Dylan Strain Len McCluskey, has opened up a £2.00 registered supporters scheme with Unite Community. Meaning you don't have to spend £25 joining Labour.
Any criteria? Like having a job in an industry that Unite operates in, or something equally stupid like that.
Get a grip man! It was bad enough with the UKIPLeadsomites on Monday.....take a tip from our glorious new leader - nothing wrong with a little bit of bottling things up....
Can I just say how glad I am that Tom Watson, the most backstabbing mendacious disgusting deceitful toad ever to have disgraced parliament has been done over today ?
Dylan Strain Len McCluskey, has opened up a £2.00 registered supporters scheme with Unite Community. Meaning you don't have to spend £25 joining Labour.
Lol, every time I try and get away and go watch some telly, new awesome ridiculousness appears.
Politics needs a break. It's just impossible to keep up!
Again, seriously, can ANYONE watch this Newsnight interview and really say with a straight face that Eagle is more electable than Corbyn?
Neither of them is electable. Only one of them is interested in Labour being a Parliamentary party that may be electable in the future.
Only one would resign for the good of the party if called upon to do so.
Indeed. However Labour probably need another candidate as many members don't grasp the nuance of that, especially those who were toying with the idea of relinquishing support for Corbyn.
Dylan Strain Len McCluskey, has opened up a £2.00 registered supporters scheme with Unite Community. Meaning you don't have to spend £25 joining Labour.
Stitch up vs stitch up..even cheaper than £3 this time around!
We need more QE to deal with such serious deflation.
Dylan Strain Len McCluskey, has opened up a £2.00 registered supporters scheme with Unite Community. Meaning you don't have to spend £25 joining Labour.
Stitch up vs stitch up..even cheaper than £3 this time around!
Pretty soon, various factions will be offering to pay us to join their gerrymander.
Can I just say how glad I am that Tom Watson, the most backstabbing mendacious disgusting deceitful toad ever to have disgraced parliament has been done over today ?
Dylan Strain Len McCluskey, has opened up a £2.00 registered supporters scheme with Unite Community. Meaning you don't have to spend £25 joining Labour.
Any criteria? Like having a job in an industry that Unite operates in, or something equally stupid like that.
My seat in the North West has a Labour majority of 96 and I reckon the Tories will win it by well over 5000 in 2020 if Corbyn is still there.
Chester?
Well done, sir!
Actually I reckon it will be nearer 10,000
It was odd how Labour gained Chester while losing Vale of Clwyd just down the road.
Neighbouring Wirral West was also one of the few Labour gains in 2015. We were one of the areas where Labour did OK last time. Doubt Labour has a prayer of holding either in 2020 with Corbyn
Except in the May local elections, Corbyn's Labour made gains across the Wirral, and they also gained the Cheshire PCC (which I would assume meant a strong performance in Chester itself, since the deep shire Cheshire is a desert for Labour).
Will be hard for Labour to hold even if they're doing OK
As that article states, they always do much worse on the Wirral in council elections than they do in general elections. In 2010, they came 3rd in Wirral South in the council elections, on the very same day that they (narrowly) held the Westminster seat.
"Posh scousers" often vote Tory on a local level to keep their council tax low, but can't bring themselves to vote for the Tory bastards at a national level.
Can someone cleverer than me estimate what the would mean in terms of seats?
Oh my god......we are in "its alll different inthe marginals." AGAIN. This has been disproved in the last two elections, why can even morons believe this now.
Labour should let him lose the next GE and hope Chuka, Ed Balls or D Miliband are in a position to take over
Do you seriously think Corbyn will resign when Labour is destroyed at the next GE?
I think he would lose in a leadership contest in that scenario, especially if up against a candidate with an ounce of gravitas
Really? Seriously? By that time the hard left will have full control and there will have been any number of deselections. What's more, the results of general elections are of little interest to parties that do not aspire to govern through Parliament.
Best chance Labour have IMO.
Corbyn would be a proven loser up against a possible winner, and the students would be bored of voting for him. At the moment he has not been given a chance to fail and the choice is arguably worse
Can I just say how glad I am that Tom Watson, the most backstabbing mendacious disgusting deceitful toad ever to have disgraced parliament has been done over today ?
Shouldn’t you be hiding behind parliamentary privilege when you say things like that?
Dylan Strain Len McCluskey, has opened up a £2.00 registered supporters scheme with Unite Community. Meaning you don't have to spend £25 joining Labour.
Bwhahaha.. delicious
"Comrades, this is your Leadership Candidate. It is an honour to speak to you today, and I am honoured to be sailing with you on the maiden voyage of our motherland's most recent achievement. Once more, we play our dangerous game, a game of chess against our old adversary — The Conservative Party. For a hundred years, your fathers before you and your older brothers played this game and played it well. But today the game is different. We have the advantage. It reminds me of the heady days of 1945 and Clement Attlee, when the world trembled at the sound of our Nationalisations! Well, they will tremble again — at the sound of our Progressiveness. The order is: engage the Corbyn Drive!
"Comrades, our own Parliamentary Party doesn't know our full potential. They will do everything possible to test us; but they will only test their own embarrassment. We will leave our MPs behind, we will pass through the Conservative patrols, past their sonar nets, and lay off their largest constituency, and listen to their chortling and tittering... while we conduct Austerity Debates! Then, and when we are finished, the only sound they will hear is our laughter, while we sail to Brighton, where the sun is warm, and so is the... Comradeship!
My seat in the North West has a Labour majority of 96 and I reckon the Tories will win it by well over 5000 in 2020 if Corbyn is still there.
Chester?
Well done, sir!
Actually I reckon it will be nearer 10,000
It was odd how Labour gained Chester while losing Vale of Clwyd just down the road.
Neighbouring Wirral West was also one of the few Labour gains in 2015. We were one of the areas where Labour did OK last time. Doubt Labour has a prayer of holding either in 2020 with Corbyn
Except in the May local elections, Corbyn's Labour made gains across the Wirral, and they also gained the Cheshire PCC (which I would assume meant a strong performance in Chester itself, since the deep shire Cheshire is a desert for Labour).
Will be hard for Labour to hold even if they're doing OK
As that article states, they always do much worse on the Wirral in council elections than they do in general elections. In 2010, they came 3rd in Wirral South in the council elections, on the very same day that they (narrowly) held the Westminster seat.
"Posh scousers" often vote Tory on a local level to keep their council tax low, but can't bring themselves to vote for the Tory bastards at a national level.
Corbyn could well end up Foot 1983 to Miliband's Kinnock 1987, or even worse, in which case a number of Labour seats would be up for grabs by the Tories, LDs and UKIP
Dylan Strain Len McCluskey, has opened up a £2.00 registered supporters scheme with Unite Community. Meaning you don't have to spend £25 joining Labour.
Any criteria? Like having a job in an industry that Unite operates in, or something equally stupid like that.
Nope. Includes unwaged/unemployed.
To be honest, I think McCluskey has done the right thing. The new Labour rules were designed to raise money and disenfranchise people who paid in good faith for a certain level of participation that has been taken away from them with no notice or justification.
As far as I can see, Eagles is a genuinely repressive figure. She not merely voted for the War in Iraq (which is perhaps excusable on the grounds that she was lied to) but she voted against an Inquiry (which is unforgivable).
Corbyn is preferable to Eagles.
Owen Smith would have had a better chance of beating Corbyn.
And the rules for who can vote for the leader are so arcane that if the result is close, this is just gonna end up in court.
My feeling is if Corbyn retains the support of the Trade Union leaders, he will win this again.
Dylan Strain Len McCluskey, has opened up a £2.00 registered supporters scheme with Unite Community. Meaning you don't have to spend £25 joining Labour.
Any criteria? Like having a job in an industry that Unite operates in, or something equally stupid like that.
Nope. Includes unwaged/unemployed.
To be honest, I think McCluskey has done the right thing. The new Labour rules were designed to raise money and disenfranchise people who paid in good faith for a certain level of participation that has been taken away from them with no notice or justification.
Labour should let him lose the next GE and hope Chuka, Ed Balls or D Miliband are in a position to take over
I think the idea is that Angela has got to be Michael Howard to Jezza's IDS (i.e with Jezza they may be totally wiped out, with Angie they will lose of course but will live to fight another day)
I'd have thought someone like Harriet Harman would make a more plausible Michael Howard though....
The thing is, I see it as the exact opposite. Corbyn would not win a general election, but he would atleast IMO save most current Labour seats (as shown in the OK but unspectacular results in the council elections in May). He doesn't have any interest or ability in winning anyone beyond the core Labour vote, but at least he does have some basic appeal to that core vote. Another defeat for Labour, but atleast enough of the furniture saved for a potential future win if a good leader eventually turns up.
On the other hand, Eagle with a Remain-style strategy would royally piss off huge tranches of the core vote who are desperate for some kind of change from the status quo, while her complete lack of charisma would mean she would be unable to win over any other voters to compensate for the loss of core votes. A massive defeat, putting Labour out of business forever, all so the PLP get to feel they won their ego battle with the membership.
Dylan Strain Len McCluskey, has opened up a £2.00 registered supporters scheme with Unite Community. Meaning you don't have to spend £25 joining Labour.
Stitch up vs stitch up..even cheaper than £3 this time around!
Pretty soon, various factions will be offering to pay us to join their gerrymander.
Can I just say how glad I am that Tom Watson, the most backstabbing mendacious disgusting deceitful toad ever to have disgraced parliament has been done over today ?
As far as I can see, Eagles is a genuinely repressive figure. She not merely voted for the War in Iraq (which is perhaps excusable on the grounds that she was lied to) but she voted against an Inquiry (which is unforgivable).
Corbyn is preferable to Eagles.
Owen Smith would have had a better chance of beating Corbyn.
And the rules for who can vote for the leader are so arcane that if the result is close, this is just gonna end up in court.
My feeling is if Corbyn retains the support of the Trade Union leaders, he will win this again.
Can I just say how glad I am that Tom Watson, the most backstabbing mendacious disgusting deceitful toad ever to have disgraced parliament has been done over today ?
Anyone going to challenge him, do you think?
For the deputyship ?
Clive Lewis should give it a go. Though of course he will need 50 signatures which he may not get.
Bedtime. No doubt there'll be a new set of rules about who can vote by the morning. This really isn't fair on betting folks. Maybe we should do a class action?
Dylan Strain Len McCluskey, has opened up a £2.00 registered supporters scheme with Unite Community. Meaning you don't have to spend £25 joining Labour.
Stitch up vs stitch up..even cheaper than £3 this time around!
Pretty soon, various factions will be offering to pay us to join their gerrymander.
Can I just say how glad I am that Tom Watson, the most backstabbing mendacious disgusting deceitful toad ever to have disgraced parliament has been done over today ?
Anyone going to challenge him, do you think?
For the deputyship ?
Clive Lewis should give it a go. Though of course he will need 50 signatures which he may not get.
Lewis needs to just be an MP. Learn his craft. This is not the time for a novice...
Bedtime. No doubt there'll be a new set of rules about who can vote by the morning. This really isn't fair on betting folks. Maybe we should do a class action?
No, all of it is perfectly fair on us bettors. We need to consider underhand tactics in our strategies.
Dylan Strain Len McCluskey, has opened up a £2.00 registered supporters scheme with Unite Community. Meaning you don't have to spend £25 joining Labour.
Any criteria? Like having a job in an industry that Unite operates in, or something equally stupid like that.
Nope. Includes unwaged/unemployed.
To be honest, I think McCluskey has done the right thing. The new Labour rules were designed to raise money and disenfranchise people who paid in good faith for a certain level of participation that has been taken away from them with no notice or justification.
McCluskey is restoring that right.
Yeah, the £25 came across as big FU to the low waged, unemployed, young, etc...
Can I just say how glad I am that Tom Watson, the most backstabbing mendacious disgusting deceitful toad ever to have disgraced parliament has been done over today ?
Anyone going to challenge him, do you think?
For the deputyship ?
Clive Lewis should give it a go. Though of course he will need 50 signatures which he may not get.
Lewis needs to just be an MP. Learn his craft. This is not the time for a novice...
Deputy leader of the Labour party with no prospect of Gov't is precisely the right place for a novice.
As far as I can see, Eagles is a genuinely repressive figure. She not merely voted for the War in Iraq (which is perhaps excusable on the grounds that she was lied to) but she voted against an Inquiry (which is unforgivable).
Corbyn is preferable to Eagles.
Owen Smith would have had a better chance of beating Corbyn.
And the rules for who can vote for the leader are so arcane that if the result is close, this is just gonna end up in court.
My feeling is if Corbyn retains the support of the Trade Union leaders, he will win this again.
Smith is 11/5 on Betfair, he's surely standing. My thinking is that Eagle will attack Corbyn, whilst Smith will be the 'competent' alternative.
Dylan Strain Len McCluskey, has opened up a £2.00 registered supporters scheme with Unite Community. Meaning you don't have to spend £25 joining Labour.
Any criteria? Like having a job in an industry that Unite operates in, or something equally stupid like that.
Nope. Includes unwaged/unemployed.
To be honest, I think McCluskey has done the right thing. The new Labour rules were designed to raise money and disenfranchise people who paid in good faith for a certain level of participation that has been taken away from them with no notice or justification.
McCluskey is restoring that right.
Yeah, the £25 came across as big FU to the low waged, unemployed, young, etc...
No prizes for guessing one of the NEC who voted that one through.
As far as I can see, Eagles is a genuinely repressive figure. She not merely voted for the War in Iraq (which is perhaps excusable on the grounds that she was lied to) but she voted against an Inquiry (which is unforgivable).
Corbyn is preferable to Eagles.
Owen Smith would have had a better chance of beating Corbyn.
And the rules for who can vote for the leader are so arcane that if the result is close, this is just gonna end up in court.
My feeling is if Corbyn retains the support of the Trade Union leaders, he will win this again.
Smith is 11/5 on Betfair, he's surely standing. My thinking is that Eagle will attack Corbyn, whilst Smith will be the 'competent' alternative.
Can I just say how glad I am that Tom Watson, the most backstabbing mendacious disgusting deceitful toad ever to have disgraced parliament has been done over today ?
Anyone going to challenge him, do you think?
For the deputyship ?
Clive Lewis should give it a go. Though of course he will need 50 signatures which he may not get.
Dylan Strain Len McCluskey, has opened up a £2.00 registered supporters scheme with Unite Community. Meaning you don't have to spend £25 joining Labour.
Stitch up vs stitch up..even cheaper than £3 this time around!
Pretty soon, various factions will be offering to pay us to join their gerrymander.
Can I just say how glad I am that Tom Watson, the most backstabbing mendacious disgusting deceitful toad ever to have disgraced parliament has been done over today ?
Anyone going to challenge him, do you think?
For the deputyship ?
Clive Lewis should give it a go. Though of course he will need 50 signatures which he may not get.
Dylan Strain Len McCluskey, has opened up a £2.00 registered supporters scheme with Unite Community. Meaning you don't have to spend £25 joining Labour.
Any criteria? Like having a job in an industry that Unite operates in, or something equally stupid like that.
Nope. Includes unwaged/unemployed.
To be honest, I think McCluskey has done the right thing. The new Labour rules were designed to raise money and disenfranchise people who paid in good faith for a certain level of participation that has been taken away from them with no notice or justification.
McCluskey is restoring that right.
It's £2 a month with a year's commitment. It's been going for about four years now.
Dylan Strain Len McCluskey, has opened up a £2.00 registered supporters scheme with Unite Community. Meaning you don't have to spend £25 joining Labour.
Any criteria? Like having a job in an industry that Unite operates in, or something equally stupid like that.
Nope. Includes unwaged/unemployed.
To be honest, I think McCluskey has done the right thing. The new Labour rules were designed to raise money and disenfranchise people who paid in good faith for a certain level of participation that has been taken away from them with no notice or justification.
McCluskey is restoring that right.
It's £2 a month with a year's commitment. It's been going for about four years now.
You'd only a quid better off then. Unless this is a new £2 thing?
Dylan Strain Len McCluskey, has opened up a £2.00 registered supporters scheme with Unite Community. Meaning you don't have to spend £25 joining Labour.
Any criteria? Like having a job in an industry that Unite operates in, or something equally stupid like that.
Nope. Includes unwaged/unemployed.
To be honest, I think McCluskey has done the right thing. The new Labour rules were designed to raise money and disenfranchise people who paid in good faith for a certain level of participation that has been taken away from them with no notice or justification.
McCluskey is restoring that right.
Yeah, the £25 came across as big FU to the low waged, unemployed, young, etc...
No prizes for guessing one of the NEC who voted that one through.
Dylan Strain Len McCluskey, has opened up a £2.00 registered supporters scheme with Unite Community. Meaning you don't have to spend £25 joining Labour.
Any criteria? Like having a job in an industry that Unite operates in, or something equally stupid like that.
Nope. Includes unwaged/unemployed.
To be honest, I think McCluskey has done the right thing. The new Labour rules were designed to raise money and disenfranchise people who paid in good faith for a certain level of participation that has been taken away from them with no notice or justification.
McCluskey is restoring that right.
It's £2 a month with a year's commitment. It's been going for about four years now.
You'd only a quid better off then. Unless this is a new £2 thing?
It doesn't look like it - or not yet, anyway. The current Unite Community scheme has ben going for four years.
Of course, anyone will be able to sign up if it does exist. The anti-Corbyn people will promote is as hard as the Corbyn people do.
Can I just say how glad I am that Tom Watson, the most backstabbing mendacious disgusting deceitful toad ever to have disgraced parliament has been done over today ?
Anyone going to challenge him, do you think?
For the deputyship ?
Clive Lewis should give it a go. Though of course he will need 50 signatures which he may not get.
I might be only 15% rather than 20%, but DYOR.
I'm just surprised I've not heard it mooted.
That is what Wikipedia said, so maybe not a good source of info for serious betters.
For all I know, they might have had a rule change banning people with a BMI of less than 35 standing for the position.
Can I just say how glad I am that Tom Watson, the most backstabbing mendacious disgusting deceitful toad ever to have disgraced parliament has been done over today ?
Anyone going to challenge him, do you think?
For the deputyship ?
Clive Lewis should give it a go. Though of course he will need 50 signatures which he may not get.
I might be only 15% rather than 20%, but DYOR.
Dear oh dear. I bumped into Clive Lewis on Milbank this afternoon. I asked him when he was going to come and see me. 'Why would I want to Do that?' he asked 'because I lead the Council in part of your constituency' I replied
Dylan Strain Len McCluskey, has opened up a £2.00 registered supporters scheme with Unite Community. Meaning you don't have to spend £25 joining Labour.
Any criteria? Like having a job in an industry that Unite operates in, or something equally stupid like that.
Nope. Includes unwaged/unemployed.
To be honest, I think McCluskey has done the right thing. The new Labour rules were designed to raise money and disenfranchise people who paid in good faith for a certain level of participation that has been taken away from them with no notice or justification.
McCluskey is restoring that right.
It's £2 a month with a year's commitment. It's been going for about four years now.
You'd only a quid better off then. Unless this is a new £2 thing?
It doesn't look like it - or not yet, anyway. The current Unite Community scheme has ben going for four years.
Of course, anyone will be able to sign up if it does exist. The anti-Corbyn people will promote is as hard as the Corbyn people do.
So some PBers just celebrated something which has been around for four years? LOL. You're right though, McCluskey will be promoting this for the next two months.
I was out running a rehearsal this evening - and was just gobsmacked at how mental Labour has managed to be this evening. As one of the characters in the play says:
'If this was on the stage right now, I would condemn is as an improbable fiction'
As far as I can see, Eagles is a genuinely repressive figure. She not merely voted for the War in Iraq (which is perhaps excusable on the grounds that she was lied to) but she voted against an Inquiry (which is unforgivable).
Corbyn is preferable to Eagles.
Owen Smith would have had a better chance of beating Corbyn.
And the rules for who can vote for the leader are so arcane that if the result is close, this is just gonna end up in court.
My feeling is if Corbyn retains the support of the Trade Union leaders, he will win this again.
As far as I can see, Eagles is a genuinely repressive figure. She not merely voted for the War in Iraq (which is perhaps excusable on the grounds that she was lied to) but she voted against an Inquiry (which is unforgivable).
Corbyn is preferable to Eagles.
Owen Smith would have had a better chance of beating Corbyn.
And the rules for who can vote for the leader are so arcane that if the result is close, this is just gonna end up in court.
My feeling is if Corbyn retains the support of the Trade Union leaders, he will win this again.
Corbyn will win. It's certain.
Well, that's good news, surely?
Well, some of us want a functioning opposition (it seems others for various political reasons don't). A one-party nation isn't really in anyone's interests (I'm intrigued to hear arguments as to how it even could be, tbqh).
Can I just say how glad I am that Tom Watson, the most backstabbing mendacious disgusting deceitful toad ever to have disgraced parliament has been done over today ?
Anyone going to challenge him, do you think?
For the deputyship ?
Clive Lewis should give it a go. Though of course he will need 50 signatures which he may not get.
I might be only 15% rather than 20%, but DYOR.
Dear oh dear. I bumped into Clive Lewis on Milbank this afternoon. I asked him when he was going to come and see me. 'Why would I want to Do that?' he asked 'because I lead the Council in part of your constituency' I replied
Can I just say how glad I am that Tom Watson, the most backstabbing mendacious disgusting deceitful toad ever to have disgraced parliament has been done over today ?
Anyone going to challenge him, do you think?
For the deputyship ?
Clive Lewis should give it a go. Though of course he will need 50 signatures which he may not get.
I might be only 15% rather than 20%, but DYOR.
Dear oh dear. I bumped into Clive Lewis on Milbank this afternoon. I asked him when he was going to come and see me. 'Why would I want to Do that?' he asked 'because I lead the Council in part of your constituency' I replied
As far as I can see, Eagles is a genuinely repressive figure. She not merely voted for the War in Iraq (which is perhaps excusable on the grounds that she was lied to) but she voted against an Inquiry (which is unforgivable).
Corbyn is preferable to Eagles.
Owen Smith would have had a better chance of beating Corbyn.
And the rules for who can vote for the leader are so arcane that if the result is close, this is just gonna end up in court.
My feeling is if Corbyn retains the support of the Trade Union leaders, he will win this again.
Corbyn will win. It's certain.
Well, that's good news, surely?
Well, some of us want a functioning opposition (it seems others for various political reasons don't). A one-party nation isn't really in anyone's interests (I'm intrigued to hear arguments as to how it even could be, tbqh).
The mobilisation of the will of the people is surely in the interest of the people.. How can it be otherwise?
Cameron's last full day as Pm included visiting one of the 300 free schools his government created. Apparently he was to spend the next 2 months before bowing out talking about "life chances" and publishing a paper on it. Telegraph: "It meant more to him than Europe ever did."
Can I just say how glad I am that Tom Watson, the most backstabbing mendacious disgusting deceitful toad ever to have disgraced parliament has been done over today ?
Anyone going to challenge him, do you think?
For the deputyship ?
Clive Lewis should give it a go. Though of course he will need 50 signatures which he may not get.
I might be only 15% rather than 20%, but DYOR.
Dear oh dear. I bumped into Clive Lewis on Milbank this afternoon. I asked him when he was going to come and see me. 'Why would I want to Do that?' he asked 'because I lead the Council in part of your constituency' I replied
He really has no idea.
bunnco. your man on the spot
bunnco - it sounds rather as if it was Clive Lewis who was put on the spot on this occasion!
I don't find it particularly edifying to see someone who aspires to become a resident of Downing Street using such language at a public event. It is not plain-speaking, it just not what I expect of someone who wants to lead.
Can I just say how glad I am that Tom Watson, the most backstabbing mendacious disgusting deceitful toad ever to have disgraced parliament has been done over today ?
Anyone going to challenge him, do you think?
For the deputyship ?
Clive Lewis should give it a go. Though of course he will need 50 signatures which he may not get.
I might be only 15% rather than 20%, but DYOR.
Dear oh dear. I bumped into Clive Lewis on Milbank this afternoon. I asked him when he was going to come and see me. 'Why would I want to Do that?' he asked 'because I lead the Council in part of your constituency' I replied
He really has no idea.
bunnco. your man on the spot
bunnco - it sounds rather as if it was Clive Lewis who was put on the spot on this occasion!
As far as I can see, Eagles is a genuinely repressive figure. She not merely voted for the War in Iraq (which is perhaps excusable on the grounds that she was lied to) but she voted against an Inquiry (which is unforgivable).
Corbyn is preferable to Eagles.
Owen Smith would have had a better chance of beating Corbyn.
And the rules for who can vote for the leader are so arcane that if the result is close, this is just gonna end up in court.
My feeling is if Corbyn retains the support of the Trade Union leaders, he will win this again.
Corbyn will win. It's certain.
Well, that's good news, surely?
Well, some of us want a functioning opposition (it seems others for various political reasons don't). A one-party nation isn't really in anyone's interests (I'm intrigued to hear arguments as to how it even could be, tbqh).
So then why do you want to replace Corbyn with an even less electable leader?
As far as I can see, Eagles is a genuinely repressive figure. She not merely voted for the War in Iraq (which is perhaps excusable on the grounds that she was lied to) but she voted against an Inquiry (which is unforgivable).
Corbyn is preferable to Eagles.
Owen Smith would have had a better chance of beating Corbyn.
And the rules for who can vote for the leader are so arcane that if the result is close, this is just gonna end up in court.
My feeling is if Corbyn retains the support of the Trade Union leaders, he will win this again.
Corbyn will win. It's certain.
Well, that's good news, surely?
Well, some of us want a functioning opposition (it seems others for various political reasons don't). A one-party nation isn't really in anyone's interests (I'm intrigued to hear arguments as to how it even could be, tbqh).
The mobilisation of the will of the people is surely in the interest of the people.. How can it be otherwise?
Well it's the will of the members. Whether it's the will of people as a whole is a different thing....
As far as I can see, Eagles is a genuinely repressive figure. She not merely voted for the War in Iraq (which is perhaps excusable on the grounds that she was lied to) but she voted against an Inquiry (which is unforgivable).
Corbyn is preferable to Eagles.
Owen Smith would have had a better chance of beating Corbyn.
And the rules for who can vote for the leader are so arcane that if the result is close, this is just gonna end up in court.
My feeling is if Corbyn retains the support of the Trade Union leaders, he will win this again.
Corbyn will win. It's certain.
Well, that's good news, surely?
Well, some of us want a functioning opposition (it seems others for various political reasons don't). A one-party nation isn't really in anyone's interests (I'm intrigued to hear arguments as to how it even could be, tbqh).
So then why do you want to replace Corbyn with an even less electable leader?
Oh god, I have already had that debate with you and contested your argument in regard to 'less electable'. If don't agree with my points then fine, but I've already attempted to answer your question many times today.
As far as I can see, Eagles is a genuinely repressive figure. She not merely voted for the War in Iraq (which is perhaps excusable on the grounds that she was lied to) but she voted against an Inquiry (which is unforgivable).
Corbyn is preferable to Eagles.
Owen Smith would have had a better chance of beating Corbyn.
And the rules for who can vote for the leader are so arcane that if the result is close, this is just gonna end up in court.
My feeling is if Corbyn retains the support of the Trade Union leaders, he will win this again.
Corbyn will win. It's certain.
Well, that's good news, surely?
Well, some of us want a functioning opposition (it seems others for various political reasons don't). A one-party nation isn't really in anyone's interests (I'm intrigued to hear arguments as to how it even could be, tbqh).
So then why do you want to replace Corbyn with an even less electable leader?
Smith or Eagle may well be less electable - but they represent a move away from Momentum and the move towards a mob mentality in the membership which is leading to violence.
Electable or not, that is an important step forward.
As far as I can see, Eagles is a genuinely repressive figure. She not merely voted for the War in Iraq (which is perhaps excusable on the grounds that she was lied to) but she voted against an Inquiry (which is unforgivable).
Corbyn is preferable to Eagles.
Owen Smith would have had a better chance of beating Corbyn.
And the rules for who can vote for the leader are so arcane that if the result is close, this is just gonna end up in court.
My feeling is if Corbyn retains the support of the Trade Union leaders, he will win this again.
Corbyn will win. It's certain.
Well, that's good news, surely?
Well, some of us want a functioning opposition (it seems others for various political reasons don't). A one-party nation isn't really in anyone's interests (I'm intrigued to hear arguments as to how it even could be, tbqh).
So then why do you want to replace Corbyn with an even less electable leader?
Oh god, I have already had that debate with you and contested your argument in regard to 'less electable'. If don't agree with my points then fine, but I've already attempted to answer your question many times today.
With respect, it was you who just brought up a strawman argument of your own, by saying "it seems others for various political reasons don't want a functioning opposition".
Most of us Labour posters have not said that we "don't want a functioning opposition", we just have a very different opinion to you on whether Corbyn or Eagle would be the best functioning opposition and which get a better General Election result (with the disaster of the Remain campaign in most Labour seats as supporting evidence).
Cameron's last full day as Pm included visiting one of the 300 free schools his government created. Apparently he was to spend the next 2 months before bowing out talking about "life chances" and publishing a paper on it. Telegraph: "It meant more to him than Europe ever did."
Why doesn't May make Dave Education Secretary?
Or am I being silly?
Chortle,
Alternatively, I fear you may been misled by the Silly Party..
I don't find it particularly edifying to see someone who aspires to become a resident of Downing Street using such language at a public event. It is not plain-speaking, it just not what I expect of someone who wants to lead.
There was a time, actually until relatively recently, when Mike Smithson wouldn't allow bad language on PB.com, but now the F word and other such terms are used as a matter of routine, without any regard and usually without any purpose. Shame really, for many it must have significantly reduced the enjoyment of visiting this site.
I don't find it particularly edifying to see someone who aspires to become a resident of Downing Street using such language at a public event. It is not plain-speaking, it just not what I expect of someone who wants to lead.
There was a time, actually until relatively recently, when Mike Smithson wouldn't allow bad language on PB.com, but now the F word and other such terms are used as a matter of routine, without any regard and usually without any purpose. Shame really, for many it must have significantly reduced the enjoyment of visiting this site.
I don't have a problem with ripe language - but there is a time and a place for it. And the professional political arena isn't one of them.
Cameron's last full day as Pm included visiting one of the 300 free schools his government created. Apparently he was to spend the next 2 months before bowing out talking about "life chances" and publishing a paper on it. Telegraph: "It meant more to him than Europe ever did."
Why doesn't May make Dave Education Secretary?
Or am I being silly?
It would be great if Dave remained in the Cabinet.
But would it be seen as undermining Theresa - ie very hard for her to then sack him or tell him what to do.
But let's face it - as was said when Maggie went - he can wipe the floor with everyone else so why not have the best player in the team?
However if he were to stay surely it would have to be in a top job - almost certainly Foreign Sec.
With respect, it was you who just brought up a strawman argument of your own, by saying "it seems others for various political reasons don't want a functioning opposition".
Most of us Labour posters have not said that we "don't want a functioning opposition", we just have a very different opinion to you on whether Corbyn or Eagle would be the best functioning opposition and which get a better General Election result (with the disaster of the Remain campaign in most Labour seats as supporting evidence).
It's not a strawman argument - it is clear there are many here for political reasons (both left and right) who want there to be no functioning opposition. Nonetheless, I wasn't referring to you specifically in the first place. Although now you bring it up by supporting Corbyn you fundamentally are rejecting the idea of a functioning opposition. In a parliamentary democracy, a functioning opposition simply cannot be one which rejects the very concept of a parliamentary democracy. By refusing to resign Corbyn has put two fingers up at parliamentary democracy. He no longer believes that gaining the confidence of his MPs actually matters. You seem to sight the disastrous Remain campaign often. Do you know who was leader of the Labour party during this period? Do you know therefore who oversaw this disastrous Remain campaign and thus who must bear the greatest burden for its failure (in regard to Labour voters)? That person is Jeremy Corbyn, not Angela Eagle or any other 'moderate PLPer' (which to Corbynites seems to be everyone but Corbyn and McDonnell in the Labour party). The same person who you argue (or at least seem to imply) is the most electable figure Labour have to offer, and who you seem to think will do decent in a GE.
Cameron's last full day as Pm included visiting one of the 300 free schools his government created. Apparently he was to spend the next 2 months before bowing out talking about "life chances" and publishing a paper on it. Telegraph: "It meant more to him than Europe ever did."
Why doesn't May make Dave Education Secretary?
Or am I being silly?
It would be great if Dave remained in the Cabinet.
But would it be seen as undermining Theresa - ie very hard for her to then sack him or tell him what to do.
But let's face it - as was said when Maggie went - he can wipe the floor with everyone else so why not have the best player in the team?
However if he were to stay surely it would have to be in a top job - almost certainly Foreign Sec.
Agree - but maybe back in at the first reshuffle to give him time to chillax on the back benches and her time to get her feet under the table.
As far as I can see, Eagles is a genuinely repressive figure. She not merely voted for the War in Iraq (which is perhaps excusable on the grounds that she was lied to) but she voted against an Inquiry (which is unforgivable).
Corbyn is preferable to Eagles.
Owen Smith would have had a better chance of beating Corbyn.
And the rules for who can vote for the leader are so arcane that if the result is close, this is just gonna end up in court.
My feeling is if Corbyn retains the support of the Trade Union leaders, he will win this again.
Corbyn will win. It's certain.
Well, that's good news, surely?
Well, some of us want a functioning opposition (it seems others for various political reasons don't). A one-party nation isn't really in anyone's interests (I'm intrigued to hear arguments as to how it even could be, tbqh).
So then why do you want to replace Corbyn with an even less electable leader?
Oh god, I have already had that debate with you and contested your argument in regard to 'less electable'. If don't agree with my points then fine, but I've already attempted to answer your question many times today.
With respect, it was you who just brought up a strawman argument of your own, by saying "it seems others for various political reasons don't want a functioning opposition".
Most of us Labour posters have not said that we "don't want a functioning opposition", we just have a very different opinion to you on whether Corbyn or Eagle would be the best functioning opposition and which get a better General Election result (with the disaster of the Remain campaign in most Labour seats as supporting evidence).
A functioning opposition involves having a full shadow front bench. Corbyn demonstrably cannot deliver one of those. Eagle can. There's no getting round that, I'm afraid.
My seat in the North West has a Labour majority of 96 and I reckon the Tories will win it by well over 5000 in 2020 if Corbyn is still there.
Chester?
Well done, sir!
Actually I reckon it will be nearer 10,000
It was odd how Labour gained Chester while losing Vale of Clwyd just down the road.
Neighbouring Wirral West was also one of the few Labour gains in 2015. We were one of the areas where Labour did OK last time. Doubt Labour has a prayer of holding either in 2020 with Corbyn
Except in the May local elections, Corbyn's Labour made gains across the Wirral, and they also gained the Cheshire PCC (which I would assume meant a strong performance in Chester itself, since the deep shire Cheshire is a desert for Labour).
Turnout in PPC elections are so small I doubt it indicates anything. I still voted Labour in the last local elections - it's a vote that runs no risk of seeing Corbyn as PM.
I'll take any bet you care to offer that Labour will lose Chester at the next GE if Corbyn is leader. I think I personally know enough ex-Labour voters to see that 96 majority disappear!
I wonder how many northern marginals Tories can gain in the north if Corbyn is still leader, I think Labour will do even better in London in 2020 building up big majorities in place like Enfield whilst tories winning mainly white seats across the north and midlands.
I don't find it particularly edifying to see someone who aspires to become a resident of Downing Street using such language at a public event. It is not plain-speaking, it just not what I expect of someone who wants to lead.
There was a time, actually until relatively recently, when Mike Smithson wouldn't allow bad language on PB.com, but now the F word and other such terms are used as a matter of routine, without any regard and usually without any purpose. Shame really, for many it must have significantly reduced the enjoyment of visiting this site.
Shame it's our political leaders using it ,that shouldn't be shown ?
Cameron's last full day as Pm included visiting one of the 300 free schools his government created. Apparently he was to spend the next 2 months before bowing out talking about "life chances" and publishing a paper on it. Telegraph: "It meant more to him than Europe ever did."
Why doesn't May make Dave Education Secretary?
Or am I being silly?
It would be great if Dave remained in the Cabinet.
But would it be seen as undermining Theresa - ie very hard for her to then sack him or tell him what to do.
But let's face it - as was said when Maggie went - he can wipe the floor with everyone else so why not have the best player in the team?
However if he were to stay surely it would have to be in a top job - almost certainly Foreign Sec.
Agree - but maybe back in at the first reshuffle to give him time to chillax on the back benches and her time to get her feet under the table.
Yep - sounds sensible.
And I don't think we should rule him out for next Con leader either - given his age he could easily come back if May wins in 2020 and then retires in 2023 or 2024 (as she surely would).
If May went at the 2023 Party Conference she would be 67 - Cameron would then be 57.
As far as I can see, Eagles is a genuinely repressive figure. She not merely voted for the War in Iraq (which is perhaps excusable on the grounds that she was lied to) but she voted against an Inquiry (which is unforgivable).
Corbyn is preferable to Eagles.
Owen Smith would have had a better chance of beating Corbyn.
And the rules for who can vote for the leader are so arcane that if the result is close, this is just gonna end up in court.
My feeling is if Corbyn retains the support of the Trade Union leaders, he will win this again.
Corbyn will win. It's certain.
Well, that's good news, surely?
Well, some of us want a functioning opposition (it seems others for various political reasons don't). A one-party nation isn't really in anyone's interests (I'm intrigued to hear arguments as to how it even could be, tbqh).
So then why do you want to replace Corbyn with an even less electable leader?
Oh god, I have already had that debate with you and contested your argument in regard to 'less electable'. If don't agree with my points then fine, but I've already attempted to answer your question many times today.
With respect, it was you who just brought up a strawman argument of your own, by saying "it seems others for various political reasons don't want a functioning opposition".
Most of us Labour posters have not said that we "don't want a functioning opposition", we just have a very different opinion to you on whether Corbyn or Eagle would be the best functioning opposition and which get a better General Election result (with the disaster of the Remain campaign in most Labour seats as supporting evidence).
A functioning opposition involves having a full shadow front bench. Corbyn demonstrably cannot deliver one of those. Eagle can. There's no getting round that, I'm afraid.
This is certainly true. The problem is that Labour is really lacking in talent to fill all of those roles. There will be those willing to serve in a non-Corbyn Shadow Cabinet - but many of them would be unemployable in the real world.
The quality of candidates has diminished (which is something that has affected all parties - but the decline on the Labour benches has been more marked)
I don't find it particularly edifying to see someone who aspires to become a resident of Downing Street using such language at a public event. It is not plain-speaking, it just not what I expect of someone who wants to lead.
There was a time, actually until relatively recently, when Mike Smithson wouldn't allow bad language on PB.com, but now the F word and other such terms are used as a matter of routine, without any regard and usually without any purpose. Shame really, for many it must have significantly reduced the enjoyment of visiting this site.
Shame it's our political leaders using it ,that shouldn't be shown ?
I don't find it particularly edifying to see someone who aspires to become a resident of Downing Street using such language at a public event. It is not plain-speaking, it just not what I expect of someone who wants to lead.
There was a time, actually until relatively recently, when Mike Smithson wouldn't allow bad language on PB.com, but now the F word and other such terms are used as a matter of routine, without any regard and usually without any purpose. Shame really, for many it must have significantly reduced the enjoyment of visiting this site.
Shame it's our political leaders using it ,that shouldn't be shown ?
With respect, it was you who just brought up a strawman argument of your own, by saying "it seems others for various political reasons don't want a functioning opposition".
Most of us Labour posters have not said that we "don't want a functioning opposition", we just have a very different opinion to you on whether Corbyn or Eagle would be the best functioning opposition and which get a better General Election result (with the disaster of the Remain campaign in most Labour seats as supporting evidence).
It's not a strawman argument - it is clear there are many here for political reasons (both left and right) who want there to be no functioning opposition. Nonetheless, I wasn't referring to you specifically in the first place. Although now you bring it up by supporting Corbyn you fundamentally are rejecting the idea of a functioning opposition. In a parliamentary democracy, a functioning opposition simply cannot be one which rejects the very concept of a parliamentary democracy. By refusing to resign Corbyn has put two fingers up at parliamentary democracy. He no longer believes that gaining the confidence of his MPs actually matters. You seem to sight the disastrous Remain campaign often. Do you know who was leader of the Labour party during this period? Do you know therefore who oversaw this disastrous Remain campaign and thus who must bear the greatest burden for its failure (in regard to Labour voters)? That person is Jeremy Corbyn, not Angela Eagle or any other 'moderate PLPer' (which to Corbynites seems to be everyone but Corbyn and McDonnell in the Labour party). The same person who you argue (or at least seem to imply) is the most electable figure Labour have to offer, and who you seem to think will do decent in a GE.
Why on earth are you blaming Corbyn for the “disastrous Remain” campaign?
It looks to me as though Angela Eagle has far more responsibility for what happened with her wretched performance at the debates.
Corbyn was elected with a massive mandate. He has the right to expect the PLP to support him for a reasonable period (I would say 2 or 3 years) while he develops policies.
The PLP destabilised him.
Rather than ask why did Corbyn not resign it is just as reasonable to ask why did members of the PLP not resign their seats and allow new MPs willing to serve under Corbyn to take their place.
The ultimate problem is that the PLP does not look either like the membership of the labour Party or their typical voters. That is unsustainable. The problem won’t go away by ditching Corbyn.
As far as I can see, Eagles is a genuinely repressive figure. She not merely voted for the War in Iraq (which is perhaps excusable on the grounds that she was lied to) but she voted against an Inquiry (which is unforgivable).
Corbyn is preferable to Eagles.
Owen Smith would have had a better chance of beating Corbyn.
And the rules for who can vote for the leader are so arcane that if the result is close, this is just gonna end up in court.
My feeling is if Corbyn retains the support of the Trade Union leaders, he will win this again.
Corbyn will win. It's certain.
Well, that's good news, surely?
Well, some of us want a functioning opposition (it seems others for various political reasons don't). A one-party nation isn't really in anyone's interests (I'm intrigued to hear arguments as to how it even could be, tbqh).
So then why do you want to replace Corbyn with an even less electable leader?
Oh god, I have already had that debate with you and contested your argument in regard to 'less electable'. If don't agree with my points then fine, but I've already attempted to answer your question many times today.
With respect, it was you who just brought up a strawman argument of your own, by saying "it seems others for various political reasons don't want a functioning opposition".
Most of us Labour posters have not said that we "don't want a functioning opposition", we just have a very different opinion to you on whether Corbyn or Eagle would be the best functioning opposition and which get a better General Election result (with the disaster of the Remain campaign in most Labour seats as supporting evidence).
A functioning opposition involves having a full shadow front bench. Corbyn demonstrably cannot deliver one of those. Eagle can. There's no getting round that, I'm afraid.
I'm not convinced you understand the power of a Different Kind of Politics and its friends in, for example, hatenothope. They will be a functioning Parliamentary Opposition after the next election due to the Labour brand - and they are The Opposition now.
In the time it's taken Labour to get absolutely nowhere in terms of removing Jezza, the Tories have seen Cameron, Boris, Gove and Leadsom all destroyed (just Osborne left tomorrow) and May elected leader by the MP's.
Comments
Politics needs a break. It's just impossible to keep up!
"Posh scousers" often vote Tory on a local level to keep their council tax low, but can't bring themselves to vote for the Tory bastards at a national level.
This has been disproved in the last two elections, why can even morons believe this now.
Corbyn would be a proven loser up against a possible winner, and the students would be bored of voting for him. At the moment he has not been given a chance to fail and the choice is arguably worse
My God, no wonder he went to war with Iraq.
"Comrades, this is your Leadership Candidate. It is an honour to speak to you today, and I am honoured to be sailing with you on the maiden voyage of our motherland's most recent achievement. Once more, we play our dangerous game, a game of chess against our old adversary — The Conservative Party. For a hundred years, your fathers before you and your older brothers played this game and played it well. But today the game is different. We have the advantage. It reminds me of the heady days of 1945 and Clement Attlee, when the world trembled at the sound of our Nationalisations! Well, they will tremble again — at the sound of our Progressiveness. The order is: engage the Corbyn Drive!
"Comrades, our own Parliamentary Party doesn't know our full potential. They will do everything possible to test us; but they will only test their own embarrassment. We will leave our MPs behind, we will pass through the Conservative patrols, past their sonar nets, and lay off their largest constituency, and listen to their chortling and tittering... while we conduct Austerity Debates! Then, and when we are finished, the only sound they will hear is our laughter, while we sail to Brighton, where the sun is warm, and so is the... Comradeship!
"A great day, Comrades! We sail into history!"
McCluskey is restoring that right.
Corbyn is preferable to Eagles.
Owen Smith would have had a better chance of beating Corbyn.
And the rules for who can vote for the leader are so arcane that if the result is close, this is just gonna end up in court.
My feeling is if Corbyn retains the support of the Trade Union leaders, he will win this again.
Now Unite are offering a scheme for people to vote through Unite for £2.
Is there a market for the other 2?
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Hooty-TM-HOO-BRO-1-Brown-Heatable/dp/B0087D6VNC/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1468362502&sr=8-2&keywords=owl
Clive Lewis should give it a go. Though of course he will need 50 signatures which he may not get.
Is he out now?
Smith is 11/5 on Betfair, he's surely standing. My thinking is that Eagle will attack Corbyn, whilst Smith will be the 'competent' alternative.
I need @AndreaParma_82 on at this time.
Of course, anyone will be able to sign up if it does exist. The anti-Corbyn people will promote is as hard as the Corbyn people do.
For all I know, they might have had a rule change banning people with a BMI of less than 35 standing for the position.
I asked him when he was going to come and see me.
'Why would I want to Do that?' he asked
'because I lead the Council in part of your constituency' I replied
He really has no idea.
bunnco. your man on the spot
'If this was on the stage right now, I would condemn is as an improbable fiction'
Corbyn to stand and applaud Cameron ................... 3/1
Corbyn NOT to stand and applaud Cameron ........... 1/5
As someone once said, you decide!
P.S. There are also a whole range of Buzz Bingo words/phrases, which Cameron may or may not utter, none of which appeal in terms of offering value.
Why doesn't May make Dave Education Secretary?
Or am I being silly?
Electable or not, that is an important step forward.
Most of us Labour posters have not said that we "don't want a functioning opposition", we just have a very different opinion to you on whether Corbyn or Eagle would be the best functioning opposition and which get a better General Election result (with the disaster of the Remain campaign in most Labour seats as supporting evidence).
Alternatively, I fear you may been misled by the Silly Party..
But would it be seen as undermining Theresa - ie very hard for her to then sack him or tell him what to do.
But let's face it - as was said when Maggie went - he can wipe the floor with everyone else so why not have the best player in the team?
However if he were to stay surely it would have to be in a top job - almost certainly Foreign Sec.
It's not a strawman argument - it is clear there are many here for political reasons (both left and right) who want there to be no functioning opposition. Nonetheless, I wasn't referring to you specifically in the first place. Although now you bring it up by supporting Corbyn you fundamentally are rejecting the idea of a functioning opposition. In a parliamentary democracy, a functioning opposition simply cannot be one which rejects the very concept of a parliamentary democracy. By refusing to resign Corbyn has put two fingers up at parliamentary democracy. He no longer believes that gaining the confidence of his MPs actually matters. You seem to sight the disastrous Remain campaign often. Do you know who was leader of the Labour party during this period? Do you know therefore who oversaw this disastrous Remain campaign and thus who must bear the greatest burden for its failure (in regard to Labour voters)? That person is Jeremy Corbyn, not Angela Eagle or any other 'moderate PLPer' (which to Corbynites seems to be everyone but Corbyn and McDonnell in the Labour party). The same person who you argue (or at least seem to imply) is the most electable figure Labour have to offer, and who you seem to think will do decent in a GE.
And I don't think we should rule him out for next Con leader either - given his age he could easily come back if May wins in 2020 and then retires in 2023 or 2024 (as she surely would).
If May went at the 2023 Party Conference she would be 67 - Cameron would then be 57.
The quality of candidates has diminished (which is something that has affected all parties - but the decline on the Labour benches has been more marked)
It looks to me as though Angela Eagle has far more responsibility for what happened with her wretched performance at the debates.
Corbyn was elected with a massive mandate. He has the right to expect the PLP to support him for a reasonable period (I would say 2 or 3 years) while he develops policies.
The PLP destabilised him.
Rather than ask why did Corbyn not resign it is just as reasonable to ask why did members of the PLP not resign their seats and allow new MPs willing to serve under Corbyn to take their place.
The ultimate problem is that the PLP does not look either like the membership of the labour Party or their typical voters. That is unsustainable. The problem won’t go away by ditching Corbyn.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07l5y3d
Well he's right isn't he?
In the time it's taken Labour to get absolutely nowhere in terms of removing Jezza, the Tories have seen Cameron, Boris, Gove and Leadsom all destroyed (just Osborne left tomorrow) and May elected leader by the MP's.