The party would not be splitting if Corbyn accepted he cannot lead it when 80% of MPs do not have confidence in his leadership. The split will occur because most party members do not believe that Labour is primarily a parliamentary party. That's not a policy difference, but it is a philosophical chasm.
Sorry but if all these people just want a protest movement and don't want to win power... what were they doing in 2010 when they voted for the Milibands?
Splitting your party is probably the closest thing to a guarantee of electoral defeat in a FPTP system.
As is having Jeremy Corbyn as your leader.
Labour is utterly buggered. Its coalition has been irrevocably broken. The question is what's the best and quickest way to build a credible, centre left alternative to the Tories from here?
Sorry didn't quite finish my thought there... splitting your party almost guarantees defeat. But to split your party and then essentially stand on the same platform!? That's just a recipe for halving your vote!
If you think Corbyn is electoral doom- then by far the quickest way to build a credible, centre left alternative is to wait for him to leave. He will lose the next general election whenever it is- and then the members will vote him out. He's 67 anyway. He's probably not enjoying this job all that much.
Labour aren't in a position where they can afford to have another election where they go backwards. They already need a 10% swing to get a majority. Going into an election with Corbyn could write off the next election before the government's next term has even started.
I know you're a bit full of yourself - but when you've the status of Zerohedge - maybe I'll pay your posts the same attention.
The original source is from the German press. Zerohedge are a bit flakey . Unfortunately, while I can order beer in every major European language, that is as far as my linguistic skills go.
I don't claim Zerohedge are oracles, they're collectively more informed than a single PB person who's recently become a market analyst.
You, mean apart from the founder of Zero Hedge being banned from working in the securities industry, and the whole site having been sued for taking money from hedge funds to spread false stories about companies?
Do you have a link to any info on the lawsuit? My Googling skills are somewhat lacking.
Incidentally, I see turnout at the referendum among young voters is estimated by Survation as being much higher than first estimated, at over 60%. This has implications for the way polls downweight certainty to vote among the young (though among the very elderly apparently it exceeded 90%, which sounds a bit implausible).
90% for elderly is more plausible than 64% for 18-24 year olds IMO.
I don't believe the 90% for one moment, seeing the magnitude of the physical and mental barriers to getting routine stuff done that so many of that age face (assuming that age = 75+).
But at least we are allowed to disbelieve polls now. We must be quite close to the point where psephology ceases to be an actual thing, like phrenology did.
1. Lose to Corbyn. 2. Start talking to Garrard, Taylor, Mills, Nasir and Rosenfeld. Sound them out about seed funding for a new party based on centre left principles. 3. Come up with a name for the party, including the word Labour. 4. Sound out how many MPs across all parties they can bring over. 5. Decide whether they are in favour or against Scottish independence. 6. Do a count, how many MPs will come over, if more than 120 are willing to come over, threaten the unions with the loss of official opposition status. 7. If the unions say no then make it happen.
I love the fact that you name those Labour donors as if we'd all know who they are! I know Mills but not the others. however we hit upon the core problem. How is such a party to be funded? To do without big donors and trade unions you'd probably need the better part of a million members. Where will they come from?
Which is why they'll need to talk to the big donors about seed funding. After that they'll need to build up members and fast. Start engaging the new members and see if the likes of our own @SouthamObserver, @Jobabob, @Roger and @tyson are more than just all talk. Solicit donations of up to £1000 per year from as many middle class types as possible.
Really? Regularly? To replace the Unite funding et al of ...
At least 14 unions affiliate to Labour but a huge bulk of the funding comes from five unions that in 2014 affiliated 2,032,297 political levy paying members who provide the party with £5.55m in annual income.
They'll be a new party with no real outgoings, no local party offices and no debt. They'll need the seed funding to get a HQ building and after that they'll have to build up slowly and begin to get councillors and members to defect to the new party.
Its not easy, but the alternative of knuckling under the hard left for another 10 years seems bleak enough to try.
And after the first blush of summer wears off?
I just don't see it as very likely. A look at past Labour donation registrations could be a sign of the future post Cash For Honours. It'd take quite a culture change for most Labour members to cough up more.
And if more middle class urban Labour voters do pay up - what link does that have with blue collar or underclass voters they claim to be for?
It's a schism.
They will get as much as Tories. There are plenty of left of centre people who want their side to win and hate Tories. Liberals might lose some funding.
The party would not be splitting if Corbyn accepted he cannot lead it when 80% of MPs do not have confidence in his leadership. The split will occur because most party members do not believe that Labour is primarily a parliamentary party. That's not a policy difference, but it is a philosophical chasm.
I agree. I've never heard of the idea (about any party, in particular Labour) that the party is primarily a parliamentary party. Commitment to parliamentary democracy is one thing, the idea that the party is primarily a vehicle for the modest number of people who currently enjoy the Labour label is another, and a complete novelty. I've never met an MP who didn't concede that they were elected primarily because of their party affiliation, and it certainly doesn't confer ownership.
See Clause One, Nick.
Labour has been committed to gaining power through the parliamentary process throughout its history. That has always meant the leader must have the confidence of the parliamentary party. Clearly, a lot of members no longer believe that should be the case. That is a significant change and a major philosophical gap that seems to be unbridgeable.
The party would not be splitting if Corbyn accepted he cannot lead it when 80% of MPs do not have confidence in his leadership. The split will occur because most party members do not believe that Labour is primarily a parliamentary party. That's not a policy difference, but it is a philosophical chasm.
Sorry but if all these people just want a protest movement and don't want to win power... what were they doing in 2010 when they voted for the Milibands?
Splitting your party is probably the closest thing to a guarantee of electoral defeat in a FPTP system.
As is having Jeremy Corbyn as your leader.
Labour is utterly buggered. Its coalition has been irrevocably broken. The question is what's the best and quickest way to build a credible, centre left alternative to the Tories from here?
Sorry didn't quite finish my thought there... splitting your party almost guarantees defeat. But to split your party and then essentially stand on the same platform!? That's just a recipe for halving your vote!
If you think Corbyn is electoral doom- then by far the quickest way to build a credible, centre left alternative is to wait for him to leave. He will lose the next general election whenever it is- and then the members will vote him out. He's 67 anyway. He's probably not enjoying this job all that much.
Labour aren't in a position where they can afford to have another election where they go backwards. They already need a 10% swing to get a majority. Going into an election with Corbyn could write off the next election before the government's next term has even started.
Labour or any other party are not looking for a majority. They just want to get rid of the Tories.
AA Gill's restaurant review this week is the Castle Inn, Bungay, Suffolk. 4 stars for both food and atmosphere. Nice to see him out of London for a change.
I was amazed to learn (or relearn) that he was married to Amber Rudd.
Umm, before the referendum - I rather liked AA Gill's determination to offend. Since it started, I've found him very unattractive - being married to Ms Rudd doesn't help.
The whole referendum has exposed many for their true selves. And many in the media aren't winning too many friends. I can think of at least a dozen or so I've stopped following on Twitter for their anti-democratic, rude or frankly snotty views of 52% of the population.
Total eye-opener.
So basically your opinion of virtually every and any individual is determined solely by their position on Leave versus Remain. No news there.
What's amazing is how you laughably continue to try to portray yourself as some sort of neutral observer.
You mean the Plato who is on a political journey from New Labour to CamCon now Leadsome which will end somehwere between Britain first and UKIP? The funniest poster on here since the glory days of Tim of this parish. Hilarious.
I know you're a bit full of yourself - but when you've the status of Zerohedge - maybe I'll pay your posts the same attention.
The original source is from the German press. Zerohedge are a bit flakey . Unfortunately, while I can order beer in every major European language, that is as far as my linguistic skills go.
I don't claim Zerohedge are oracles, they're collectively more informed than a single PB person who's recently become a market analyst.
You, mean apart from the founder of Zero Hedge being banned from working in the securities industry, and the whole site having been sued for taking money from hedge funds to spread false stories about companies?
Presumably they're very sympathetic to the Brexit cause?
You really do yourself no favours here.
My point was that a single PBer rubbishing a widely read source was silly hubris.
He claimed to know more about a subject ten yrs on that I was exceptionally closely involved with at the time. Twice.
Incidentally, I see turnout at the referendum among young voters is estimated by Survation as being much higher than first estimated, at over 60%. This has implications for the way polls downweight certainty to vote among the young (though among the very elderly apparently it exceeded 90%, which sounds a bit implausible).
90% for elderly is more plausible than 64% for 18-24 year olds IMO.
I don't believe the 90% for one moment, seeing the magnitude of the physical and mental barriers to getting routine stuff done that so many of that age face (assuming that age = 75+).
But at least we are allowed to disbelieve polls now. We must be quite close to the point where psephology ceases to be an actual thing, like phrenology did.
Of course you'd say that - I've no doubt your cranial ridges would reveal an aptitude for troublemaking.
Gerhard Schroeder and Alain Minc (Sarkozy confidant) are calling for the bilateral Elysee treaty between France and Germany to be deepened to include a Franco-German minister in each government, a common position on European issues, the ability for each state to represent the other in European meetings and investment in language education so that they don't default to using English with each other.
So federalism is dead and the Franco-German Empire is back?
I know you're a bit full of yourself - but when you've the status of Zerohedge - maybe I'll pay your posts the same attention.
The fact that you take zerohedge seriously means your posts are as worthless as theirs.
Zerohedge can be very breathless and excitable and underestimate the ability of people and institutions to find fudges and compromises and limp on, but that's no reason to dismiss everything they report out of hand. Doing that with any information source these days is simply stupid. It's about whether a piece is well-argued and corroborated by other information.
I know you're a bit full of yourself - but when you've the status of Zerohedge - maybe I'll pay your posts the same attention.
The original source is from the German press. Zerohedge are a bit flakey . Unfortunately, while I can order beer in every major European language, that is as far as my linguistic skills go.
I don't claim Zerohedge are oracles, they're collectively more informed than a single PB person who's recently become a market analyst.
You, mean apart from the founder of Zero Hedge being banned from working in the securities industry, and the whole site having been sued for taking money from hedge funds to spread false stories about companies?
Presumably they're very sympathetic to the Brexit cause?
It's hard to tell, in truth. They're mainly angry and foretelling the End of Days. Basically the web equivalent of that guy on the high street with the sandwich board.
They will get as much as Tories. There are plenty of left of centre people who want their side to win and hate Tories. Liberals might lose some funding.
Thanks for confirming this new party will still be a party based on hate.
1. Lose to Corbyn. 2. Start talking to Garrard, Taylor, Mills, Nasir and Rosenfeld. Sound them out about seed funding for a new party based on centre left principles. 3. Come up with a name for the party, including the word Labour. 4. Sound out how many MPs across all parties they can bring over. 5. Decide whether they are in favour or against Scottish independence. 6. Do a count, how many MPs will come over, if more than 120 are willing to come over, threaten the unions with the loss of official opposition status. 7. If the unions say no then make it happen.
I love the fact that you name those Labour donors as if we'd all know who they are! I know Mills but not the others. however we hit upon the core problem. How is such a party to be funded? To do without big donors and trade unions you'd probably need the better part of a million members. Where will they come from?
Which is why they'll need to talk to the big donors about seed class types as possible.
Really? Regularly? To replace the Unite funding et al of ...
At least 14 unions affiliate to Labour but a huge bulk of the funding comes from five unions that in 2014 affiliated 2,032,297 political levy paying members who provide the party with £5.55m in annual income.
They'll be a new party with no real outgoings, no local party offices and no debt. They'll need the seed funding to get a HQ building and after that they'll have to build up slowly and begin to get councillors and members to defect to the new party.
Its not easy, but the alternative of knuckling under the hard left for another 10 years seems bleak enough to try.
And after the first blush of summer wears off?
I just don't see it as very likely. A look at past Labour donation registrations could be a sign of the future post Cash For Honours. It'd take quite a culture change for most Labour members to cough up more.
And if more middle class urban Labour voters do pay up - what link does that have with blue collar or underclass voters they claim to be for?
It's a schism.
Completely top down and completely doomed. Zero roots, zero infrastructure, zero brand. Just 170 odd europhiles unexpectedly out of a job and looking for a sub.
We don't know until the split happens and who gets to keep the Labour name. But just as many Labour members think Corbyn is the second coming, so many others believe he is utterly destructive.
The party would not be splitting if Corbyn accepted he cannot lead it when 80% of MPs do not have confidence in his leadership. The split will occur because most party members do not believe that Labour is primarily a parliamentary party. That's not a policy difference, but it is a philosophical chasm.
I agree. I've never heard of the idea (about any party, in particular Labour) that the party is primarily a parliamentary party. Commitment to parliamentary democracy is one thing, the idea that the party is primarily a vehicle for the modest number of people who currently enjoy the Labour label is another, and a complete novelty. I've never met an MP who didn't concede that they were elected primarily because of their party affiliation, and it certainly doesn't confer ownership.
See Clause One, Nick.
Labour has been committed to gaining power through the parliamentary process throughout its history. That has always meant the leader must have the confidence of the parliamentary party. Clearly, a lot of members no longer believe that should be the case. That is a significant change and a major philosophical gap that seems to be unbridgeable.
How many of these MPs will win their standing as Independents ? Possibly none.
The party would not be splitting if Corbyn accepted he cannot lead it when 80% of MPs do not have confidence in his leadership. The split will occur because most party members do not believe that Labour is primarily a parliamentary party. That's not a policy difference, but it is a philosophical chasm.
Sorry but if all these people just want a protest movement and don't want to win power... what were they doing in 2010 when they voted for the Milibands?
Splitting your party is probably the closest thing to a guarantee of electoral defeat in a FPTP system.
As is having Jeremy Corbyn as your leader.
Labour is utterly buggered. Its coalition has been irrevocably broken. The question is what's the best and quickest way to build a credible, centre left alternative to the Tories from here?
Sorry didn't quite finish my thought there... splitting your party almost guarantees defeat. But to split your party and then essentially stand on the same platform!? That's just a recipe for halving your vote!
If you think Corbyn is electoral doom- then by far the quickest way to build a credible, centre left alternative is to wait for him to leave. He will lose the next general election whenever it is- and then the members will vote him out. He's 67 anyway. He's probably not enjoying this job all that much.
Labour aren't in a position where they can afford to have another election where they go backwards. They already need a 10% swing to get a majority. Going into an election with Corbyn could write off the next election before the government's next term has even started.
Labour or any other party are not looking for a majority. They just want to get rid of the Tories.
But the odds of that happening while Corbyn is leader or for five years after he is gone are about the same as the odds of ME winning Wimbledon!
Every week he stays now will add another seat to the Conservative majority.
The party would not be splitting if Corbyn accepted he cannot lead it when 80% of MPs do not have confidence in his leadership. The split will occur because most party members do not believe that Labour is primarily a parliamentary party. That's not a policy difference, but it is a philosophical chasm.
Sorry but if all these people just want a protest movement and don't want to win power... what were they doing in 2010 when they voted for the Milibands?
Splitting your party is probably the closest thing to a guarantee of electoral defeat in a FPTP system.
As is having Jeremy Corbyn as your leader.
Labour is utterly buggered. Its coalition has been irrevocably broken. The question is what's the best and quickest way to build a credible, centre left alternative to the Tories from here?
Sorry didn't quite finish my thought there... splitting your party almost guarantees defeat. But to split your party and then essentially stand on the same platform!? That's just a recipe for halving your vote!
If you think Corbyn is electoral doom- then by far the quickest way to build a credible, centre left alternative is to wait for him to leave. He will lose the next general election whenever it is- and then the members will vote him out. He's 67 anyway. He's probably not enjoying this job all that much.
Labour aren't in a position where they can afford to have another election where they go backwards. They already need a 10% swing to get a majority. Going into an election with Corbyn could write off the next election before the government's next term has even started.
Labour or any other party are not looking for a majority. They just want to get rid of the Tories.
But the odds of that happening while Corbyn is leader or for five years after he is gone are about the same as the odds of ME winning Wimbledon!
Every week he stays now will add another seat to the Conservative majority.
And what? She's too smart an investor to be PM? That's a peculiar way to upset Tory members.
Too keen on family?
Thinks adopted kids should have a mum and a dad?
Keen on generic Christian values?
Seriously. Get a grip.
Oh dear we are very tetchy today - questions questions - which Leave people have never been keen on answering and still aren't even after they won the referendum.
The party would not be splitting if Corbyn accepted he cannot lead it when 80% of MPs do not have confidence in his leadership. The split will occur because most party members do not believe that Labour is primarily a parliamentary party. That's not a policy difference, but it is a philosophical chasm.
I agree. I've never heard of the idea (about any party, in particular Labour) that the party is primarily a parliamentary party. Commitment to parliamentary democracy is one thing, the idea that the party is primarily a vehicle for the modest number of people who currently enjoy the Labour label is another, and a complete novelty. I've never met an MP who didn't concede that they were elected primarily because of their party affiliation, and it certainly doesn't confer ownership.
See Clause One, Nick.
Labour has been committed to gaining power through the parliamentary process throughout its history. That has always meant the leader must have the confidence of the parliamentary party. Clearly, a lot of members no longer believe that should be the case. That is a significant change and a major philosophical gap that seems to be unbridgeable.
How many of these MPs will win their standing as Independents ? Possibly none.
Very few. It would have to be a new party. The likelihood is that a split will deliver a huge Tory majority. But this country needs a credible centre left alternative government. Corbyn Labour cannot provide that.
I know you're a bit full of yourself - but when you've the status of Zerohedge - maybe I'll pay your posts the same attention.
The original source is from the German press. Zerohedge are a bit flakey . Unfortunately, while I can order beer in every major European language, that is as far as my linguistic skills go.
I don't claim Zerohedge are oracles, they're collectively more informed than a single PB person who's recently become a market analyst.
You, mean apart from the founder of Zero Hedge being banned from working in the securities industry, and the whole site having been sued for taking money from hedge funds to spread false stories about companies?
Presumably they're very sympathetic to the Brexit cause?
It's hard to tell, in truth. They're mainly angry and foretelling the End of Days. Basically the web equivalent of that guy on the high street with the sandwich board.
I miss those guys. When I was a teenager in Newcastle - there was a very committed chappy who'd always be around Grey's Monument with his.
Always very polite and earnest. No hideous megaphone, just a Greatcoat.
Gerhard Schroeder and Alain Minc (Sarkozy confidant) are calling for the bilateral Elysee treaty between France and Germany to be deepened to include a Franco-German minister in each government, a common position on European issues, the ability for each state to represent the other in European meetings and investment in language education so that they don't default to using English with each other.
So federalism is dead and the Franco-German Empire is back?
Or the German empire has arrived and France is looking for a way to get in the driver's seat.
I know you're a bit full of yourself - but when you've the status of Zerohedge - maybe I'll pay your posts the same attention.
The original source is from the German press. Zerohedge are a bit flakey . Unfortunately, while I can order beer in every major European language, that is as far as my linguistic skills go.
I don't claim Zerohedge are oracles, they're collectively more informed than a single PB person who's recently become a market analyst.
You, mean apart from the founder of Zero Hedge being banned from working in the securities industry, and the whole site having been sued for taking money from hedge funds to spread false stories about companies?
Presumably they're very sympathetic to the Brexit cause?
You really do yourself no favours here.
My point was that a single PBer rubbishing a widely read source was silly hubris.
He claimed to know more about a subject ten yrs on that I was exceptionally closely involved with at the time. Twice.
Is there anything that you weren't closely involved with?
The party would not be splitting if Corbyn accepted he cannot lead it when 80% of MPs do not have confidence in his leadership. The split will occur because most party members do not believe that Labour is primarily a parliamentary party. That's not a policy difference, but it is a philosophical chasm.
Sorry but if all these people just want a protest movement and don't want to win power... what were they doing in 2010 when they voted for the Milibands?
Splitting your party is probably the closest thing to a guarantee of electoral defeat in a FPTP system.
As is having Jeremy Corbyn as your leader.
Labour is utterly buggered. Its coalition has been irrevocably broken. The question is what's the best and quickest way to build a credible, centre left alternative to the Tories from here?
Sorry didn't quite finish my thought there... splitting your party almost guarantees defeat. But to split your party and then essentially stand on the same platform!? That's just a recipe for halving your vote!
If you think Corbyn is electoral doom- then by far the quickest way to build a credible, centre left alternative is to wait for him to leave. He will lose the next general election whenever it is- and then the members will vote him out. He's 67 anyway. He's probably not enjoying this job all that much.
Labour aren't in a position where they can afford to have another election where they go backwards. They already need a 10% swing to get a majority. Going into an election with Corbyn could write off the next election before the government's next term has even started.
Labour or any other party are not looking for a majority. They just want to get rid of the Tories.
But the odds of that happening while Corbyn is leader or for five years after he is gone are about the same as the odds of ME winning Wimbledon!
Every week he stays now will add another seat to the Conservative majority.
I don't think so.
Which merely goes to prove the gulf between London and the rest of the country.
I know you're a bit full of yourself - but when you've the status of Zerohedge - maybe I'll pay your posts the same attention.
The original source is from the German press. Zerohedge are a bit flakey . Unfortunately, while I can order beer in every major European language, that is as far as my linguistic skills go.
I don't claim Zerohedge are oracles, they're collectively more informed than a single PB person who's recently become a market analyst.
You, mean apart from the founder of Zero Hedge being banned from working in the securities industry, and the whole site having been sued for taking money from hedge funds to spread false stories about companies?
Presumably they're very sympathetic to the Brexit cause?
You really do yourself no favours here.
My point was that a single PBer rubbishing a widely read source was silly hubris.
He claimed to know more about a subject ten yrs on that I was exceptionally closely involved with at the time. Twice.
Is there anything that you weren't closely involved with?
Mr. Dave, just had a quick listen to that programme.
Not too surprised the Remain campaign (BSE, an inauspicious acronym) was a bit of a mess.
What really struck me in the long Guardian piece was how they decided they needed a leader of the campaign from the liberal right and opted for Stuart Rose. Presumably they were worried about Nigel Lawson away all those libertarian voters and an internationalist businessman like Rose would put a stop to it. Clegg recommended his own former strategist Ryan Coetzee to the campaign - a man who's record could hardly get worse.
AA Gill's restaurant review this week is the Castle Inn, Bungay, Suffolk. 4 stars for both food and atmosphere. Nice to see him out of London for a change.
I was amazed to learn (or relearn) that he was married to Amber Rudd.
Umm, before the referendum - I rather liked AA Gill's determination to offend. Since it started, I've found him very unattractive - being married to Ms Rudd doesn't help.
The whole referendum has exposed many for their true selves. And many in the media aren't winning too many friends. I can think of at least a dozen or so I've stopped following on Twitter for their anti-democratic, rude or frankly snotty views of 52% of the population.
Total eye-opener.
So basically your opinion of virtually every and any individual is determined solely by their position on Leave versus Remain. No news there.
What's amazing is how you laughably continue to try to portray yourself as some sort of neutral observer.
You mean the Plato who is on a political journey from New Labour to CamCon now Leadsome which will end somehwere between Britain first and UKIP? The funniest poster on here since the glory days of Tim of this parish. Hilarious.
The party would not be splitting if Corbyn accepted he cannot lead it when 80% of MPs do not have confidence in his leadership. The split will occur because most party members do not believe that Labour is primarily a parliamentary party. That's not a policy difference, but it is a philosophical chasm.
Sorry but if all these people just want a protest movement and don't want to win power... what were they doing in 2010 when they voted for the Milibands?
Splitting your party is probably the closest thing to a guarantee of electoral defeat in a FPTP system.
As is having Jeremy Corbyn as your leader.
Labour is utterly buggered. Its coalition has been irrevocably broken. The question is what's the best and quickest way to build a credible, centre left alternative to the Tories from here?
Sorry didn't quite finish my thought there... splitting your party almost guarantees defeat. But to split your party and then essentially stand on the same platform!? That's just a recipe for halving your vote!
If you think Corbyn is electoral doom- then by far the quickest way to build a credible, centre left alternative is to wait for him to leave. He will lose the next general election whenever it is- and then the members will vote him out. He's 67 anyway. He's probably not enjoying this job all that much.
Also- I actually think he has quite a personal following in the membership based on his humbleness and reputation that would not transfer across to another candidate with similar views.
If you split the party... the mechanism seems to be lots of the MPs will leave a la SDP and set up their own party. They will have no brand, no loyal activists, and likely not enough money to function. In a FPTP system they will get hammered and guarantee a Tory win. Then when Corbyn's reign ends in disaster- how do you get back into the Labour party which you left? Or do you keep trying to build up your new party? You split your resources in two and doom the left to a meaningless divide- since there isn't really much of a policy difference!
Doesn't seem to me much hope for the current batch of MPs. For ordinary members or activists who aren't in the Corbyn wing, it seems to be a matter of sitting it out/leaving and waiting until the pendulum swings back
Are the members of Mr Miliband's front bench under threat of deselection too - those who refused to serve under him? Or is it only those who resigned from Mr Corbyn's front bench?
Mr. S, whilst I disagree with Miss Plato on Leadsom, your post effectively accuses her of repeatedly being on the winning side, and being an accurate reflection of mainstream public opinion.
Edited extra bit: original post was actually by Mr. Felix, Mr. S just quoted it.
I know you're a bit full of yourself - but when you've the status of Zerohedge - maybe I'll pay your posts the same attention.
The original source is from the German press. Zerohedge are a bit flakey . Unfortunately, while I can order beer in every major European language, that is as far as my linguistic skills go.
I don't claim Zerohedge are oracles, they're collectively more informed than a single PB person who's recently become a market analyst.
You, mean apart from the founder of Zero Hedge being banned from working in the securities industry, and the whole site having been sued for taking money from hedge funds to spread false stories about companies?
Presumably they're very sympathetic to the Brexit cause?
You really do yourself no favours here.
My point was that a single PBer rubbishing a widely read source was silly hubris.
He claimed to know more about a subject ten yrs on that I was exceptionally closely involved with at the time. Twice.
Is there anything that you weren't closely involved with?
You're not really Andrea Leadsom, are you?
Plato has had so many jobs and yet had time to MOTHER 600 cats !
Allow Corbyn on the ballot. Let him win. Then form a new independent parliamentary grouping under a new leader with enough MPs to be the official opposition. Force their own parties to deselect them. Then run as candidates at the next election as Independent Labour Party. They will have the benefit of incumbency, having been the official opposition in parliament for three years and hopefully attracted some donors to get the party going.
B. Nomination i. In the case of a vacancy for leader or deputy leader, each nomination must be supported by 15 per cent of the combined Commons members of the PLP and members of the EPLP. Nominations not attaining this threshold shall be null and void. ii. Where there is no vacancy, nominations may be sought by potential challengers each year prior to the annual session of Party conference. In this case any nomination must be supported by 20 per cent of the combined Commons members of the PLP and members of the EPLP. Nominations not attaining this threshold shall be null and void.
Yes, the rules are perfectly clear - it's only those who want to see Corbyn defenestrated who are trying to read into them something which isn't there.
Allow Corbyn on the ballot. Let him win. Then form a new independent parliamentary grouping under a new leader with enough MPs to be the official opposition. Force their own parties to deselect them. Then run as candidates at the next election as Independent Labour Party. They will have the benefit of incumbency, having been the official opposition in parliament for three years and hopefully attracted some donors to get the party going.
B. Nomination i. In the case of a vacancy for leader or deputy leader, each nomination must be supported by 15 per cent of the combined Commons members of the PLP and members of the EPLP. Nominations not attaining this threshold shall be null and void. ii. Where there is no vacancy, nominations may be sought by potential challengers each year prior to the annual session of Party conference. In this case any nomination must be supported by 20 per cent of the combined Commons members of the PLP and members of the EPLP. Nominations not attaining this threshold shall be null and void.
Yes, the rules are perfectly clear - it's only those who want to see Corbyn defenestrated who are trying to read into them something which isn't there.
Yup, we've been here months ago. It's very clear. The assertions from those wishing otherwise doesn't change it.
We don't know until the split happens and who gets to keep the Labour name. But just as many Labour members think Corbyn is the second coming, so many others believe he is utterly destructive.
If the MPs leave to set up a new party on what grounds could they claim Labour's name should follow them?
Gerhard Schroeder and Alain Minc (Sarkozy confidant) are calling for the bilateral Elysee treaty between France and Germany to be deepened to include a Franco-German minister in each government, a common position on European issues, the ability for each state to represent the other in European meetings and investment in language education so that they don't default to using English with each other.
So federalism is dead and the Franco-German Empire is back?
We don't know until the split happens and who gets to keep the Labour name. But just as many Labour members think Corbyn is the second coming, so many others believe he is utterly destructive.
If the MPs leave to set up a new party on what grounds could they claim Labour's name should follow them?
What if they do not set up a party but simply make themselves the official opposition in the HoC. Corbyn and co. will then be just non-party backbenchers.
And what? She's too smart an investor to be PM? That's a peculiar way to upset Tory members.
Too keen on family?
Thinks adopted kids should have a mum and a dad?
Keen on generic Christian values?
Seriously. Get a grip.
Oh dear we are very tetchy today - questions questions - which Leave people have never been keen on answering and still aren't even after they won the referendum.
Labour aren't in a position where they can afford to have another election where they go backwards. They already need a 10% swing to get a majority. Going into an election with Corbyn could write off the next election before the government's next term has even started.
Perfectly appropriate to have a leadership election- but if Corbyn wins it isn't appropriate to split the party. In electoral terms that will be much worse than just having a united (ish) party behind Corbyn. It will make it much harder to rebuild after.
Hamilton’s 4th British GP win and Murray at Wimbledon today will make SPOTY betting fun.
Got to be Murray. That was a magnificent performance.
Very impressed with Raonic's net play as well - haven't seen anyone that good at the net since Federer in his heyday.
I agree on both counts – a cracking match all round. - does small Mexicon wave.
Are you sure you meant Federer? He's never spent much time at the net. Not that he was particularly bad at it when the opportunity presented itself.
I seem to remember him playing a lot at the net before Nadal upped his game. Then he hung back to make him run round more. Very good at punching the ball almost off his hips straight back into play.
We don't know until the split happens and who gets to keep the Labour name. But just as many Labour members think Corbyn is the second coming, so many others believe he is utterly destructive.
If the MPs leave to set up a new party on what grounds could they claim Labour's name should follow them?
What if they do not set up a party but simply make themselves the official opposition in the HoC. Corbyn and co. will then be just non-party backbenchers.
The leader of the Labour Party is the ex officio leader of the PLP. Unless they form themselves into a new party (where they would no longer be Labour MPs) Corbyn remains LOTO and leader of the PLP.
Thinking about splits and party names it brings to mind one of my favourite election results:
1997 Cardiff South and Penarth
Alun Michael Labour Co-op 22647 Caroline Roberts Conservative 8786 Simon Wakefield Lib Dem 3964 John Foreman New Labour 3942 David Haswell Plaid Cymru 1356
Andrew Castle says of Murray's Wimbledon victory. "It's not about money. But for the record it's £2 million to the winner, £1 million to the runner up" !!!!!
Labour aren't in a position where they can afford to have another election where they go backwards. They already need a 10% swing to get a majority. Going into an election with Corbyn could write off the next election before the government's next term has even started.
Perfectly appropriate to have a leadership election- but if Corbyn wins it isn't appropriate to split the party. In electoral terms that will be much worse than just having a united (ish) party behind Corbyn. It will make it much harder to rebuild after.
Yes. If Corbyn wins the PLP will need to row in behind him. Humiliating, yes - but they would have played for high stakes and lost. Splitting is like falling into a black hole.
We don't know until the split happens and who gets to keep the Labour name. But just as many Labour members think Corbyn is the second coming, so many others believe he is utterly destructive.
If the MPs leave to set up a new party on what grounds could they claim Labour's name should follow them?
What if they do not set up a party but simply make themselves the official opposition in the HoC. Corbyn and co. will then be just non-party backbenchers.
The leader of the Labour Party is the ex officio leader of the PLP. Unless they form themselves into a new party (where they would no longer be Labour MPs) Corbyn remains LOTO and leader of the PLP.
Yes. But the Speaker will only recognise numbers. Not what the Labour party constitution says.
We don't know until the split happens and who gets to keep the Labour name. But just as many Labour members think Corbyn is the second coming, so many others believe he is utterly destructive.
If the MPs leave to set up a new party on what grounds could they claim Labour's name should follow them?
What if they do not set up a party but simply make themselves the official opposition in the HoC. Corbyn and co. will then be just non-party backbenchers.
The leader of the Labour Party is the ex officio leader of the PLP. Unless they form themselves into a new party (where they would no longer be Labour MPs) Corbyn remains LOTO and leader of the PLP.
Yes. But the Speaker will only recognise numbers. Not what the Labour party constitution says.
Labour aren't in a position where they can afford to have another election where they go backwards. They already need a 10% swing to get a majority. Going into an election with Corbyn could write off the next election before the government's next term has even started.
Perfectly appropriate to have a leadership election- but if Corbyn wins it isn't appropriate to split the party. In electoral terms that will be much worse than just having a united (ish) party behind Corbyn. It will make it much harder to rebuild after.
Yes. If Corbyn wins the PLP will need to row in behind him. Humiliating, yes - but they would have played for high stakes and lost. Splitting is like falling into a black hole.
In which case the Tory posters at the next general election write themselves '172 Labour MPs didn't vote for Corbyn, so why should you?'
Labour aren't in a position where they can afford to have another election where they go backwards. They already need a 10% swing to get a majority. Going into an election with Corbyn could write off the next election before the government's next term has even started.
Perfectly appropriate to have a leadership election- but if Corbyn wins it isn't appropriate to split the party. In electoral terms that will be much worse than just having a united (ish) party behind Corbyn. It will make it much harder to rebuild after.
Yes. If Corbyn wins the PLP will need to row in behind him. Humiliating, yes - but they would have played for high stakes and lost. Splitting is like falling into a black hole.
In which case the Tory posters at the next general election write themselves '172 Labour MPs didn't vote for Corbyn, why should you?'
I know - they ar e doomed anyway. The only way is for for Corbyn to be on the ballot and to lose in a fair fight.
Thinking about splits and party names it brings to mind one of my favourite election results:
1997 Cardiff South and Penarth
Alun Michael Labour Co-op 22647 Caroline Roberts Conservative 8786 Simon Wakefield Lib Dem 3964 John Foreman New Labour 3942 David Haswell Plaid Cymru 1356
1997 Tatton:
Independent Martin Bell 29,354 60.2% N/A
Conservative Mostyn Neil Hamilton 18,277 37.5 −17.6
Independent Conservative Sam Hill 295 0.6 N/A
Independent Conservative Simon Lowther Kinsey 184 0.4 N/A
Miss Moneypenny's Glamorous One Party Burnel Graig Penhaul 128 0.3 N/A
Albion Party John Richard Muir 126 0.3 N/A
Natural Law Michael Paul Kennedy 123 0.3 N/A
Lord Byro versus the Scallywag Tories David Laurence Bishop 116 0.2 N/A
Independent Conservative Ralph Nicholas 113 0.2 N/A
Labour aren't in a position where they can afford to have another election where they go backwards. They already need a 10% swing to get a majority. Going into an election with Corbyn could write off the next election before the government's next term has even started.
Perfectly appropriate to have a leadership election- but if Corbyn wins it isn't appropriate to split the party. In electoral terms that will be much worse than just having a united (ish) party behind Corbyn. It will make it much harder to rebuild after.
Yes. If Corbyn wins the PLP will need to row in behind him. Humiliating, yes - but they would have played for high stakes and lost. Splitting is like falling into a black hole.
In which case the Tory posters at the next general election write themselves '172 Labour MPs didn't vote for Corbyn, so why should you?'
@EdConwaySky: Generous words from Murray to PM there, despite fact that his Wimbledon prize money has fallen $400k in dollar terms since the referendum
Comments
Labour aren't in a position where they can afford to have another election where they go backwards. They already need a 10% swing to get a majority. Going into an election with Corbyn could write off the next election before the government's next term has even started.
But at least we are allowed to disbelieve polls now. We must be quite close to the point where psephology ceases to be an actual thing, like phrenology did.
Now this is potentially VERY interesting. If the Japanese revise their constitution, they'll have essentially reverted to their pre-1945 position.
Labour has been committed to gaining power through the parliamentary process throughout its history. That has always meant the leader must have the confidence of the parliamentary party. Clearly, a lot of members no longer believe that should be the case. That is a significant change and a major philosophical gap that seems to be unbridgeable.
My point was that a single PBer rubbishing a widely read source was silly hubris.
He claimed to know more about a subject ten yrs on that I was exceptionally closely involved with at the time. Twice.
Not too surprised the Remain campaign (BSE, an inauspicious acronym) was a bit of a mess.
Every week he stays now will add another seat to the Conservative majority.
Always very polite and earnest. No hideous megaphone, just a Greatcoat.
You're not really Andrea Leadsom, are you?
Dearie me.
If the 2015 election was Martin Day, a Corbyn-led Labour Party may make 2020 May Day.
Are the members of Mr Miliband's front bench under threat of deselection too - those who refused to serve under him? Or is it only those who resigned from Mr Corbyn's front bench?
Edited extra bit: original post was actually by Mr. Felix, Mr. S just quoted it.
Allow Corbyn on the ballot. Let him win. Then form a new independent parliamentary grouping under a new leader with enough MPs to be the official opposition. Force their own parties to deselect them. Then run as candidates at the next election as Independent Labour Party. They will have the benefit of incumbency, having been the official opposition in parliament for three years and hopefully attracted some donors to get the party going.
Hamilton’s 4th British GP win and Murray at Wimbledon today will make SPOTY betting fun.
I think Hamilton didn't win it with last year's title, and Button was 2nd in 2009 (Ryan Giggs got it, for reasons that are beyond me).
Very impressed with Raonic's net play as well - haven't seen anyone that good at the net since Federer in his heyday.
Oh no sorry, it was actually @David_Cameron https://t.co/K4nx4ed7yX
https://twitter.com/Grouse_Beater/status/752172764623212544
1997 Cardiff South and Penarth
Alun Michael Labour Co-op 22647
Caroline Roberts Conservative 8786
Simon Wakefield Lib Dem 3964
John Foreman New Labour 3942
David Haswell Plaid Cymru 1356
Oh, look, 21/6.
Cameron urges voters “think of the children” before deciding which way to vote in EU Ref.
https://t.co/Ze1S2vhqK0
Fancy that
Go Andy!
Of course there would be a twitter storm now if he mentioned First Minister instead.
That is an actual IndyRef2 trigger.
Of course, Andy had the edge because he is a mother
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/09/andrea-leadsom-is-a-conservative-every-brexiteer-should-want-as/
I simply think the EEA and City Remainers are ignoring 2.8m other plus a load of cultural others.