE, gent of this parish, have different views on quite a lot of things and so will fall into different political camps. I think it quite legitimate for a political party to target their offering to us on the basis of our political views and how we may be persuaded to vote differently as a result. For a political party to target their message based on the fact that TSE likes red shoes and I prefer a more sober, but highly polished, black is as valid (but less offensive) than it should target on the fact that TSE and I have slightly different skin colours and come from different religious backgrounds.
Identity politics is as revolting as any other form of discrimination on the basis of involuntary characteristics.
For me, it's not so much revolting as incredibly insulting. It reduces people to a single dimension.
Gay people are people. Transgender people are people. Muslims are people. And so on and so forth. I have been fortunate enough to travel widely and people are generally pleasant and friendly. Those that haven't been are well distributed across all genders, religions, sexual orientations etc. Assholes know no denomination. Identity politics is for those who are both lazy and stupid.
''She was hinting that the principal concern of the Republican Establishment was to prevent Trump running as an Independent. I think that they are right to be concerned. He could easily do a Ross Perot and let a Clinton into the White House.''
The Obama coalition was, essentially, blacks+hispanics+blue collar whites.
Trump's tactic is to frighten the blue collar whites
This is clearly right - Trump has to calculate that the number of people who voted Republican last time that he's frightening away, is significantly smaller than the white working class vote he's stripping away from the Dems. It assumes the vast majority of Republicans will vote for him while holding their nose because the alternative is Clinton.
The fact that Clinton is the Democratic candidate (as good as) helps Trump. Moderate republicans might choose some Democrats over Trump, but (and even though she's a centrist) not Hillary.
Not sure how that works out in his favour given the US system e.g. places like Florida are vital to win in order to become President. The Republicans have won there in the past due to a big support from the likes of the Cuban communities, Obama managed to win them over.
Not sure how Trump going big time anti-immigrant with endear him to the Cubans.
Maybe the USA would be better governed if its politics were not so dominated by worrying about specific groups (e.g. Cubans, Hispanics etc etc). Maybe the UK would be wise to turn away from following the American example before it is too late.
A small example: TSE, gent of this parish, have different views on quite a lot of things and so will fall into different political camps. I think it quite legitimate for a political party to target their offering to us on the basis of our political views and how we may be persuaded to vote differently as a result. For a political party to target their message based on the fact that TSE likes red shoes and I prefer a more sober, but highly polished, black is as valid (but less offensive) than it should target on the fact that TSE and I have slightly different skin colours and come from different religious backgrounds.
Identity politics is as revolting as any other form of discrimination on the basis of involuntary characteristics.
''She was hinting that the principal concern of the Republican Establishment was to prevent Trump running as an Independent. I think that they are right to be concerned. He could easily do a Ross Perot and let a Clinton into the White House.''
The Obama coalition was, essentially, blacks+hispanics+blue collar whites.
Trump's tactic is to frighten the blue collar whites
The fact that Clinton is the Democratic candidate (as good as) helps Trump. Moderate republicans might choose some Democrats over Trump, but (and even though she's a centrist) not Hillary.
Not sure how that works out in his favour given the US system e.g. places like Florida are vital to win in order to become President. The Republicans have won there in the past due to a big support from the likes of the Cuban communities, Obama managed to win them over.
Not sure how Trump going big time anti-immigrant with endear him to the Cubans.
Maybe the USA would be better governed if its politics were not so dominated by worrying about specific groups (e.g. Cubans, Hispanics etc etc). Maybe the UK would be wise to turn away from following the American example before it is too late.
A small example: TSE, gent of this parish, have different views on quite a lot of things and so will fall into different political camps. I think it quite legitimate for a political party to target their offering to us on the basis of our political views and how we may be persuaded to vote differently as a result. For a political party to target their message based on the fact that TSE likes red shoes and I prefer a more sober, but highly polished, black is as valid (but less offensive) than it should target on the fact that TSE and I have slightly different skin colours and come from different religious backgrounds.
Identity politics is as revolting as any other form of discrimination on the basis of involuntary characteristics.
That's american politics, since it's composed entirely of immigrants, identity in america goes a long way through it's history. Even now scandinavian immigrants who arrived in the northern great plains in the late 19th century still vote for left wing democrats in places like Minnesota, Wisconsin and Iowa, although their power has waned over the decades. Not to mention Irish-americans who still keep New York a democratic bastion since the middle of the 19th century. Mormons in Utah keep it a republican bastion ever since Utah became a state, etc etc.
I think CCHQ is gunning for the mayoralty AND his seat in Tooting in 2020.....
Do you really think it's effective to complain that the son of a bus driver should take £130,000 from the trade unions to help fund his mayoral campaign when the criticism comes from Zak Goldsmith who was bequeathed several billions by his late father?
I think where that campaign is effective is that, when taken as a whole, it shows Khan to be generally poor at sticking to his convictions. The man nominated corbyn - probably says a lot about his judgement.
''She was hinting that the principal concern of the Republican Establishment was to prevent Trump running as an Independent. I think that they are right to be concerned. He could easily do a Ross Perot and let a Clinton into the White House.''
The Obama coalition was, essentially, blacks+hispanics+blue collar whites.
Trump's tactic is to frighten the blue collar whites
This is clearly right - Trump has to calculate that the number of people who voted Republican last time that he's frightening away, is significantly smaller than the white working class vote he's stripping away from the Dems. It assumes the vast majority of Republicans will vote for him while holding their nose because the alternative is Clinton.
The fact that Clinton is the Democratic candidate (as good as) helps Trump. Moderate republicans might choose some Democrats over Trump, but (and even though she's a centrist) not Hillary.
Not sure how that works out in his favour given the US system e.g. places like Florida are vital to win in order to become President. The Republicans have won there in the past due to a big support from the likes of the Cuban communities, Obama managed to win them over.
Not sure how Trump going big time anti-immigrant with endear him to the Cubans.
Maybe the USA would be better governed if its politics were not so dominated by worrying about specific groups (e.g. Cubans, Hispanics etc etc). Maybe the UK would be wise to turn away from following the American example before it is too late.
A small example: TSE, gent of this parish, have different views on quite a lot of things and so will fall into different political camps. I think it quite legitimate for a political party to target their offering to us on the basis of our political views and how we may be persuaded to vote differently as a result. For a political party to target their message based on the fact that TSE likes red shoes and I prefer a more sober, but highly polished, black is as valid (but less offensive) than it should target on the fact that TSE and I have slightly different skin colours and come from different religious backgrounds.
Identity politics is as revolting as any other form of discrimination on the basis of involuntary characteristics.
I've always known that I'm sitting in a very small slice of a tremendously complicated political Venn diagram.
Most political discussions, centred around the idea that positions is linear, operating around one Left right Axis. I thnk it is more complicated that that, but the best simple module is that of 2 axis, one for social attitudes and one for economic attitudes. crating a chess board square, or diamond shape, rather than I line.
I would recommend the 'Would smallest political quiz' where in 10 questions you can see where you stand on this square, link here: https://www.theadvocates.org/quiz/quiz.php#
It won't surprise anybody that I'm right in the Libertarian corner, Where are you?
Most political discussions, centred around the idea that positions is linear, operating around one Left right Axis. I thnk it is more complicated that that, but the best simple module is that of 2 axis, one for social attitudes and one for economic attitudes. crating a chess board square, or diamond shape, rather than I line.
I would recommend the 'Would smallest political quiz' where in 10 questions you can see where you stand on this square, link here: https://www.theadvocates.org/quiz/quiz.php#
It won't surprise anybody that I'm right in the Libertarian corner, Where are you?
@KarinBBC: Mayor of London Boris Johnson statement: "The only reason I wouldn't go to some parts of New York is the real risk of meeting Donald Trump."
The first meeting between PM Boris and POTUS Trump should be a humdinger.
That is a good question, how does a British PM meet with a President Trump, especially in London? The same applies for a Dutch PM Wilders, or a French President Le Pen.
The answer is the same as all these things - the British PM will end up eating sh*t. It could be that Britain is being used as the Michael Fallon of the US - the one you get to say dumb things so it doesn't rebound on you.
I think CCHQ is gunning for the mayoralty AND his seat in Tooting in 2020.....
Do you really think it's effective to complain that the son of a bus driver should take £130,000 from the trade unions to help fund his mayoral campaign when the criticism comes from Zak Goldsmith who was bequeathed several billions by his late father?
Has anyone asked the Trade Union members whether they want their money to go to Khan?
I think CCHQ is gunning for the mayoralty AND his seat in Tooting in 2020.....
Do you really think it's effective to complain that the son of a bus driver should take £130,000 from the trade unions to help fund his mayoral campaign when the criticism comes from Zak Goldsmith who was bequeathed several billions by his late father?
Yes. Next question?
Most people sent so blinded by money as you think Roger, they are more interested in principles.
Most political discussions, centred around the idea that positions is linear, operating around one Left right Axis. I thnk it is more complicated that that, but the best simple module is that of 2 axis, one for social attitudes and one for economic attitudes. crating a chess board square, or diamond shape, rather than I line.
I would recommend the 'Would smallest political quiz' where in 10 questions you can see where you stand on this square, link here: https://www.theadvocates.org/quiz/quiz.php#
It won't surprise anybody that I'm right in the Libertarian corner, Where are you?
I got Left Liberal (unsurprisingly)!
I got libertarian which is accurate, the state should have minimal interference in our lives
Most political discussions, centred around the idea that positions is linear, operating around one Left right Axis. I thnk it is more complicated that that, but the best simple module is that of 2 axis, one for social attitudes and one for economic attitudes. crating a chess board square, or diamond shape, rather than I line.
I would recommend the 'Would smallest political quiz' where in 10 questions you can see where you stand on this square, link here: https://www.theadvocates.org/quiz/quiz.php#
It won't surprise anybody that I'm right in the Libertarian corner, Where are you?
I got Left Liberal (unsurprisingly)!
I got libertarian which is accurate, the state should have minimal interference in our lives
Yep I got Libertarian as well. 90% on both social and economic issues.
The 2015 election was decided off the back of a relatively benign economic background. You know how a recession can change political views.
Don't go laying Corbyn next PM at ~ 9-1 just yet...
If we have a recession, 2020 will be like 1992 with knobs on.
It depends whether Labour replace Corbyn and McDonnell with people who are credible.
Otherwise, it doesn't matter what the economic circumstances are, what the government does, Labour won't win the next election.
A Benn-led Labour would IMO have atleast a 40% chance of beating an Osborne-led Tories.
You can quote me on that.
"Danny thinks a Benn led Labour Party would most likely lose against an Osborne led Tory party" - something like that?
:-)
I agree, a Benn led Labour party would most likely lose, the biggest factor for it's loss would be a complete abandonment by it's Labour voters. A secondary issue would be that Benn is an empty shell, there is nothing in it, pretty much like a bad egg.
Do you really think it's effective to complain that the son of a bus driver should take £130,000 from the trade unions to help fund his mayoral campaign when the criticism comes from Zak Goldsmith who was bequeathed several billions by his late father?
It was only about a quarter of one billion, so a mere 1900 times more than the figure for Khan!
And why stop there? Why not say "£250 million from the leader of a rival party"!
There are things that need to be grappled though. These peoples reactions havent come from nowhere. They've seen how islam is tearing apart the world. Though I doubt they do know, but Mosques and college islamic socities have (along with jails) been the cornerstone of extremist preaching and recruitment amongst resident populations.
In that context, their anger is understandable. It's only a phobia if the fear is irrational. There is nothing irrational about fearing a growth of islam within your own community.
Most political discussions, centred around the idea that positions is linear, operating around one Left right Axis. I thnk it is more complicated that that, but the best simple module is that of 2 axis, one for social attitudes and one for economic attitudes. crating a chess board square, or diamond shape, rather than I line.
I would recommend the 'Would smallest political quiz' where in 10 questions you can see where you stand on this square, link here: https://www.theadvocates.org/quiz/quiz.php#
It won't surprise anybody that I'm right in the Libertarian corner, Where are you?
I got Left Liberal (unsurprisingly)!
I got libertarian which is accurate, the state should have minimal interference in our lives
Yep I got Libertarian as well. 90% on both social and economic issues.
Most political discussions, centred around the idea that positions is linear, operating around one Left right Axis. I thnk it is more complicated that that, but the best simple module is that of 2 axis, one for social attitudes and one for economic attitudes. crating a chess board square, or diamond shape, rather than I line.
I would recommend the 'Would smallest political quiz' where in 10 questions you can see where you stand on this square, link here: https://www.theadvocates.org/quiz/quiz.php#
It won't surprise anybody that I'm right in the Libertarian corner, Where are you?
I got Left Liberal (unsurprisingly)!
I got libertarian which is accurate, the state should have minimal interference in our lives
Yep I got Libertarian as well. 90% on both social and economic issues.
Some of my conservative acquaintances claim to be libertarian without any hint of irony.
The 2015 election was decided off the back of a relatively benign economic background. You know how a recession can change political views.
Don't go laying Corbyn next PM at ~ 9-1 just yet...
If we have a recession, 2020 will be like 1992 with knobs on.
It depends whether Labour replace Corbyn and McDonnell with people who are credible.
Otherwise, it doesn't matter what the economic circumstances are, what the government does, Labour won't win the next election.
A Benn-led Labour would IMO have atleast a 40% chance of beating an Osborne-led Tories.
You can quote me on that.
"Danny thinks a Benn led Labour Party would most likely lose against an Osborne led Tory party" - something like that?
:-)
I agree, a Benn led Labour party would most likely lose, the biggest factor for it's loss would be a complete abandonment by it's Labour voters. A secondary issue would be that Benn is an empty shell, there is nothing in it, pretty much like a bad egg.
Most political discussions, centred around the idea that positions is linear, operating around one Left right Axis. I thnk it is more complicated that that, but the best simple module is that of 2 axis, one for social attitudes and one for economic attitudes. crating a chess board square, or diamond shape, rather than I line.
I would recommend the 'Would smallest political quiz' where in 10 questions you can see where you stand on this square, link here: https://www.theadvocates.org/quiz/quiz.php#
It won't surprise anybody that I'm right in the Libertarian corner, Where are you?
I got Left Liberal (unsurprisingly)!
I got libertarian which is accurate, the state should have minimal interference in our lives
Yep I got Libertarian as well. 90% on both social and economic issues.
Some of my conservative acquaintances claim to be libertarian without any hint of irony.
Most political discussions, centred around the idea that positions is linear, operating around one Left right Axis. I thnk it is more complicated that that, but the best simple module is that of 2 axis, one for social attitudes and one for economic attitudes. crating a chess board square, or diamond shape, rather than I line.
I would recommend the 'Would smallest political quiz' where in 10 questions you can see where you stand on this square, link here: https://www.theadvocates.org/quiz/quiz.php#
It won't surprise anybody that I'm right in the Libertarian corner, Where are you?
I got Left Liberal (unsurprisingly)!
I got libertarian which is accurate, the state should have minimal interference in our lives
Yep I got Libertarian as well. 90% on both social and economic issues.
"snip"
Its a bit like claiming to be a socialist worker.
LOL. Thats fantastic. I can honestly say I never thought of that before. :-)
"This is clearly right - Trump has to calculate that the number of people who voted Republican last time that he's frightening away, is significantly smaller than the white working class vote he's stripping away from the Dems. It assumes the vast majority of Republicans will vote for him while holding their nose because the alternative is Clinton. "
Absolutely. So this makes what Trump has done today smart politics.
The 2015 election was decided off the back of a relatively benign economic background. You know how a recession can change political views.
Don't go laying Corbyn next PM at ~ 9-1 just yet...
If we have a recession, 2020 will be like 1992 with knobs on.
It depends whether Labour replace Corbyn and McDonnell with people who are credible.
Otherwise, it doesn't matter what the economic circumstances are, what the government does, Labour won't win the next election.
A Benn-led Labour would IMO have atleast a 40% chance of beating an Osborne-led Tories.
You can quote me on that.
"Danny thinks a Benn led Labour Party would most likely lose against an Osborne led Tory party" - something like that?
:-)
I agree, a Benn led Labour party would most likely lose, the biggest factor for it's loss would be a complete abandonment by it's Labour voters. A secondary issue would be that Benn is an empty shell, there is nothing in it, pretty much like a bad egg.
Take it you don't like Benn then !!!
The the vast majority of people who like Benn are currently residing on PB , the government benches of the house, and Liz Kendall's afternoon tea parties in Rochdale.
This would indicate that the NCTC believes IS or other jihadi groups have deliberately attempted to place people in the refugee stream in order to infiltrate them into the US. Trump seems to be the only one listening to the alarm bells being rung by the intelligence community.
Amused to see Cameron attacking Trump, savaged by a sheep. Will the government still kowtow to Washington DC if Trump is elected President? His foreign policy positions seem the very repudiation of Cameron's hare brained neocon interventionism. Self funding sets a candidate free.
I also see the press is pushing that Monmouth poll of Iowa with its odd sampling criteria. The CNN Trump 33% Cruz 20% Rubio 11% seems more accurate. Still Iowa can throw up some odd results and should be ignored for projecting to the rest of the country.
The 2015 election was decided off the back of a relatively benign economic background. You know how a recession can change political views.
Don't go laying Corbyn next PM at ~ 9-1 just yet...
If we have a recession, 2020 will be like 1992 with knobs on.
It depends whether Labour replace Corbyn and McDonnell with people who are credible.
Otherwise, it doesn't matter what the economic circumstances are, what the government does, Labour won't win the next election.
A Benn-led Labour would IMO have atleast a 40% chance of beating an Osborne-led Tories.
You can quote me on that.
"Danny thinks a Benn led Labour Party would most likely lose against an Osborne led Tory party" - something like that?
:-)
I agree, a Benn led Labour party would most likely lose, the biggest factor for it's loss would be a complete abandonment by it's Labour voters. A secondary issue would be that Benn is an empty shell, there is nothing in it, pretty much like a bad egg.
I think you're confusing voters and members again.
At the moment, the Corbyn leadership is belying Michel's implication that leaders are always more centrist than their party...
Or, thinking about it, maybe Corbyn is confirming it. The members of the labour party must be more left wing than Corbyn to vote for continued opposition so enthusiastically...
The spewing of the endless unintelligible right-wing bile from Plato and her ilk is why quite a few people have left this site. However, I do believe in people articulating what they believe in (even if it makes little sense) so my advice to The Apocalypse is just ignore her posts.
.
Quite an instructive spat on the other thread which shows how far to the right the centre of gravity is on here. An excellent newish (?) left of centre poster is told their opinion is not going to be listened to by the cognoscenti by one who claims to represent the way the site thinks...
Fortunately Apocalypse seems to be made of sterner stuff.
The CBI have accused Cameron of "a lack of leadership" over Heathrow.
Amazing how the penny is starting to drop.
Yawn.
How old are you? Haven't you yet worked out that people pushing for specific policies always say things like that?
I expect you know that, but your bizarre obsession with Cameron - which seems to be the most dominant factor in everything you ever post here - blinds you to it when he's involved.
The CBI have accused Cameron of "a lack of leadership" over Heathrow.
Amazing how the penny is starting to drop.
Yawn.
How old are you? Haven't you yet worked out that people pushing for specific policies always say things like that?
I expect you know that, but your bizarre obsession with Cameron - which seems to be the most dominant factor in everything you ever post here - blinds you to it when he's involved.
The CBI have accused Cameron of "a lack of leadership" over Heathrow.
Amazing how the penny is starting to drop.
Yawn.
How old are you? Haven't you yet worked out that people pushing for specific policies always say things like that?
I expect you know that, but your bizarre obsession with Cameron - which seems to be the most dominant factor in everything you ever post here - blinds you to it when he's involved.
Haha! You replied a couple of minutes after I expected but no matter.
In the link below posted by TSE Cameron promised not to play politics, now he he is blatantly delaying a decision and doing just that.
You keep defending him, I'll keep pointing out his deficiencies - deal?
The 2015 election was decided off the back of a relatively benign economic background. You know how a recession can change political views.
Don't go laying Corbyn next PM at ~ 9-1 just yet...
If we have a recession, 2020 will be like 1992 with knobs on.
It depends whether Labour replace Corbyn and McDonnell with people who are credible.
Otherwise, it doesn't matter what the economic circumstances are, what the government does, Labour won't win the next election.
A Benn-led Labour would IMO have atleast a 40% chance of beating an Osborne-led Tories.
You can quote me on that.
"Danny thinks a Benn led Labour Party would most likely lose against an Osborne led Tory party" - something like that?
:-)
I agree, a Benn led Labour party would most likely lose, the biggest factor for it's loss would be a complete abandonment by it's Labour voters. A secondary issue would be that Benn is an empty shell, there is nothing in it, pretty much like a bad egg.
Take it you don't like Benn then !!!
The the vast majority of people who like Benn are currently residing on PB , the government benches of the house, and Liz Kendall's afternoon tea parties in Rochdale.
It is not often that the past of the Labour party looks like the future. But when people who are quoting Mao are in the leadership, the rules go out of the window.
The only thing that can be said for Corbyn is that he stopped Burnham from winning.
Could you imagine? Eyelashes as leader of the opposition!
The CBI have accused Cameron of "a lack of leadership" over Heathrow.
Amazing how the penny is starting to drop.
Yawn.
How old are you? Haven't you yet worked out that people pushing for specific policies always say things like that?
I expect you know that, but your bizarre obsession with Cameron - which seems to be the most dominant factor in everything you ever post here - blinds you to it when he's involved.
The 2015 election was decided off the back of a relatively benign economic background. You know how a recession can change political views.
Don't go laying Corbyn next PM at ~ 9-1 just yet...
If we have a recession, 2020 will be like 1992 with knobs on.
It depends whether Labour replace Corbyn and McDonnell with people who are credible.
Otherwise, it doesn't matter what the economic circumstances are, what the government does, Labour won't win the next election.
A Benn-led Labour would IMO have atleast a 40% chance of beating an Osborne-led Tories.
You can quote me on that.
"Danny thinks a Benn led Labour Party would most likely lose against an Osborne led Tory party" - something like that?
:-)
I agree, a Benn led Labour party would most likely lose, the biggest factor for it's loss would be a complete abandonment by it's Labour voters. A secondary issue would be that Benn is an empty shell, there is nothing in it, pretty much like a bad egg.
Take it you don't like Benn then !!!
The the vast majority of people who like Benn are currently residing on PB , the government benches of the house, and Liz Kendall's afternoon tea parties in Rochdale.
Do you really think it's effective to complain that the son of a bus driver should take £130,000 from the trade unions to help fund his mayoral campaign when the criticism comes from Zak Goldsmith who was bequeathed several billions by his late father?
It was only about a quarter of one billion, so a mere 1900 times more than the figure for Khan! And why stop there? Why not say "£250 million from the leader of a rival party"! Henry
There are presumably limits on election expenditure and so personal wealth does not come into it. Is there any evidence that Goldsmith is funding himself? The inference is about influence. Money buying trade union influence.
The CBI have accused Cameron of "a lack of leadership" over Heathrow.
Amazing how the penny is starting to drop.
Yawn.
How old are you? Haven't you yet worked out that people pushing for specific policies always say things like that?
I expect you know that, but your bizarre obsession with Cameron - which seems to be the most dominant factor in everything you ever post here - blinds you to it when he's involved.
Well he's clearly kicked the can down the road for rather transparent mayoral reasons.
Anyway here he was happily in 2009:
The man the polls say will be the next Prime Minister has made a personal pledge that there will be no third runway at Heathrow - “No ifs, no buts”.
'Mr Goldsmith, the MP for Richmond Park, said he stood by his pledge to resign and trigger a by-election if Heathrow expansion was backed by the Conservative Party, but said he did not think this would happen.
"A decision in favour of Heathrow expansion is really just a decision in favour of delay and fudge," he added.'
It'll clearly go ahead once Zac has won or lost the mayoralty.
Do you really think it's effective to complain that the son of a bus driver should take £130,000 from the trade unions to help fund his mayoral campaign when the criticism comes from Zak Goldsmith who was bequeathed several billions by his late father?
It was only about a quarter of one billion, so a mere 1900 times more than the figure for Khan!
And why stop there? Why not say "£250 million from the leader of a rival party"!
Henry
Perhaps a good place for Khan to start his campaign
The CBI have accused Cameron of "a lack of leadership" over Heathrow.
Amazing how the penny is starting to drop.
Yawn.
How old are you? Haven't you yet worked out that people pushing for specific policies always say things like that?
I expect you know that, but your bizarre obsession with Cameron - which seems to be the most dominant factor in everything you ever post here - blinds you to it when he's involved.
The CBI have accused Cameron of "a lack of leadership" over Heathrow.
Amazing how the penny is starting to drop.
Yawn.
How old are you? Haven't you yet worked out that people pushing for specific policies always say things like that?
I expect you know that, but your bizarre obsession with Cameron - which seems to be the most dominant factor in everything you ever post here - blinds you to it when he's involved.
The CBI have accused Cameron of "a lack of leadership" over Heathrow.
Amazing how the penny is starting to drop.
Yawn.
How old are you? Haven't you yet worked out that people pushing for specific policies always say things like that?
I expect you know that, but your bizarre obsession with Cameron - which seems to be the most dominant factor in everything you ever post here - blinds you to it when he's involved.
The CBI have accused Cameron of "a lack of leadership" over Heathrow.
Amazing how the penny is starting to drop.
Yawn.
How old are you? Haven't you yet worked out that people pushing for specific policies always say things like that?
I expect you know that, but your bizarre obsession with Cameron - which seems to be the most dominant factor in everything you ever post here - blinds you to it when he's involved.
Richard Nabavi - Cameron's loyal toady on PB
Not while I'm around, sunshine.
Peerage?
Come on then JohnO, defend Dave's Heathrow manoeuvrings
Haha! You replied a couple of minutes after I expected but no matter.
In the link below posted by TSE Cameron promised not to play politics, now he he is blatantly delaying a decision and doing just that.
You keep defending him, I'll keep pointing out his deficiencies - deal?
I'm not defending him, I'm attacking you. Your remark was just puerile. All leaders have to choose their battles and their timing.
You might just as well say 'Cameron has exhibited extremely strong leadership, pushing through HS2, gay marriage, welfare reform, NHS reform, the bedroom tax, and his commitment to the aid budget, and resisting calls for an EU referendum before renegotiation, and resisting calls not to hold an EU referendum at all'.
Funnily enough, I don't think I've ever seen you say anything like that. I wonder why not.
The CBI have accused Cameron of "a lack of leadership" over Heathrow.
Amazing how the penny is starting to drop.
Yawn.
How old are you? Haven't you yet worked out that people pushing for specific policies always say things like that?
I expect you know that, but your bizarre obsession with Cameron - which seems to be the most dominant factor in everything you ever post here - blinds you to it when he's involved.
Richard Nabavi - Cameron's loyal toady on PB
Not while I'm around, sunshine.
Peerage?
Come on then JohnO, defend Dave's Heathrow manouvreings
The CBI have accused Cameron of "a lack of leadership" over Heathrow.
Amazing how the penny is starting to drop.
Yawn.
How old are you? Haven't you yet worked out that people pushing for specific policies always say things like that?
I expect you know that, but your bizarre obsession with Cameron - which seems to be the most dominant factor in everything you ever post here - blinds you to it when he's involved.
Richard Nabavi - Cameron's loyal toady on PB
Not while I'm around, sunshine.
Peerage?
Come on then JohnO, defend Dave's Heathrow manoeuvrings
Has all the hallmarks of Osborne.
As we know Osborne is a genius and master strategist.
The CBI have accused Cameron of "a lack of leadership" over Heathrow.
Amazing how the penny is starting to drop.
Yawn.
How old are you? Haven't you yet worked out that people pushing for specific policies always say things like that?
I expect you know that, but your bizarre obsession with Cameron - which seems to be the most dominant factor in everything you ever post here - blinds you to it when he's involved.
Richard Nabavi - Cameron's loyal toady on PB
Not while I'm around, sunshine.
Peerage?
Come on then JohnO, defend Dave's Heathrow manoeuvrings
Has all the hallmarks of Osborne.
As we know Osborne is a genius and master strategist.
The CBI have accused Cameron of "a lack of leadership" over Heathrow.
Amazing how the penny is starting to drop.
Yawn.
How old are you? Haven't you yet worked out that people pushing for specific policies always say things like that?
I expect you know that, but your bizarre obsession with Cameron - which seems to be the most dominant factor in everything you ever post here - blinds you to it when he's involved.
Richard Nabavi - Cameron's loyal toady on PB
Not while I'm around, sunshine.
Peerage?
Come on then JohnO, defend Dave's Heathrow manoeuvrings
Has all the hallmarks of Osborne.
As we know Osborne is a genius and master strategist.
In George we trust.
It's so amusingly transparent though. Or can the average man on the street not see out an open window ?
Haha! You replied a couple of minutes after I expected but no matter.
In the link below posted by TSE Cameron promised not to play politics, now he he is blatantly delaying a decision and doing just that.
You keep defending him, I'll keep pointing out his deficiencies - deal?
I'm not defending him, I'm attacking you. Your remark was just puerile. All leaders have to choose their battles and their timing.
You might just as well say 'Cameron has exhibited extremely strong leadership, pushing through HS2, gay marriage, welfare reform, NHS reform, the bedroom tax, and his commiotment to the aid budget, and resisting calls for an EU referendum before renegotiation, and resisting calls not to hold an EU referendum at all'.
Funnily enough, I don't think I've ever seen you say anything like that. I wonder why not.
At least you're honest in attacking me ie playing the man not the ball.
The link below points out clearly Cameron's view on Heathrow now for purely political reasons he's changing tack. As I previously said, I'm very happy to point out his shortcomings all the while you're prepared to slavishly worship his every move.
The CBI have accused Cameron of "a lack of leadership" over Heathrow.
Amazing how the penny is starting to drop.
Yawn.
How old are you? Haven't you yet worked out that people pushing for specific policies always say things like that?
I expect you know that, but your bizarre obsession with Cameron - which seems to be the most dominant factor in everything you ever post here - blinds you to it when he's involved.
Richard Nabavi - Cameron's loyal toady on PB
Not while I'm around, sunshine.
Peerage?
Come on then JohnO, defend Dave's Heathrow manoeuvrings
Has all the hallmarks of Osborne.
As we know Osborne is a genius and master strategist.
In George we trust.
It's so amusingly transparent though. Or can the average man on the street not see out an open window ?
They don't care and they don't notice.
Only way they would notice it is if Cameron announced it whilst eating a bacon sandwich badly.
Comments
DTWNBPOTUSA
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3350888/Horror-children-babies-14-people-killed-Russian-airstrikes-rebel-held-areas-Syria.html?ito=social-twitter_mailonline
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/04/politics/full-results-poll-general-election-2016/index.html
For a comparison, with Carson 9% of republicans vote for Hillary.
With Rubio it's 10%.
With Cruz it's 13%.
The same applies for a Dutch PM Wilders, or a French President Le Pen.
A small example: TSE, gent of this parish, have different views on quite a lot of things and so will fall into different political camps. I think it quite legitimate for a political party to target their offering to us on the basis of our political views and how we may be persuaded to vote differently as a result. For a political party to target their message based on the fact that TSE likes red shoes and I prefer a more sober, but highly polished, black is as valid (but less offensive) than it should target on the fact that TSE and I have slightly different skin colours and come from different religious backgrounds.
Identity politics is as revolting as any other form of discrimination on the basis of involuntary characteristics.
Gay people are people. Transgender people are people. Muslims are people. And so on and so forth. I have been fortunate enough to travel widely and people are generally pleasant and friendly. Those that haven't been are well distributed across all genders, religions, sexual orientations etc. Assholes know no denomination. Identity politics is for those who are both lazy and stupid.
I think I might be turning into SeanT on this front for the next few months.
I think Jez is safe if Khan becomes London Mayor and I now think he will (sorry Lynton)
Even now scandinavian immigrants who arrived in the northern great plains in the late 19th century still vote for left wing democrats in places like Minnesota, Wisconsin and Iowa, although their power has waned over the decades.
Not to mention Irish-americans who still keep New York a democratic bastion since the middle of the 19th century.
Mormons in Utah keep it a republican bastion ever since Utah became a state, etc etc.
Anyway, tragic whatever the number. Let's hope the area is safely back in Government control soon.
8/13
Still available with BetVictor.
Full disclosure on at around 4-5 for £150.
LOL, Brilliant, Absolutely brilliant!!
You can quote me on that.
What is it?
Most people sent so blinded by money as you think Roger, they are more interested in principles.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8h_v_our_Q
http://www.vox.com/2015/12/1/9822452/muslim-islamophobia-trump
:-)
And why stop there? Why not say "£250 million from the leader of a rival party"!
Henry
In that context, their anger is understandable. It's only a phobia if the fear is irrational. There is nothing irrational about fearing a growth of islam within your own community.
Its a bit like claiming to be a socialist worker.
Turns out Zac would resign as MP pre-May if Heathrow go-ahead @duncanpoundcake @krishgm But not resign as Mayor if they approve after May.
Nothing compared to what is meted out to christians in muslim countries,.
Absolutely. So this makes what Trump has done today smart politics.
Amazing how the penny is starting to drop.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55NxKENplG4
It takes a sidewise look, mostly at his position and language, rather than judgmental.
This would indicate that the NCTC believes IS or other jihadi groups have deliberately attempted to place people in the refugee stream in order to infiltrate them into the US. Trump seems to be the only one listening to the alarm bells being rung by the intelligence community.
Amused to see Cameron attacking Trump, savaged by a sheep. Will the government still kowtow to Washington DC if Trump is elected President? His foreign policy positions seem the very repudiation of Cameron's hare brained neocon interventionism. Self funding sets a candidate free.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/commentators/donald-trump-is-much-derided-but-he-is-right-about-the-middle-east-a6698171.html
I also see the press is pushing that Monmouth poll of Iowa with its odd sampling criteria. The CNN Trump 33% Cruz 20% Rubio 11% seems more accurate. Still Iowa can throw up some odd results and should be ignored for projecting to the rest of the country.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1ZiZdz5nao&feature=youtu.be
I think you're confusing voters and members again.
At the moment, the Corbyn leadership is belying Michel's implication that leaders are always more centrist than their party...
Or, thinking about it, maybe Corbyn is confirming it. The members of the labour party must be more left wing than Corbyn to vote for continued opposition so enthusiastically...
Quite an instructive spat on the other thread which shows how far to the right the centre of gravity is on here. An excellent newish (?) left of centre poster is told their opinion is not going to be listened to by the cognoscenti by one who claims to represent the way the site thinks...
Fortunately Apocalypse seems to be made of sterner stuff.
How old are you? Haven't you yet worked out that people pushing for specific policies always say things like that?
I expect you know that, but your bizarre obsession with Cameron - which seems to be the most dominant factor in everything you ever post here - blinds you to it when he's involved.
In the link below posted by TSE Cameron promised not to play politics, now he he is blatantly delaying a decision and doing just that.
You keep defending him, I'll keep pointing out his deficiencies - deal?
The only thing that can be said for Corbyn is that he stopped Burnham from winning.
Could you imagine? Eyelashes as leader of the opposition!
The inference is about influence. Money buying trade union influence.
Anyway here he was happily in 2009:
The man the polls say will be the next Prime Minister has made a personal pledge that there will be no third runway at Heathrow - “No ifs, no buts”.
http://www.richmondandtwickenhamtimes.co.uk/news/4694685.David_Cameron___No_third_runway___no_ifs__no_buts_/
"Promising" a decision by the end of the year:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33341548
A daft thing to say considering Zac's position.
'Mr Goldsmith, the MP for Richmond Park, said he stood by his pledge to resign and trigger a by-election if Heathrow expansion was backed by the Conservative Party, but said he did not think this would happen.
"A decision in favour of Heathrow expansion is really just a decision in favour of delay and fudge," he added.'
It'll clearly go ahead once Zac has won or lost the mayoralty.
PublicPolicyPolling @ppppolls 21m21 minutes ago
Islamopobic views are a central feature of Trump's base in North Carolina: http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2015/12/trump-getting-stronger-in-nc-islamophobia-helps-fuel-that-strength.html …
PublicPolicyPolling @ppppolls 23m23 minutes ago
Trump has gained support in every NC poll we've done since July- 16% to 24% to 26% to 31% to now 33%: http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2015/12/trump-getting-stronger-in-nc-islamophobia-helps-fuel-that-strength.html …
PublicPolicyPolling @ppppolls 25m25 minutes ago
Our new NC poll- Trump 33, Cruz 16, Carson/Rubio 14. No one else over 5%: http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2015/12/trump-getting-stronger-in-nc-islamophobia-helps-fuel-that-strength.html …
Peerage?
You might just as well say 'Cameron has exhibited extremely strong leadership, pushing through HS2, gay marriage, welfare reform, NHS reform, the bedroom tax, and his commitment to the aid budget, and resisting calls for an EU referendum before renegotiation, and resisting calls not to hold an EU referendum at all'.
Funnily enough, I don't think I've ever seen you say anything like that. I wonder why not.
As we know Osborne is a genius and master strategist.
In George we trust.
That is only one state though, right?
The link below points out clearly Cameron's view on Heathrow now for purely political reasons he's changing tack. As I previously said, I'm very happy to point out his shortcomings all the while you're prepared to slavishly worship his every move.
Only way they would notice it is if Cameron announced it whilst eating a bacon sandwich badly.