Leading Labour and being the official opposition leader is not only good for Corbyn's brand of socialism but also his bank balance, what other person with 2 E grade A Levels, no degree and no work experience outside trade unions and the Labour Party would earn £138,000 a year, live in a £600,000 house and have a £2 million pension pot as Corbyn has?
Len McCluskey?
Even McCluskey worked for the Mersey Docks and Harbour Company for 11 years
Mersey Docks to Monte Carlo..the lad has come along way.
''Again, why is Tristram Hunt a Labour MP ? And an MP for Stoke Central ?''
Both are conundrums, I'll grant you.
Surely people with the opinions of Tristram Hunt should be candidates in rural Oxfordshire, not an inner city.
If Labour really want Hunt in the party he should be sent to Chipping Norton where he is in tune with the locals, instead of losing piles of votes in Stoke.
Islington South, Westminster North, Hove, Cambridge, Exeter, Bristol West would all be good fits.
Indeed, some of Labour's suffering is from putting the wrong people in the wrong constituencies.
Lefties should be put in inner cities, the blairites in rural and wealthy areas, and the soft left in middle class suburbs.
Putting a Blairite in an inner city or a Lefty in a village will rub the wrong way.
Leading Labour and being the official opposition leader is not only good for Corbyn's brand of socialism but also his bank balance, what other person with 2 E grade A Levels, no degree and no work experience outside trade unions and the Labour Party would earn £138,000 a year, live in a £600,000 house and have a £2 million pension pot as Corbyn has? Corbyn has managed to profit from his socialism in a way any capitalist would be proud of!
A friend of mine left school with no qualifications at all and started a small business. He sold it for £8 million.
But somehow I don't think Corbyn would have been able to do that. It required hard work, skill, and luck.
Plenty of entrepreneurs have, the only thing Corbyn has ever helped start and built up are the Socialist Campaign Group and Momentum!
Leading Labour and being the official opposition leader is not only good for Corbyn's brand of socialism but also his bank balance, what other person with 2 E grade A Levels, no degree and no work experience outside trade unions and the Labour Party would earn £138,000 a year, live in a £600,000 house and have a £2 million pension pot as Corbyn has? Corbyn has managed to profit from his socialism in a way any capitalist would be proud of!
Yet despite all that he doesn't look or behave like a rich man. He has been criticized for wearing the clothes of a tramp, having an allotment, and for making his own Jam.
"On the BBC's Newsnight in 1984, Corbyn was invited to discuss the House of Commons' dress code, during which broadcast Conservative MP Terry Dicks asserted that so-called Labour scruffs (such as Corbyn, who at this time was known for wearing open-necked shirts to the Commons[37]) should be banned from addressing the House unless they maintained higher standards. Corbyn responded, saying that: "It's not a fashion parade, it's not a gentleman's club, it's not a bankers' institute, it's a place where the people are represented." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZsYvkTw4Rg
Leading Labour and being the official opposition leader is not only good for Corbyn's brand of socialism but also his bank balance, what other person with 2 E grade A Levels, no degree and no work experience outside trade unions and the Labour Party would earn £138,000 a year, live in a £600,000 house and have a £2 million pension pot as Corbyn has?
Len McCluskey?
Even McCluskey worked for the Mersey Docks and Harbour Company for 11 years
Mersey Docks to Monte Carlo..the lad has come along way.
Yes, 'do as I say not as I do' applies very well in his case!
Leading Labour and being the official opposition leader is not only good for Corbyn's brand of socialism but also his bank balance, what other person with 2 E grade A Levels, no degree and no work experience outside trade unions and the Labour Party would earn £138,000 a year, live in a £600,000 house and have a £2 million pension pot as Corbyn has? Corbyn has managed to profit from his socialism in a way any capitalist would be proud of!
Yet despite all that he doesn't look or behave like a rich man. He has been criticized for wearing the clothes of a tramp, having an allotment, and for making his own Jam.
"On the BBC's Newsnight in 1984, Corbyn was invited to discuss the House of Commons' dress code, during which broadcast Conservative MP Terry Dicks asserted that so-called Labour scruffs (such as Corbyn, who at this time was known for wearing open-necked shirts to the Commons[37]) should be banned from addressing the House unless they maintained higher standards. Corbyn responded, saying that: "It's not a fashion parade, it's not a gentleman's club, it's not a bankers' institute, it's a place where the people are represented." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZsYvkTw4Rg
Using UNS based seat predictor with Corbyn in charge of Labour is not going to work out well for predictions.
Add in recent times, polling at GEs have tended to overestimate Labour.
I feel a thread coming on....
Not in 2010 - 1983 or February 1974.
So only three times in the last 42 years? Or only three times in the last eleven general elections. You're making my points for me.
2005 was pretty close to the outcome. 1997 ICM underestimated the Labour lead.
Probably the only polling company to do so!
Yes - but for so long it was seen as the Gold Standard! A week before Polling Day ICM caused panic in Labour ranks by showing its lead drop to 5%. Its final poll showing a Labour 10% lead was still 3% too low.
So we can agree that almost all polls overstated Labour in 97?
Indeed - particularly Gallup and NOP neither of which we hear from nowadays.
''Again, why is Tristram Hunt a Labour MP ? And an MP for Stoke Central ?''
Both are conundrums, I'll grant you.
Surely people with the opinions of Tristram Hunt should be candidates in rural Oxfordshire, not an inner city.
If Labour really want Hunt in the party he should be sent to Chipping Norton where he is in tune with the locals, instead of losing piles of votes in Stoke.
Islington South, Westminster North, Hove, Cambridge, Exeter, Bristol West would all be good fits.
Indeed, some of Labour's suffering is from putting the wrong people in the wrong constituencies.
Lefties should be put in inner cities, the blairites in rural and wealthy areas, and the soft left in middle class suburbs.
Putting a Blairite in an inner city or a Lefty in a village will rub the wrong way.
Rural areas will hardly ever vote Labour anyway and certainly not for a Blairite, someone with an agricultural background would be far more sensible, Blairites are better off in wealthy areas as you say, preferably in the metropolis
Leading Labour and being the official opposition leader is not only good for Corbyn's brand of socialism but also his bank balance, what other person with 2 E grade A Levels, no degree and no work experience outside trade unions and the Labour Party would earn £138,000 a year, live in a £600,000 house and have a £2 million pension pot as Corbyn has? Corbyn has managed to profit from his socialism in a way any capitalist would be proud of!
Yet despite all that he doesn't look or behave like a rich man. He has been criticized for wearing the clothes of a tramp, having an allotment, and for making his own Jam.
"On the BBC's Newsnight in 1984, Corbyn was invited to discuss the House of Commons' dress code, during which broadcast Conservative MP Terry Dicks asserted that so-called Labour scruffs (such as Corbyn, who at this time was known for wearing open-necked shirts to the Commons[37]) should be banned from addressing the House unless they maintained higher standards. Corbyn responded, saying that: "It's not a fashion parade, it's not a gentleman's club, it's not a bankers' institute, it's a place where the people are represented." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZsYvkTw4Rg
Well, he does have a bit of a point, although how people present themselves has an impact even when it shouldn't. The Commons represents the people, but it is not and never has been a perfect microcosm of how they look, act, dress or anything else, it is not necessary in order to represent the people to create a simulacrum of representation, should there be a mandated number of shire tories stomping in with muddy farmer's boots, and no more than that as it would not be represented?
Maybe requiring a shirt and tie is too extreme a code, maybe, although one of the counters to that is it is a job and appearance in the commons is one of the most formal aspects of that job, and people in jobs usually have some expectations of dress and appearance. People are not merely represented in the chamber, they are represented on all sorts of occasions outside of it when the MP might not feel the need to dress more formally.
IIRC Cromwell was mocked for his plain clothes when he went to parliament.
Erskine May says female Lords can wear hats. You're not supposed to attend Her Majesty with a stick or umbrella with you. Cannot wear military insignia or uniform. Wearing jacket and tie is custom for men but not always enforced.
Leading Labour and being the official opposition leader is not only good for Corbyn's brand of socialism but also his bank balance, what other person with 2 E grade A Levels, no degree and no work experience outside trade unions and the Labour Party would earn £138,000 a year, live in a £600,000 house and have a £2 million pension pot as Corbyn has? Corbyn has managed to profit from his socialism in a way any capitalist would be proud of!
Yet despite all that he doesn't look or behave like a rich man. He has been criticized for wearing the clothes of a tramp, having an allotment, and for making his own Jam.
"On the BBC's Newsnight in 1984, Corbyn was invited to discuss the House of Commons' dress code, during which broadcast Conservative MP Terry Dicks asserted that so-called Labour scruffs (such as Corbyn, who at this time was known for wearing open-necked shirts to the Commons[37]) should be banned from addressing the House unless they maintained higher standards. Corbyn responded, saying that: "It's not a fashion parade, it's not a gentleman's club, it's not a bankers' institute, it's a place where the people are represented." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZsYvkTw4Rg
Using UNS based seat predictor with Corbyn in charge of Labour is not going to work out well for predictions.
Add in recent times, polling at GEs have tended to overestimate Labour.
I feel a thread coming on....
Not in 2010 - 1983 or February 1974.
So only three times in the last 42 years? Or only three times in the last eleven general elections. You're making my points for me.
2005 was pretty close to the outcome. 1997 ICM underestimated the Labour lead.
Probably the only polling company to do so!
Yes - but for so long it was seen as the Gold Standard! A week before Polling Day ICM caused panic in Labour ranks by showing its lead drop to 5%. Its final poll showing a Labour 10% lead was still 3% too low.
So we can agree that almost all polls overstated Labour in 97?
Indeed - particularly Gallup and NOP neither of which we hear from nowadays.
Actually NOP helps produce the most important poll in the UK
Leading Labour and being the official opposition leader is not only good for Corbyn's brand of socialism but also his bank balance, what other person with 2 E grade A Levels, no degree and no work experience outside trade unions and the Labour Party would earn £138,000 a year, live in a £600,000 house and have a £2 million pension pot as Corbyn has? Corbyn has managed to profit from his socialism in a way any capitalist would be proud of!
A friend of mine left school with no qualifications at all and started a small business. He sold it for £8 million.
But somehow I don't think Corbyn would have been able to do that. It required hard work, skill, and luck.
Plenty of entrepreneurs have, the only thing Corbyn has ever helped start and built up are the Socialist Campaign Group and Momentum!
Leading Labour and being the official opposition leader is not only good for Corbyn's brand of socialism but also his bank balance, what other person with 2 E grade A Levels, no degree and no work experience outside trade unions and the Labour Party would earn £138,000 a year, live in a £600,000 house and have a £2 million pension pot as Corbyn has? Corbyn has managed to profit from his socialism in a way any capitalist would be proud of!
Yet despite all that he doesn't look or behave like a rich man. He has been criticized for wearing the clothes of a tramp, having an allotment, and for making his own Jam.
"On the BBC's Newsnight in 1984, Corbyn was invited to discuss the House of Commons' dress code, during which broadcast Conservative MP Terry Dicks asserted that so-called Labour scruffs (such as Corbyn, who at this time was known for wearing open-necked shirts to the Commons[37]) should be banned from addressing the House unless they maintained higher standards. Corbyn responded, saying that: "It's not a fashion parade, it's not a gentleman's club, it's not a bankers' institute, it's a place where the people are represented." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZsYvkTw4Rg
Well, he does have a bit of a point, although how people present themselves has an impact even when it shouldn't. The Commons represents the people, but it is not and never has been a perfect microcosm of how they look, act, dress or anything else, it is not necessary in order to represent the people to create a simulacrum of representation, should there be a mandated number of shire tories stomping in with muddy farmer's boots, and no more than that as it would not be represented?
Maybe requiring a shirt and tie is too extreme a code, maybe, although one of the counters to that is it is a job and appearance in the commons is one of the most formal aspects of that job, and people in jobs usually have some expectations of dress and appearance. People are not merely represented in the chamber, they are represented on all sorts of occasions outside of it when the MP might not feel the need to dress more formally.
IIRC Cromwell was mocked for his plain clothes when he went to parliament.
Erskine May says female Lords can wear hats. You're not supposed to attend Her Majesty with a stick or umbrella with you. Cannot wear military insignia or uniform. Wearing jacket and tie is custom for men but not always enforced.
Certainly formal wear is not absolutely necessary at all times but as you say MPs are meant to set an example not be representative of their voters' everyday where, otherwise we could end up with MPs in the nude to represent the nudist vote!
Leading Labour and being the official opposition leader is not only good for Corbyn's brand of socialism but also his bank balance, what other person with 2 E grade A Levels, no degree and no work experience outside trade unions and the Labour Party would earn £138,000 a year, live in a £600,000 house and have a £2 million pension pot as Corbyn has? Corbyn has managed to profit from his socialism in a way any capitalist would be proud of!
A friend of mine left school with no qualifications at all and started a small business. He sold it for £8 million.
But somehow I don't think Corbyn would have been able to do that. It required hard work, skill, and luck.
Plenty of entrepreneurs have, the only thing Corbyn has ever helped start and built up are the Socialist Campaign Group and Momentum!
Err Stop the War?
Yes, a great example of commercial entrepreneurship
''Again, why is Tristram Hunt a Labour MP ? And an MP for Stoke Central ?''
Both are conundrums, I'll grant you.
Surely people with the opinions of Tristram Hunt should be candidates in rural Oxfordshire, not an inner city.
If Labour really want Hunt in the party he should be sent to Chipping Norton where he is in tune with the locals, instead of losing piles of votes in Stoke.
Islington South, Westminster North, Hove, Cambridge, Exeter, Bristol West would all be good fits.
Indeed, some of Labour's suffering is from putting the wrong people in the wrong constituencies.
Lefties should be put in inner cities, the blairites in rural and wealthy areas, and the soft left in middle class suburbs.
Putting a Blairite in an inner city or a Lefty in a village will rub the wrong way.
Rural areas will hardly ever vote Labour anyway and certainly not for a Blairite, someone with an agricultural background would be far more sensible, Blairites are better off in wealthy areas as you say, preferably in the metropolis
Chipping Norton is actually quite a working class place that often elects Labour councillors.
Corbyn and his cronies really aren't interested in the constitution or possibly even real democracy.
God help us if they ever got power.
You needn't worry yourself about that.
What do you mean.....Paul Mason thinks he is a shoe in if only people stop playing silly buggers.
Labour shadow cabinet ministers resigned en masse because they were afraid Jeremy Corbyn would win an election, it was claimed this morning.
Journalist-turned Labour activist Paul Mason said members of Mr Corbyn's top team had co-ordinated the mass walkout because they feared it was their "last chance" to unseat him before a "winnable" general election.
Corbyn and his cronies really aren't interested in the constitution or possibly even real democracy.
God help us if they ever got power.
You needn't worry yourself about that.
What do you mean.....Paul Mason thinks he is a shoe in if only people stop playing silly buggers.
Labour shadow cabinet ministers resigned en masse because they were afraid Jeremy Corbyn would win an election, it was claimed this morning.
Journalist-turned Labour activist Paul Mason said members of Mr Corbyn's top team had co-ordinated the mass walkout because they feared it was their "last chance" to unseat him before a "winnable" general election.
''Again, why is Tristram Hunt a Labour MP ? And an MP for Stoke Central ?''
Both are conundrums, I'll grant you.
Surely people with the opinions of Tristram Hunt should be candidates in rural Oxfordshire, not an inner city.
If Labour really want Hunt in the party he should be sent to Chipping Norton where he is in tune with the locals, instead of losing piles of votes in Stoke.
Islington South, Westminster North, Hove, Cambridge, Exeter, Bristol West would all be good fits.
Indeed, some of Labour's suffering is from putting the wrong people in the wrong constituencies.
Lefties should be put in inner cities, the blairites in rural and wealthy areas, and the soft left in middle class suburbs.
Putting a Blairite in an inner city or a Lefty in a village will rub the wrong way.
Rural areas will hardly ever vote Labour anyway and certainly not for a Blairite, someone with an agricultural background would be far more sensible, Blairites are better off in wealthy areas as you say, preferably in the metropolis
Chipping Norton is actually quite a working class place that often elects Labour councillors.
Chipping Norton is in the Witney constituency which has always elected a Tory MP although from 1999-2001 it had a Labour MP after Sean Woodward defected before moving to the safe Labour seat of St Helens after which David Cameron was elected the MP. It is also in West Oxfordshire District Council which presently has 41 Tory councillors and just 4 from Labour
Mason appears to be having some mid life crisis...while most men go and buy a penis extension sports car and try and pick up younger ladies...instead he seems to have resorted to spouting utter nonsense about Corbyn the Messiah.
Mason appears to be having some mid life crisis...while most men go and buy a penis extension sports car and try and pick up younger ladies...instead he seems to have resorted to spouting utter nonsense about Corbyn the Messiah.
''Again, why is Tristram Hunt a Labour MP ? And an MP for Stoke Central ?''
Both are conundrums, I'll grant you.
Surely people with the opinions of Tristram Hunt should be candidates in rural Oxfordshire, not an inner city.
If Labour really want Hunt in the party he should be sent to Chipping Norton where he is in tune with the locals, instead of losing piles of votes in Stoke.
Islington South, Westminster North, Hove, Cambridge, Exeter, Bristol West would all be good fits.
Indeed, some of Labour's suffering is from putting the wrong people in the wrong constituencies.
Lefties should be put in inner cities, the blairites in rural and wealthy areas, and the soft left in middle class suburbs.
Putting a Blairite in an inner city or a Lefty in a village will rub the wrong way.
Rural areas will hardly ever vote Labour anyway and certainly not for a Blairite, someone with an agricultural background would be far more sensible, Blairites are better off in wealthy areas as you say, preferably in the metropolis
Chipping Norton is actually quite a working class place that often elects Labour councillors.
Chipping Norton is in the Witney constituency which has always elected a Tory MP although from 1999-2001 it had a Labour MP after Sean Woodward defected before moving to the safe Labour seat of St Helens after which David Cameron was elected the MP. It is also in West Oxfordshire District Council which presently has 41 Tory councillors and just 4 from Labour
Yes I know all of that thanks. It in no way alters my observation.
The notion that Chipping Norton is some super-gilded hangout of the very rich is wrong. The town itself is not like that, even if some of the villages around it are.
Mason appears to be having some mid life crisis...while most men go and buy a penis extension sports car and try and pick up younger ladies...instead he seems to have resorted to spouting utter nonsense about Corbyn the Messiah.
Using UNS based seat predictor with Corbyn in charge of Labour is not going to work out well for predictions.
Add in recent times, polling at GEs have tended to overestimate Labour.
I feel a thread coming on....
Not in 2010 - 1983 or February 1974.
So only three times in the last 42 years? Or only three times in the last eleven general elections. You're making my points for me.
2005 was pretty close to the outcome. 1997 ICM underestimated the Labour lead.
Probably the only polling company to do so!
Yes - but for so long it was seen as the Gold Standard! A week before Polling Day ICM caused panic in Labour ranks by showing its lead drop to 5%. Its final poll showing a Labour 10% lead was still 3% too low.
So we can agree that almost all polls overstated Labour in 97?
Indeed - particularly Gallup and NOP neither of which we hear from nowadays.
Actually NOP helps produce the most important poll in the UK
''Again, why is Tristram Hunt a Labour MP ? And an MP for Stoke Central ?''
Both are conundrums, I'll grant you.
Surely people with the opinions of Tristram Hunt should be candidates in rural Oxfordshire, not an inner city.
If Labour really want Hunt in the party he should be sent to Chipping Norton where he is in tune with the locals, instead of losing piles of votes in Stoke.
Islington South, Westminster North, Hove, Cambridge, Exeter, Bristol West would all be good fits.
Indeed, some of Labour's suffering is from putting the wrong people in the wrong constituencies.
Lefties should be put in inner cities, the blairites in rural and wealthy areas, and the soft left in middle class suburbs.
Putting a Blairite in an inner city or a Lefty in a village will rub the wrong way.
Rural areas will hardly ever vote Labour anyway and certainly not for a Blairite, someone with an agricultural background would be far more sensible, Blairites are better off in wealthy areas as you say, preferably in the metropolis
Chipping Norton is actually quite a working class place that often elects Labour councillors.
Chipping Norton is in the Witney constituency which has always elected a Tory MP although from 1999-2001 it had a Labour MP after Sean Woodward defected before moving to the safe Labour seat of St Helens after which David Cameron was elected the MP. It is also in West Oxfordshire District Council which presently has 41 Tory councillors and just 4 from Labour
Yes I know all of that thanks. It in no way alters my observation.
The notion that Chipping Norton is some super-gilded hangout of the very rich is wrong. The town itself is not like that, even if some of the villages around it are.
Since when did I say it was just a super-gilded hangout of the very rich? In any case even if it was that would it no way guarantee it would vote Tory eg Islington and Hampstead are wealthier than Chipping Norton and Witney and both have Labour MPs and Labour councils.
The point I originally made was that rural areas are generally very unlikely to vote Labour and the fact Chipping Norton has a Tory MP and an overwhelmingly Tory council hardly disputes that. I also said Labour would also be better off picking candidates with agricultural backgrounds in rural areas than Blairites, which I think holds too
Mason appears to be having some mid life crisis...while most men go and buy a penis extension sports car and try and pick up younger ladies...instead he seems to have resorted to spouting utter nonsense about Corbyn the Messiah.
One can only really appreciate poking fun at a MLC, once you've grown out of your own.
Mason's is hilarious. The stubble and leather jacket - oh dear me
The wearing of scruffy clothes to associate oneself with the working class is the sure sign of a charlatan. Having written loads of local history books with family photos contributed by impeccably working class families I know that the working class since the 19th century have had a strong sense of appropriate dress and for important occasions like weddings they always wear their best, formal clothes. A telling example from America was shown in the BBC documentary on the history of folk/country music. The communist Pete Seegar always wanted the artists on his shows to wear jeans, check shirts and working clothes when replicating barn dances, despite being told that back in the hills they always wore their suits and best dresses when then went out to have a good time.
The wearing of scruffy clothes to associate oneself with the working class is the sure sign of a charlatan. Having written loads of local history books with family photos contributed by impeccably working class families I know that the working class since the 19th century have had a strong sense of appropriate dress and for important occasions like weddings they always wear their best, formal clothes. A telling example from America was shown in the BBC documentary on the history of folk/country music. The communist Pete Seegar always wanted the artists on his shows to wear jeans, check shirts and working clothes when replicating barn dances, despite being told that back in the hills they always wore their suits and best dresses when then went out to have a good time.
yep. My grandparents would have been horrified by Corbyn.
Great article but the solution does still lie within the PLP and they lack the confidence/ability/spine to act decisively. The weakness of Labour sadly is not just down to JC and his cronies. I doubt if Bercow would do anything but if he did the obvious alternative is within the SNP - for my money the more exposure they get the better - it makes them look ever barmier!
You are the barmy one, try posting on something you remotely have a clue about.
Staggeringly, the Turks and Kurds (or their affiliates, at least) appear to be having a go at one another in Syria. Gosh.
Edited extra bit: a very trivial aside, but Hannibal's last elephant was called Surus, Latin for Syrian. He rode it through the Arnus Marshes when he lost an eye to exposure.
Time the Americans slapped Turkey down and put them in their place.
Interesting, if true. Massa's likely to go, and Bottas isn't a certainty either.
Perez and Button could be what they are looking at, but Perez will take some convincing, Williams are not in a good place right now. Worse than FI and McLaren for sure. Not that there is a space at McLaren, Vandoorne has to get the space or he will toodle off to Force India.
Yes - but for so long it was seen as the Gold Standard! A week before Polling Day ICM caused panic in Labour ranks by showing its lead drop to 5%. Its final poll showing a Labour 10% lead was still 3% too low.
ICM came far closer than the rest, though.
MEAN ABSOLUTE ERRORS OF FIVE SELECTED POLLSTERS ON THEIR LAST POLL ISSUED WHEN COMPARED TO THE GB[1] RESULT
Pollster (date): Con Lab Lib Oth, MAE[2]
* Opinium (2015-05-05): 0.350 0.340 0.080 0.230, a MAE of 0.0145 * ComRes (2015-05-06): 0.350 0.340 0.090 0.220, a MAE of 0.0185 * YouGov (2015-05-06): 0.340 0.340 0.100 0.220, a MAE of 0.0235 * ICM (2015-05-06): 0.345 0.350 0.09 0.215, a MAE of 0.0235 * Populus (2015-05-07): 0.330 0.330 0.100 0.240, a MAE of 0.024
NOTES [1] don't forget the pollsters were polling GB not UK, and so their error should be against the GB vote share (Con/Lab/Lib/Oth) of 0.378, 0.312, 0.081, 0.229 [2] the cutoff for an acceptable MAE is around 0.020. More than that and the big boys will laugh at you.
The wearing of scruffy clothes to associate oneself with the working class is the sure sign of a charlatan. Having written loads of local history books with family photos contributed by impeccably working class families I know that the working class since the 19th century have had a strong sense of appropriate dress and for important occasions like weddings they always wear their best, formal clothes. A telling example from America was shown in the BBC documentary on the history of folk/country music. The communist Pete Seegar always wanted the artists on his shows to wear jeans, check shirts and working clothes when replicating barn dances, despite being told that back in the hills they always wore their suits and best dresses when then went out to have a good time.
yep. My grandparents would have been horrified by Corbyn.
Lenin dressed smartly, and formally at first, but later he frequently wore a cloth cap to look a bit more like one of the workers. Stalin had his military tunics. Mao gave us a type of suit that still carries his name. All of them were affectations to one degree or another. Corbyn has his "closing down sale at BHS" attire, I don't know what message he is trying to send.
The wearing of scruffy clothes to associate oneself with the working class is the sure sign of a charlatan. Having written loads of local history books with family photos contributed by impeccably working class families I know that the working class since the 19th century have had a strong sense of appropriate dress and for important occasions like weddings they always wear their best, formal clothes. A telling example from America was shown in the BBC documentary on the history of folk/country music. The communist Pete Seegar always wanted the artists on his shows to wear jeans, check shirts and working clothes when replicating barn dances, despite being told that back in the hills they always wore their suits and best dresses when then went out to have a good time.
'According to The Times, Prime Minister Theresa May told cabinet colleagues that limits on EU migrants “are a priority” for Brexit negotiations, and “work is under way to examine how to reduce the number of international students coming to the UK”. Students from outside the EU are also likely to face tougher visa rules, as the PM is said to want universities to “develop sustainable funding models that are not so dependent on international students”.' http://www.varsity.co.uk/news/10589
'According to The Times, Prime Minister Theresa May told cabinet colleagues that limits on EU migrants “are a priority” for Brexit negotiations, and “work is under way to examine how to reduce the number of international students coming to the UK”. Students from outside the EU are also likely to face tougher visa rules, as the PM is said to want universities to “develop sustainable funding models that are not so dependent on international students”.' http://www.varsity.co.uk/news/10589
Don't understand the rationale for this move on students. Need more details.
'According to The Times, Prime Minister Theresa May told cabinet colleagues that limits on EU migrants “are a priority” for Brexit negotiations, and “work is under way to examine how to reduce the number of international students coming to the UK”. Students from outside the EU are also likely to face tougher visa rules, as the PM is said to want universities to “develop sustainable funding models that are not so dependent on international students”.' http://www.varsity.co.uk/news/10589
Don't understand the rationale for this move.
Because the student visa system is just a back door to a tier 2 visa. Reducing EU student numbers should be a priority, or at least forcing them into the foreign student system and making them pay foreign student fees up front rather than skipping out in student loans.
I'd say that non-EU students are also linked to illegal work and we need to reduce that.
'According to The Times, Prime Minister Theresa May told cabinet colleagues that limits on EU migrants “are a priority” for Brexit negotiations, and “work is under way to examine how to reduce the number of international students coming to the UK”. Students from outside the EU are also likely to face tougher visa rules, as the PM is said to want universities to “develop sustainable funding models that are not so dependent on international students”.' http://www.varsity.co.uk/news/10589
Don't understand the rationale for this move.
Because the student visa system is just a back door to a tier 2 visa. Reducing EU student numbers should be a priority, or at least forcing them into the foreign student system and making them pay foreign student fees up front rather than skipping out in student loans.
I'd say that non-EU students are also linked to illegal work and we need to reduce that.
'According to The Times, Prime Minister Theresa May told cabinet colleagues that limits on EU migrants “are a priority” for Brexit negotiations, and “work is under way to examine how to reduce the number of international students coming to the UK”. Students from outside the EU are also likely to face tougher visa rules, as the PM is said to want universities to “develop sustainable funding models that are not so dependent on international students”.' http://www.varsity.co.uk/news/10589
Don't understand the rationale for this move.
Because the student visa system is just a back door to a tier 2 visa. Reducing EU student numbers should be a priority, or at least forcing them into the foreign student system and making them pay foreign student fees up front rather than skipping out in student loans.
I'd say that non-EU students are also linked to illegal work and we need to reduce that.
Ah, fair enough. Thanks.
John - ref earlier post. Yes, I did see your posting on MEP voting on Brexit. Thanks.
'According to The Times, Prime Minister Theresa May told cabinet colleagues that limits on EU migrants “are a priority” for Brexit negotiations, and “work is under way to examine how to reduce the number of international students coming to the UK”. Students from outside the EU are also likely to face tougher visa rules, as the PM is said to want universities to “develop sustainable funding models that are not so dependent on international students”.' http://www.varsity.co.uk/news/10589
Don't understand the rationale for this move on students. Need more details.
Yes I also have concerns, we are presently one of the top destinations for international students and in competition with US colleges for them, this has to be handled with care
John Furnish Mason goes the full Icke #Shapeshifters #PurpleSweaters https://t.co/kX5nfSOEhv
I'd say he's gone bonkers, but clearly he was always bonkers, he just felt some professional obligation toward balance (or rather he was being forced to tell lies, to hear him now).
'According to The Times, Prime Minister Theresa May told cabinet colleagues that limits on EU migrants “are a priority” for Brexit negotiations, and “work is under way to examine how to reduce the number of international students coming to the UK”. Students from outside the EU are also likely to face tougher visa rules, as the PM is said to want universities to “develop sustainable funding models that are not so dependent on international students”.' http://www.varsity.co.uk/news/10589
Don't understand the rationale for this move on students. Need more details.
Suspect further clamp down on fake schools and on students staying on after their visas expire.
'According to The Times, Prime Minister Theresa May told cabinet colleagues that limits on EU migrants “are a priority” for Brexit negotiations, and “work is under way to examine how to reduce the number of international students coming to the UK”. Students from outside the EU are also likely to face tougher visa rules, as the PM is said to want universities to “develop sustainable funding models that are not so dependent on international students”.' http://www.varsity.co.uk/news/10589
Don't understand the rationale for this move on students. Need more details.
Yes I also have concerns, we are presently one of the top destinations for international students and in competition with US colleges for them, this has to be handled with care
This is an important export industry. Another dubious decision. She still worries me.
'According to The Times, Prime Minister Theresa May told cabinet colleagues that limits on EU migrants “are a priority” for Brexit negotiations, and “work is under way to examine how to reduce the number of international students coming to the UK”. Students from outside the EU are also likely to face tougher visa rules, as the PM is said to want universities to “develop sustainable funding models that are not so dependent on international students”.' http://www.varsity.co.uk/news/10589
Don't understand the rationale for this move on students. Need more details.
She wants to raise fees on British students, again?
'According to The Times, Prime Minister Theresa May told cabinet colleagues that limits on EU migrants “are a priority” for Brexit negotiations, and “work is under way to examine how to reduce the number of international students coming to the UK”. Students from outside the EU are also likely to face tougher visa rules, as the PM is said to want universities to “develop sustainable funding models that are not so dependent on international students”.' http://www.varsity.co.uk/news/10589
Don't understand the rationale for this move on students. Need more details.
Yes I also have concerns, we are presently one of the top destinations for international students and in competition with US colleges for them, this has to be handled with care
Your original link was to a student newspaper, which is not particularly noted for its accuracy.
'According to The Times, Prime Minister Theresa May told cabinet colleagues that limits on EU migrants “are a priority” for Brexit negotiations, and “work is under way to examine how to reduce the number of international students coming to the UK”. Students from outside the EU are also likely to face tougher visa rules, as the PM is said to want universities to “develop sustainable funding models that are not so dependent on international students”.' http://www.varsity.co.uk/news/10589
Don't understand the rationale for this move.
Because the student visa system is just a back door to a tier 2 visa. Reducing EU student numbers should be a priority, or at least forcing them into the foreign student system and making them pay foreign student fees up front rather than skipping out in student loans.
I'd say that non-EU students are also linked to illegal work and we need to reduce that.
There are two problems with EU students;
1) they are entitled to free places in UK schools if under 18, and there is a whole industry of 'guardians' for such children who are being paid to act in loco parentis for children of EU nationals so they can be taught in Britain;
2) they are entitled to student loans, and millions have taken them out - but to my certain knowledge less than 100 have ever paid them back. Of course, that is partly due to the laziness, incompetence and stupidity of the SLC and the egregious Kevin O'Connor, but the money lost is rather substantial.
As part of Brexit, we must ensure that this is rectified so that they pay for their education. Equally, it would be a very stupid mistake to restrict access to our schools and universities for foreign students to the point where we lose them all, as we are world-famous for the quality of our education, delivered in English, and it brings in big money for our economy.
While I recognise Southam's frustrations about Corbyn, the salient point is that it was democracy that allowed the situation to happen. By allowing MPs to nominate candidates for whom they had no intention of voting as a way of expanding the contest, the situation was created which allowed Corbyn to stand.
The problem was his three opponents simply had nothing to say or nothing to offer a party still reeling from a heavy election defeat. How parties respond to defeat is more important than how they respond to victory and last year Labour decided it wanted to move away from compromise to purity (crudely put).
Corbyn is the manifestation of that purity. Anyone who had followed Corbyn since 1983 could not have been surprised by his actions as leader. He could, like Kinnock, have tacked away from his roots to a more centrist position with time but that's not Jeremy Corbyn and for all I personally like the man and on some issues he has some relevant and interesting things to say, there's too many areas where his idea of what should happen is at a sharp divergence with what is currently the majority view.
I have no doubt that were Britain run as he wanted, Corbyn would be this country's staunchest defender and patriot. I also think Corbyn believes if he could sit down and talk to every voter, he could get a lot of them to agree with him.
Maybe but politics doesn't work that way. Blair succeeded brilliantly by convincing millions of former Conservative voters the Labour Party he led was a non-socialist party of the centre or centre left. More accurately perhaps, after 18 years and with the economy in good shape, people believed they could afford to vote Labour.
Corbyn doesn't see it in those terms of course - to compromise to win power is betrayal. I get that - I understand principle, I really do and in Opposition you have all the time you need to polish those principles but power means compromise and governing a multi-layered multi-faceted nation of approaching 70 million is quintessentially compromise.
'According to The Times, Prime Minister Theresa May told cabinet colleagues that limits on EU migrants “are a priority” for Brexit negotiations, and “work is under way to examine how to reduce the number of international students coming to the UK”. Students from outside the EU are also likely to face tougher visa rules, as the PM is said to want universities to “develop sustainable funding models that are not so dependent on international students”.' http://www.varsity.co.uk/news/10589
Don't understand the rationale for this move.
Because the student visa system is just a back door to a tier 2 visa. Reducing EU student numbers should be a priority, or at least forcing them into the foreign student system and making them pay foreign student fees up front rather than skipping out in student loans.
I'd say that non-EU students are also linked to illegal work and we need to reduce that.
There are two problems with EU students;
1) they are entitled to free places in UK schools if under 18, and there is a whole industry of 'guardians' for such children who are being paid to act in loco parentis for children of EU nationals so they can be taught in Britain;
2) they are entitled to student loans, and millions have taken them out - but to my certain knowledge less than 100 have ever paid them back. Of course, that is partly due to the laziness, incompetence and stupidity of the SLC and the egregious Kevin O'Connor, but the money lost is rather substantial.
As part of Brexit, we must ensure that this is rectified so that they pay for their education. Equally, it would be a very stupid mistake to restrict access to our schools and universities for foreign students to the point where we lose them all, as we are world-famous for the quality of our education, delivered in English, and it brings in big money for our economy.
We really need a change in the law in regards to student loans. It is way too easy for anybody to do a runner without paying and / or to be dishonest with their income when not part of the UK tax system...and there is little the authorities can do.
'According to The Times, Prime Minister Theresa May told cabinet colleagues that limits on EU migrants “are a priority” for Brexit negotiations, and “work is under way to examine how to reduce the number of international students coming to the UK”. Students from outside the EU are also likely to face tougher visa rules, as the PM is said to want universities to “develop sustainable funding models that are not so dependent on international students”.' http://www.varsity.co.uk/news/10589
Don't understand the rationale for this move on students. Need more details.
Yes I also have concerns, we are presently one of the top destinations for international students and in competition with US colleges for them, this has to be handled with care
This is an important export industry. Another dubious decision. She still worries me.
It's not a decision - "work is underway". It's clearly a careful path to tread but equally there are evident abuses and the question is how to stop the abuses without damaging the good parts of the industry
'According to The Times, Prime Minister Theresa May told cabinet colleagues that limits on EU migrants “are a priority” for Brexit negotiations, and “work is under way to examine how to reduce the number of international students coming to the UK”. Students from outside the EU are also likely to face tougher visa rules, as the PM is said to want universities to “develop sustainable funding models that are not so dependent on international students”.' http://www.varsity.co.uk/news/10589
Don't understand the rationale for this move.
Because the student visa system is just a back door to a tier 2 visa. Reducing EU student numbers should be a priority, or at least forcing them into the foreign student system and making them pay foreign student fees up front rather than skipping out in student loans.
I'd say that non-EU students are also linked to illegal work and we need to reduce that.
There are two problems with EU students;
1) they are entitled to free places in UK schools if under 18, and there is a whole industry of 'guardians' for such children who are being paid to act in loco parentis for children of EU nationals so they can be taught in Britain;
2) they are entitled to student loans, and millions have taken them out - but to my certain knowledge less than 100 have ever paid them back. Of course, that is partly due to the laziness, incompetence and stupidity of the SLC and the egregious Kevin O'Connor, but the money lost is rather substantial.
As part of Brexit, we must ensure that this is rectified so that they pay for their education. Equally, it would be a very stupid mistake to restrict access to our schools and universities for foreign students to the point where we lose them all, as we are world-famous for the quality of our education, delivered in English, and it brings in big money for our economy.
We really need a change in the law in regards to student loans. It is way too easy for anybody to do a runner without paying and / or to be dishonest with their income when not part of the UK tax system...and there is little the authorities can do.
Doesn't help though when the authorities in question are so stupid and/or disorganised that - to take an example from personal experience - they don't know that July is the month before August or that it is illegal to share confidential documents with third parties.
Comments
Clinton 40 .. Trump 39
http://email.connectstrategic.com/t/j-73630F4BD52B12D8
Lefties should be put in inner cities, the blairites in rural and wealthy areas, and the soft left in middle class suburbs.
Putting a Blairite in an inner city or a Lefty in a village will rub the wrong way.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZsYvkTw4Rg
Even better than when I compared Cameron's decision to hold the EURef was a bit like making home made porn.
Maybe requiring a shirt and tie is too extreme a code, maybe, although one of the counters to that is it is a job and appearance in the commons is one of the most formal aspects of that job, and people in jobs usually have some expectations of dress and appearance. People are not merely represented in the chamber, they are represented on all sorts of occasions outside of it when the MP might not feel the need to dress more formally.
IIRC Cromwell was mocked for his plain clothes when he went to parliament.
Erskine May says female Lords can wear hats. You're not supposed to attend Her Majesty with a stick or umbrella with you. Cannot wear military insignia or uniform. Wearing jacket and tie is custom for men but not always enforced.
It's laughable censorship when they do. So bleeding obvious
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1690785/facebook-reaches-out-to-right-wingers-with-vow-to-stamp-out-alleged-political-bias/
Labour 47% (36%)
LibDems 26% (35%)
Cons 11% (16%)
Clinton 46 .. Trump 39
http://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/MonmouthPoll_US_082916/
God help us if they ever got power.
Labour shadow cabinet ministers resigned en masse because they were afraid Jeremy Corbyn would win an election, it was claimed this morning.
Journalist-turned Labour activist Paul Mason said members of Mr Corbyn's top team had co-ordinated the mass walkout because they feared it was their "last chance" to unseat him before a "winnable" general election.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-shadow-ministers-resigned-because-8722027
penis extensionsports car and try and pick up younger ladies...instead he seems to have resorted to spouting utter nonsense aboutCorbynthe Messiah.The notion that Chipping Norton is some super-gilded hangout of the very rich is wrong. The town itself is not like that, even if some of the villages around it are.
Accrington StanleyNOP? Who are they?The point I originally made was that rural areas are generally very unlikely to vote Labour and the fact Chipping Norton has a Tory MP and an overwhelmingly Tory council hardly disputes that. I also said Labour would also be better off picking candidates with agricultural backgrounds in rural areas than Blairites, which I think holds too
Mason's is hilarious. The stubble and leather jacket - oh dear me
Interesting, if true. Massa's likely to go, and Bottas isn't a certainty either.
@WillHillBet: 13th seed Richard Gasquet was stunned when he was knocked out by Britain’s Kyle Edmund in straight sets #USOpen https://t.co/55uXmXJppX
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37215684
Mason goes the full Icke #Shapeshifters #PurpleSweaters https://t.co/kX5nfSOEhv
Pollster (date): Con Lab Lib Oth, MAE[2]
* Opinium (2015-05-05): 0.350 0.340 0.080 0.230, a MAE of 0.0145
* ComRes (2015-05-06): 0.350 0.340 0.090 0.220, a MAE of 0.0185
* YouGov (2015-05-06): 0.340 0.340 0.100 0.220, a MAE of 0.0235
* ICM (2015-05-06): 0.345 0.350 0.09 0.215, a MAE of 0.0235
* Populus (2015-05-07): 0.330 0.330 0.100 0.240, a MAE of 0.024
NOTES
[1] don't forget the pollsters were polling GB not UK, and so their error should be against the GB vote share (Con/Lab/Lib/Oth) of 0.378, 0.312, 0.081, 0.229
[2] the cutoff for an acceptable MAE is around 0.020. More than that and the big boys will laugh at you.
Just lost the Keith Shere Khan game. https://t.co/yRxqewTk0S
Yeh, 24hrs late and hidden away as the 11th story on the UK news page, but they got there in the end. Well done Aunty.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-37212493
5 stabbings on day one of the #NottingHillCarnival, bit of an odd float I'll admit, but very bright and colourful.
'According to The Times, Prime Minister Theresa May told cabinet colleagues that limits on EU migrants “are a priority” for Brexit negotiations, and “work is under way to examine how to reduce the number of international students coming to the UK”. Students from outside the EU are also likely to face tougher visa rules, as the PM is said to want universities to “develop sustainable funding models that are not so dependent on international students”.'
http://www.varsity.co.uk/news/10589
@RockitBill: #BREAKING NEW YORK (AP) -- Gene Wilder, star of `Willy Wonka' and Mel Brooks comedies, is dead at 83, his family says.
http://bruegel.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/EU-UK-20160829-final-1.pdf
Blazing Saddles was awesome, still is in fact. RIP Mr Wilder, and thanks for the laughs...
I'd say that non-EU students are also linked to illegal work and we need to reduce that.
Igor: What hump?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment_and_arts
All the great ones are going.........going.......
I saw the stage play in the West End and adored it.
1) they are entitled to free places in UK schools if under 18, and there is a whole industry of 'guardians' for such children who are being paid to act in loco parentis for children of EU nationals so they can be taught in Britain;
2) they are entitled to student loans, and millions have taken them out - but to my certain knowledge less than 100 have ever paid them back. Of course, that is partly due to the laziness, incompetence and stupidity of the SLC and the egregious Kevin O'Connor, but the money lost is rather substantial.
As part of Brexit, we must ensure that this is rectified so that they pay for their education. Equally, it would be a very stupid mistake to restrict access to our schools and universities for foreign students to the point where we lose them all, as we are world-famous for the quality of our education, delivered in English, and it brings in big money for our economy.
While I recognise Southam's frustrations about Corbyn, the salient point is that it was democracy that allowed the situation to happen. By allowing MPs to nominate candidates for whom they had no intention of voting as a way of expanding the contest, the situation was created which allowed Corbyn to stand.
The problem was his three opponents simply had nothing to say or nothing to offer a party still reeling from a heavy election defeat. How parties respond to defeat is more important than how they respond to victory and last year Labour decided it wanted to move away from compromise to purity (crudely put).
Corbyn is the manifestation of that purity. Anyone who had followed Corbyn since 1983 could not have been surprised by his actions as leader. He could, like Kinnock, have tacked away from his roots to a more centrist position with time but that's not Jeremy Corbyn and for all I personally like the man and on some issues he has some relevant and interesting things to say, there's too many areas where his idea of what should happen is at a sharp divergence with what is currently the majority view.
I have no doubt that were Britain run as he wanted, Corbyn would be this country's staunchest defender and patriot. I also think Corbyn believes if he could sit down and talk to every voter, he could get a lot of them to agree with him.
Maybe but politics doesn't work that way. Blair succeeded brilliantly by convincing millions of former Conservative voters the Labour Party he led was a non-socialist party of the centre or centre left. More accurately perhaps, after 18 years and with the economy in good shape, people believed they could afford to vote Labour.
Corbyn doesn't see it in those terms of course - to compromise to win power is betrayal. I get that - I understand principle, I really do and in Opposition you have all the time you need to polish those principles but power means compromise and governing a multi-layered multi-faceted nation of approaching 70 million is quintessentially compromise.
How about giving May the benefit of the doubt?