So why did you do nothing about it? You saw this coming. You put not one hour into pounding the streets or manning the phone banks, and paid not one pound to the Remain campaign, in the weeks before the referendum.
The Mori poll giving the Tories a lead of 11% represents a swing of 2.2% in their direction from Labour across GB since 2015. Applied universally that would result in 15 Tory gains at Labour’s expense – reducing Labour to 217 seats and giving the Tories a majority of 42. However, the details of poll tend to confirm the pattern shown by Opinium two weeks ago – ie that a very strong swing to the Tories in Scotland is hiding relatively little change in England. The Tory lead in England as stated by Mori is also 11% – but it was already 9.5% in 2015. That would imply a swing to the Tories of just 0.75% and would only lead to 7 Tory gains from Labour. Labour would still retain 225 MPs and the Tory majority would be 26. Moreover , most of those 7 vulnerable Labour seats have MPs newly elected in 2015 and who could reasonably expect a first – time incumbency boost in the same way enjoyed by Tory MPs in marginal seats in 2015. On that basis, very few seats might change hands at all between the major parties. The strong Tory performance in Scotland does raise the possibility of several gains from the SNP.At the same time some of the Tory gains from the LibDems in 2015 might be reversed – though not many!
Sorry but that is garbage. Even if the poll is right your analysis is the phrase 'applied universally'. It won't be. Labour would probably do better in areas where they are already strong and much worse in the areas where they are vulnerable.
It is not garbage but based on past electoral data with May 2015 as the starting point. I specifically distinguished between likely results on the basis of a uniform swing and what might be expected given the very different trends apparent in Scotland and England. Labour's most vulnerable seats should - prima facie - be their marginal seats , but most othe 15 most marginal Labour seats have MPs likely to enjoy a first time incumbency boost. The logic of your comment is that extrapolating any electoral outcome from a national poll is likely to produce garbage. I beg to disagree.
In the true spirit of Donald Trump, here is today's fake news:
"BBC: Retail sales fall unexpectedly in January"
The detail: YoY volumes are up 1.5% and YoY value up 3.9%. Consumers 'battered by inflation' (Reuters) increased spending by 3.9% on the annual comparison.
Selection Selection Details Result 1 Horse Racing SANDOWN 15:15 ROYAL ARTILLERY GOLD CUP 3m 37y 17th of February 2017 3:15 pm Win or E/W Rathlin Rose @ 5/2 (GP) Win
In the true spirit of Donald Trump, here is today's fake news:
"BBC: Retail sales fall unexpectedly in January"
The detail: YoY volumes are up 1.5% and YoY value up 3.9%. Consumers 'battered by inflation' (Reuters) increased spending by 3.9% on the annual comparison.
The Don has a point.
So does RCS 1000. We can't keep this consumption level up without a major improvement to productivity. Borrowing to import is not a viable economic model.
Selection Selection Details Result 1 Horse Racing SANDOWN 15:15 ROYAL ARTILLERY GOLD CUP 3m 37y 17th of February 2017 3:15 pm Win or E/W Rathlin Rose @ 5/2 (GP) Win
I'd rather have Corbyn as PM than McDonnell. I think Labour MPs would be foolish to agree to switch to McD - and no before anyone asks I'm not talking my book.
I'd rather have Corbyn as PM than McDonnell. I think Labour MPs would be foolish to agree to switch to McD - and no before anyone asks I'm not talking my book.
He is the REALLY REALLY hard left in my eyes.
The hard left just talk you into submission, the really hard left kneecaps?
I'd rather have Corbyn as PM than McDonnell. I think Labour MPs would be foolish to agree to switch to McD - and no before anyone asks I'm not talking my book.
He is the REALLY REALLY hard left in my eyes.
McDonnell's suggestions to honour the IRA will be a vote winner.
Corbyn might be just as left wing as McDonnell in theory, but he'd be too busy with irrelevancies/incompetent to do nearly as much damage as McD if he ever somehow became PM.
I doubt McDonnell spends much time making jam from his allotment berries...
I think I'd prefer Khan or Lewis to get it, though. Not that I'm a fan of either, but given the options...
I really wouldn't mind Sadiq Khan as the next Labour PM. He seems to be doing a decent enough job in London, and he's not on the batshit crazy left left.
It is hard to see how McDonnell gets close to being Labour leader given that, even if manages to get the McDonnell amendment through Conference in October.
If the hardline Trots are moving in to take over Corbyn's office, then it will hasten the end of the far left's control of the party.
There is a suspicion that McDonnell has always seen Corbyn as a useful idiot.
As I said last week, it's now a case of when not if Corbyn goes before the general election.
Put some money on Yvette Cooper and Keith Starmer. McDonnell, even if there is a deal, will be challenged before summer 2018. Labour could be viable before 2020.
It is hard to see how McDonnell gets close to being Labour leader given that, even if manages to get the McDonnell amendment through Conference in October.
If the hardline Trots are moving in to take over Corbyn's office, then it will hasten the end of the far left's control of the party.
There is a suspicion that McDonnell has always seen Corbyn as a useful idiot.
Yes, but the likelihood is that he'll continue to regard Corbyn as a useful idiot. I'm not sure that hastens the end of the far left's control of the party, it might simply cement Corbyn in place.
As I said last week, it's now a case of when not if Corbyn goes before the general election.
Put some money on Yvette Cooper and Keith Starmer. McDonnell, even if there is a deal, will be challenged before summer 2018. Labour could be viable before 2020.
Not unless the membership has seriously changed its views since last September
McDonnell was behind Tom Watson and even Angela Eagle among Labour members when asked last year. He hasn't been able to piggy back on the popularity of Corbyn at all.
Corbyn might be just as left wing as McDonnell in theory, but he'd be too busy with irrelevancies/incompetent to do nearly as much damage as McD if he ever somehow became PM.
I doubt McDonnell spends much time making jam from his allotment berries...
McDonnell is a hardline, disciplined Trot who has never done this as a game. Corbyn is a privileged son of the middle class who has been playing his entire political life.
If anything, McDonnell is even more disliked inside the PLP. I suspect that if he did somehow find his way to the leadership it would presage a split.
But look, I have a very counter-consensus view on the Eurozone economy in the next ten years to the PB consensus. I suspect that - absent a major political shock - it will substantially outgrow the UK, as it gets into a virtuous circle of falling savings rates boosting growth, boosting confidence pulling down the savings rate. Countries like Spain - which have modernised their economies - could well see a decade of 3% growth ahead of them.
I agree with that view.
I most certainly agree. I can see what is happening in Eastern Europe. Many of the migrants who came to the UK, will leave by themselves.
I think McDonnell has a potentially greater risk and reward for Labour than Corbyn.
He comes across as more ruthless, competent, smart, and serious than Corbyn, who is a feeble scruffy joke in comparison. At least with McDonnell I actually get the feeling that he has a plan, he wants power, and wants to change things for his version of better. Corbyn just seems like he would be happier sitting in a tent outside parliament and protesting.
The risk is that the IRA stuff manages to stick and do damage to him, and his more competent image backfires (either it scares people that we may actually put a marxist in power, or it is proven to be misguided as he makes fuck-ups as leader). He may actually alienate a lot of labour members as he is less of a Green/New Age/Transgender Bathroom type leftie than Corbyn, and more of a good old fashioned marxist (i.e the opposite of many corbynistas).
It is hard to see how McDonnell gets close to being Labour leader given that, even if manages to get the McDonnell amendment through Conference in October.
If the hardline Trots are moving in to take over Corbyn's office, then it will hasten the end of the far left's control of the party.
There is a suspicion that McDonnell has always seen Corbyn as a useful idiot.
Yes, but the likelihood is that he'll continue to regard Corbyn as a useful idiot. I'm not sure that hastens the end of the far left's control of the party, it might simply cement Corbyn in place.
It's like Kremlinology, but the position Lansman takes in all of this is crucial because he controls the Corbyn database. If Lansman switches from Corbyn to, say, Lewis, then that immediately opens up the possibility of a challenge to Corbyn who would then be fighting to win against a fellow member of the hard left, as well as anyone else who enters the race. That third person will probably get the vast majority of the votes Smith won (ie, just under 40%), while the far left vote would split. It would be all about second preferences - and as we know, the hard left is unforgiving. It is unlikely there would be many transfers from one to the other.
Corbyn might be just as left wing as McDonnell in theory, but he'd be too busy with irrelevancies/incompetent to do nearly as much damage as McD if he ever somehow became PM.
I doubt McDonnell spends much time making jam from his allotment berries...
McDonnell is a hardline, disciplined Trot who has never done this as a game. Corbyn is a privileged son of the middle class who has been playing his entire political life.
If anything, McDonnell is even more disliked inside the PLP. I suspect that if he did somehow find his way to the leadership it would presage a split.
McDonnell was behind Tom Watson and even Angela Eagle among Labour members when asked last year. He hasn't been able to piggy back on the popularity of Corbyn at all.
Mr. Pulpstar, depends what you mean by 'seriously'. I do think freedom of expression matters, and letting it be chipped away piece by piece is not a good thing.
Khan is, however, clearly better than a batshit insane communist.
Mr. City, Starmer's a humourless blighter who may as well have metropolitan elite tattooed on his forehead.
Better than Corbyn, of course, but Khan (even though he's mayor of London) would be better for Labour.
So the fake news here is that O'Brien incorrectly introduced an interviewee, who was then able to make the necessary correction and proceed with the interview.
So the fake news here is that O'Brien incorrectly introduced an interviewee, who was then able to make the necessary correction and proceed with the interview.
So Douglas Murray has fallen for it as well. The Trump strategy that is e.g. I know I'm going to be a crap, even dangerous, president, so if I spend the next four years making sure we don't have a free press, then I might get re-elected after all.
Let's leave this fake news crap for the US to sort out and not import to UK.
Mr. Pulpstar, depends what you mean by 'seriously'. I do think freedom of expression matters, and letting it be chipped away piece by piece is not a good thing.
Khan is, however, clearly better than a batshit insane communist.
Mr. City, Starmer's a humourless blighter who may as well have metropolitan elite tattooed on his forehead.
Better than Corbyn, of course, but Khan (even though he's mayor of London) would be better for Labour.
Has Yvette used these quiet years to work on policy and on a more direct, up-beat delivery? I reckon she deserves better than odds of 26.
Corbyn might be just as left wing as McDonnell in theory, but he'd be too busy with irrelevancies/incompetent to do nearly as much damage as McD if he ever somehow became PM.
I doubt McDonnell spends much time making jam from his allotment berries...
McDonnell is a hardline, disciplined Trot who has never done this as a game. Corbyn is a privileged son of the middle class who has been playing his entire political life.
If anything, McDonnell is even more disliked inside the PLP. I suspect that if he did somehow find his way to the leadership it would presage a split.
Or...an immediate challenge.
He can't get to the leadership without a members' vote. If the members back a hard-line Trot, then the game is up for the PLP and anyone else that is interested in an electable Labour party. At that stage, the sensible thing is to walk away.
So the fake news here is that O'Brien incorrectly introduced an interviewee, who was then able to make the necessary correction and proceed with the interview.
So it seems. More of a smear/misdirection than fake I would say. Similar to the tweets ScottP related on Trump from Mehdi Hassan last night
Corbyn might be just as left wing as McDonnell in theory, but he'd be too busy with irrelevancies/incompetent to do nearly as much damage as McD if he ever somehow became PM.
I doubt McDonnell spends much time making jam from his allotment berries...
McDonnell is a hardline, disciplined Trot who has never done this as a game. Corbyn is a privileged son of the middle class who has been playing his entire political life.
If anything, McDonnell is even more disliked inside the PLP. I suspect that if he did somehow find his way to the leadership it would presage a split.
If there's anything we've learned this past year and a half, it is that Labour seem like they will never split again. Tribal, emotional loyalty to the brand is so strong and fear of marginalization so high, it seems people may drift away but they will never contemplate leaving and backing something else, not openly.
So the fake news here is that O'Brien incorrectly introduced an interviewee, who was then able to make the necessary correction and proceed with the interview.
Mistakes are seized upon and made a lot more than they are, now more than ever.
I think McDonnell has a potentially greater risk and reward for Labour than Corbyn.
He comes across as more ruthless, competent, smart, and serious than Corbyn, who is a feeble scruffy joke in comparison. At least with McDonnell I actually get the feeling that he has a plan, he wants power, and wants to change things for his version of better. Corbyn just seems like he would be happier sitting in a tent outside parliament and protesting.
The risk is that the IRA stuff manages to stick and do damage to him, and his more competent image backfires (either it scares people that we may actually put a marxist in power, or it is proven to be misguided as he makes fuck-ups as leader). He may actually alienate a lot of labour members as he is less of a Green/New Age/Transgender Bathroom type leftie than Corbyn, and more of a good old fashioned marxist (i.e the opposite of many corbynistas).
Neither of these people should be anywhere near the levers of power.
Corbyn might be just as left wing as McDonnell in theory, but he'd be too busy with irrelevancies/incompetent to do nearly as much damage as McD if he ever somehow became PM.
I doubt McDonnell spends much time making jam from his allotment berries...
McDonnell is a hardline, disciplined Trot who has never done this as a game. Corbyn is a privileged son of the middle class who has been playing his entire political life.
If anything, McDonnell is even more disliked inside the PLP. I suspect that if he did somehow find his way to the leadership it would presage a split.
Or...an immediate challenge.
He can't get to the leadership without a members' vote. If the members back a hard-line Trot, then the game is up for the PLP and anyone else that is interested in an electable Labour party. At that stage, the sensible thing is to walk away.
So the fake news here is that O'Brien incorrectly introduced an interviewee, who was then able to make the necessary correction and proceed with the interview.
Mistakes are seized upon and made a lot more than they are, now more than ever.
O'Brien has form as long as your arm for "accidentally" making mistakes that make people he disagree with politically look bad. His interview with Farage pre GE 2015 was one of the most dishonest pieces of journalism I have ever seen, all founded on an absolute lie
So the fake news here is that O'Brien incorrectly introduced an interviewee, who was then able to make the necessary correction and proceed with the interview.
So it seems. More of a smear/misdirection than fake I would say. Similar to the tweets ScottP related on Trump from Mehdi Hassan last night
Not up to your Gina Miller photo's I grant you!
I agree with you that being accused of writing for Breitbart should be regarded as a smear. But in this instance, it seems as if the interviewee had the immediate chance to correct the statement and was not then challenged for doing so. Looks like a cock-up to me and one being confected into something more sinister by a little snowflake.
Corbyn might be just as left wing as McDonnell in theory, but he'd be too busy with irrelevancies/incompetent to do nearly as much damage as McD if he ever somehow became PM.
I doubt McDonnell spends much time making jam from his allotment berries...
McDonnell is a hardline, disciplined Trot who has never done this as a game. Corbyn is a privileged son of the middle class who has been playing his entire political life.
If anything, McDonnell is even more disliked inside the PLP. I suspect that if he did somehow find his way to the leadership it would presage a split.
Or...an immediate challenge.
He can't get to the leadership without a members' vote. If the members back a hard-line Trot, then the game is up for the PLP and anyone else that is interested in an electable Labour party. At that stage, the sensible thing is to walk away.
Mr. Chestnut, well quite. Expecting retail sales to rise from December to January seems a little contrary to history and reason.
Edited extra bit: Mr. Eagles, cheers.
The fall in retail sales was both month on month and quarter on quarter. As for historical values over the Christmas period, last years value was +2.3%, so a fall in this month is unexpected.
So the fake news here is that O'Brien incorrectly introduced an interviewee, who was then able to make the necessary correction and proceed with the interview.
So it seems. More of a smear/misdirection than fake I would say. Similar to the tweets ScottP related on Trump from Mehdi Hassan last night
Not up to your Gina Miller photo's I grant you!
I agree with you that being accused of writing for Breitbart should be regarded as a smear. But in this instance, it seems as if the interviewee had the immediate chance to correct the statement and was not then challenged for doing so. Looks like a cock-up to me and one being confected into something more sinister by a little snowflake.
O'Brien has done this before, have you never listened to his LBC show? Or can people like him do no wrong because you agree with his politics, just as you think The Sun black up photos because you disagree with theirs?
Corbyn might be just as left wing as McDonnell in theory, but he'd be too busy with irrelevancies/incompetent to do nearly as much damage as McD if he ever somehow became PM.
I doubt McDonnell spends much time making jam from his allotment berries...
McDonnell is a hardline, disciplined Trot who has never done this as a game. Corbyn is a privileged son of the middle class who has been playing his entire political life.
If anything, McDonnell is even more disliked inside the PLP. I suspect that if he did somehow find his way to the leadership it would presage a split.
Or...an immediate challenge.
He can't get to the leadership without a members' vote. If the members back a hard-line Trot, then the game is up for the PLP and anyone else that is interested in an electable Labour party. At that stage, the sensible thing is to walk away.
SO how would you rate Jon Ashworth chances ?
Right now? Pretty low. But he is competent and sane and is a member of the Corbyn shadow cabinet, so clearly has a chance if he builds his profile a little more. He has the advantage of probably being able to get 15% of the PLP to back him. If the McDonnell amendment is not passed by conference that is gong to be absolutely crucial in the Corbyn succession battle.
So the fake news here is that O'Brien incorrectly introduced an interviewee, who was then able to make the necessary correction and proceed with the interview.
So Douglas Murray has fallen for it as well. The Trump strategy that is e.g. I know I'm going to be a crap, even dangerous, president, so if I spend the next four years making sure we don't have a free press, then I might get re-elected after all.
Let's leave this fake news crap for the US to sort out and not import to UK.
We have had it for years, the only difference is that we never had a specific term for it.
The left has spent decades complaining about the slanting of news by Murdoch, the Mail etc. The right do likewise with left wing news outlets.
Corbyn might be just as left wing as McDonnell in theory, but he'd be too busy with irrelevancies/incompetent to do nearly as much damage as McD if he ever somehow became PM.
I doubt McDonnell spends much time making jam from his allotment berries...
McDonnell is a hardline, disciplined Trot who has never done this as a game. Corbyn is a privileged son of the middle class who has been playing his entire political life.
If anything, McDonnell is even more disliked inside the PLP. I suspect that if he did somehow find his way to the leadership it would presage a split.
Or...an immediate challenge.
He can't get to the leadership without a members' vote. If the members back a hard-line Trot, then the game is up for the PLP and anyone else that is interested in an electable Labour party. At that stage, the sensible thing is to walk away.
SO how would you rate Jon Ashworth chances ?
Right now? Pretty low. But he is competent and sane and is a member of the Corbyn shadow cabinet, so clearly has a chance if he builds his profile a little more. He has the advantage of probably being able to get 15% of the PLP to back him. If the McDonnell amendment is not passed by conference that is gong to be absolutely crucial in the Corbyn succession battle.
So the fake news here is that O'Brien incorrectly introduced an interviewee, who was then able to make the necessary correction and proceed with the interview.
Mistakes are seized upon and made a lot more than they are, now more than ever.
Yup and the BBC [used to] pride itself on being way above that sort of thing.
So the fake news here is that O'Brien incorrectly introduced an interviewee, who was then able to make the necessary correction and proceed with the interview.
So it seems. More of a smear/misdirection than fake I would say. Similar to the tweets ScottP related on Trump from Mehdi Hassan last night
Not up to your Gina Miller photo's I grant you!
I agree with you that being accused of writing for Breitbart should be regarded as a smear. But in this instance, it seems as if the interviewee had the immediate chance to correct the statement and was not then challenged for doing so. Looks like a cock-up to me and one being confected into something more sinister by a little snowflake.
O'Brien has done this before, have you never listened to his LBC show? Or can people like him do no wrong because you agree with his politics, just as you think The Sun black up photos because you disagree with theirs?
I have never listened to his LBC show, but I am not surprised that he gets something wrong about an interviewee every now and again. It happens. If the interviewee is given the opportunity to correct, then I don't see a huge problem.
So it seems. More of a smear/misdirection than fake I would say. Similar to the tweets ScottP related on Trump from Mehdi Hassan last night
Fuck off
There was no spin. Watch the video.
Here's the transcript
Reporter: When you say inner cities, are you gonna include the CBC, mr. President, in the conversations with your urban agenda, your inner city agenda, as well as—
Trump: Am I gonna—am I gonna include who?
Reporter: Are you gonna include the Congressional Black Caucus and —
Trump: Well, I would. I tell you what, you want to set up the meeting? Do you want to set up the meeting?
Reporter: No, no, no I'm just a reporter.
Trump: Are they friends of yours?
Reporter: I know some of them —
Trump: No, go ahead, set up the meeting. Let's go. Set up a meeting, I would love to meet with the black caucus. I think it's great, the Congressional Black Caucus, I think it's great. I actually thought I had a meeting with Congressman Cummings, and he was all excited, and then he said, oh, I can't move. It might be bad for me politically. I can't have that meeting. I was all set to have that meeting. You know we called him and called him. And he was all set. I spoke to him on the phone, a nice guy.
Trump asked a black reporter to set up a meeting with the Black Congressional Caucus.
So the fake news here is that O'Brien incorrectly introduced an interviewee, who was then able to make the necessary correction and proceed with the interview.
So it seems. More of a smear/misdirection than fake I would say. Similar to the tweets ScottP related on Trump from Mehdi Hassan last night
Not up to your Gina Miller photo's I grant you!
I agree with you that being accused of writing for Breitbart should be regarded as a smear. But in this instance, it seems as if the interviewee had the immediate chance to correct the statement and was not then challenged for doing so. Looks like a cock-up to me and one being confected into something more sinister by a little snowflake.
Oh dear ' snowflake' - i thought we were above that sort of labelling. Only when it suits eh.
Corbyn might be just as left wing as McDonnell in theory, but he'd be too busy with irrelevancies/incompetent to do nearly as much damage as McD if he ever somehow became PM.
I doubt McDonnell spends much time making jam from his allotment berries...
McDonnell is a hardline, disciplined Trot who has never done this as a game. Corbyn is a privileged son of the middle class who has been playing his entire political life.
If anything, McDonnell is even more disliked inside the PLP. I suspect that if he did somehow find his way to the leadership it would presage a split.
Or...an immediate challenge.
He can't get to the leadership without a members' vote. If the members back a hard-line Trot, then the game is up for the PLP and anyone else that is interested in an electable Labour party. At that stage, the sensible thing is to walk away.
SO how would you rate Jon Ashworth chances ?
Oh God, how am I suppose to stay greenish on this book when new names keep being floated.
So it seems. More of a smear/misdirection than fake I would say. Similar to the tweets ScottP related on Trump from Mehdi Hassan last night
Fuck off
There was no spin. Watch the video.
Here's the transcript
Reporter: When you say inner cities, are you gonna include the CBC, mr. President, in the conversations with your urban agenda, your inner city agenda, as well as—
Trump: Am I gonna—am I gonna include who?
Reporter: Are you gonna include the Congressional Black Caucus and —
Trump: Well, I would. I tell you what, you want to set up the meeting? Do you want to set up the meeting?
Reporter: No, no, no I'm just a reporter.
Trump: Are they friends of yours?
Reporter: I know some of them —
Trump: No, go ahead, set up the meeting. Let's go. Set up a meeting, I would love to meet with the black caucus. I think it's great, the Congressional Black Caucus, I think it's great. I actually thought I had a meeting with Congressman Cummings, and he was all excited, and then he said, oh, I can't move. It might be bad for me politically. I can't have that meeting. I was all set to have that meeting. You know we called him and called him. And he was all set. I spoke to him on the phone, a nice guy.
Trump asked a black reporter to set up a meeting with the Black Congressional Caucus.
Where did you imagine the spin?
I didn't imagine it, I watched it live and then was surprised to see your posts of spin.
Mr. Chestnut, well quite. Expecting retail sales to rise from December to January seems a little contrary to history and reason.
Edited extra bit: Mr. Eagles, cheers.
The fall in retail sales was both month on month and quarter on quarter. As for historical values over the Christmas period, last years value was +2.3%, so a fall in this month is unexpected.
The quarterly value of sales rose, Jonathan.
The quarterly comparison of money spent/value to the same period last year was a 4.9% increase.
So the fake news here is that O'Brien incorrectly introduced an interviewee, who was then able to make the necessary correction and proceed with the interview.
So it seems. More of a smear/misdirection than fake I would say. Similar to the tweets ScottP related on Trump from Mehdi Hassan last night
Not up to your Gina Miller photo's I grant you!
I agree with you that being accused of writing for Breitbart should be regarded as a smear. But in this instance, it seems as if the interviewee had the immediate chance to correct the statement and was not then challenged for doing so. Looks like a cock-up to me and one being confected into something more sinister by a little snowflake.
O'Brien has done this before, have you never listened to his LBC show? Or can people like him do no wrong because you agree with his politics, just as you think The Sun black up photos because you disagree with theirs?
I have never listened to his LBC show, but I am not surprised that he gets something wrong about an interviewee every now and again. It happens. If the interviewee is given the opportunity to correct, then I don't see a huge problem.
Watch the first 2:30 mins of this and consider that John Lynden Sullivan was NEVER a councillor for UKIP, was sacked as a candidate when he made the comments and stood (and failed) as an Independent. And that this hadn't happened overnight, it took place 15 months earlier
Nuttall reaches a tearfully toddleresque end stage after having exhausted all other possibilities in trying to avoid taking responsibility for his words and actions.
So the fake news here is that O'Brien incorrectly introduced an interviewee, who was then able to make the necessary correction and proceed with the interview.
So it seems. More of a smear/misdirection than fake I would say. Similar to the tweets ScottP related on Trump from Mehdi Hassan last night
Not up to your Gina Miller photo's I grant you!
I agree with you that being accused of writing for Breitbart should be regarded as a smear. But in this instance, it seems as if the interviewee had the immediate chance to correct the statement and was not then challenged for doing so. Looks like a cock-up to me and one being confected into something more sinister by a little snowflake.
O'Brien has done this before, have you never listened to his LBC show? Or can people like him do no wrong because you agree with his politics, just as you think The Sun black up photos because you disagree with theirs?
I have never listened to his LBC show, but I am not surprised that he gets something wrong about an interviewee every now and again. It happens. If the interviewee is given the opportunity to correct, then I don't see a huge problem.
He doesn't jusr get things wrong now or then, he lies. He is one of the most dishonest commentators broadcasting today. And obviously that is saying something.
So the fake news here is that O'Brien incorrectly introduced an interviewee, who was then able to make the necessary correction and proceed with the interview.
So it seems. More of a smear/misdirection than fake I would say. Similar to the tweets ScottP related on Trump from Mehdi Hassan last night
Not up to your Gina Miller photo's I grant you!
I agree with you that being accused of writing for Breitbart should be regarded as a smear. But in this instance, it seems as if the interviewee had the immediate chance to correct the statement and was not then challenged for doing so. Looks like a cock-up to me and one being confected into something more sinister by a little snowflake.
O'Brien has done this before, have you never listened to his LBC show? Or can people like him do no wrong because you agree with his politics, just as you think The Sun black up photos because you disagree with theirs?
I have never listened to his LBC show, but I am not surprised that he gets something wrong about an interviewee every now and again. It happens. If the interviewee is given the opportunity to correct, then I don't see a huge problem.
He doesn't jusr get things wrong now or then, he lies. He is one of the most dishonest commentators broadcasting today. And obviously that is saying something.
Yes.
The PB lads seem to want to give him a free pass though. Strange, they never believe anything anyone else says and often are deeply suspicious
Corbyn might be just as left wing as McDonnell in theory, but he'd be too busy with irrelevancies/incompetent to do nearly as much damage as McD if he ever somehow became PM.
I doubt McDonnell spends much time making jam from his allotment berries...
McDonnell is a hardline, disciplined Trot who has never done this as a game. Corbyn is a privileged son of the middle class who has been playing his entire political life.
If anything, McDonnell is even more disliked inside the PLP. I suspect that if he did somehow find his way to the leadership it would presage a split.
Or...an immediate challenge.
He can't get to the leadership without a members' vote. If the members back a hard-line Trot, then the game is up for the PLP and anyone else that is interested in an electable Labour party. At that stage, the sensible thing is to walk away.
SO how would you rate Jon Ashworth chances ?
Oh God, how am I suppose to stay greenish on this book when new names keep being floated.
You will never stay green on a market like this by just betting. Because even if you back everyone on the list, the next person added to the market will be a large red. They key is to do some laying as well, preferably on someone you backed at high odds whose price has fallen.
We only joined thanks to the Economics argument, and hoped (vainly) that the Political side could be avoided.
That may be your view and the view of a section of the elite which sadly grew over the last few decades, but is a completely inadequate reading of the politics of the 60s and 70s. We joined for political reasons, of which being able a sane economy was just one of a long list.
You are half way to enlightenment in realising that their is no real economic case for Brexit. What still awaits you is the realisation it is the political side of the EU that we needed more than anything, and that there will be severe political costs to stepping aside. What happens to the economy is a side issue.
Britain's economy in the early 1970s was broken.
The countries of the EEC had done much, much better than the UK in the preceding decade, and had caught up, and even surpassed us on most metrics.
The government picked economic winners (badly), while unions were very short sighted, bringing down a number of profitable firms.
We thought that the difference between Germany's economic fate and ours, was that they were members of the EEC. Obviously that wasn't true.
But look, I have a very counter-consensus view on the Eurozone economy in the next ten years to the PB consensus. I suspect that - absent a major political shock - it will substantially outgrow the UK, as it gets into a virtuous circle of falling savings rates boosting growth, boosting confidence pulling down the savings rate. Countries like Spain - which have modernised their economies - could well see a decade of 3% growth ahead of them.
I see both Brexit and Trump coming about because of a period of economic stagnation, and ironically just about as we exit stagnation. Over the lSt year there are real signs of economic recovery in China and the EZ as well as here and the USA. I am not yet sure whether tbis is very good timing (smoothing the bumps) or very bad timing pushing us back into recession.
Comments
Is the Press Sec denying the State Guard round-up proposal?
Fascist.
"The only one left in position is Jeremy himself, and McDonnell is coming for him too."
Labour would do well to replace Corbyn with McDonnell.
McDonnell is a more serious politician than Corbyn, and his backstory with the IRA is an irrelevancy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Lenin#Declining_health_and_arguments_with_Stalin:_1920.E2.80.9323
The logic of your comment is that extrapolating any electoral outcome from a national poll is likely to produce garbage. I beg to disagree.
But would he get the nominations?
[I might have a small bet on him being next Labour leader. Only a few pounds, if so].
"BBC: Retail sales fall unexpectedly in January"
The detail: YoY volumes are up 1.5% and YoY value up 3.9%. Consumers 'battered by inflation' (Reuters) increased spending by 3.9% on the annual comparison.
The Don has a point.
I can't help wondering who would find this 'unexpected'.
McDonnell might be worse, politics wise, I am not sure, but he projects a more serious and competent image.
https://twitter.com/racingpost/status/832624933213593601
This is also cool
Selection Selection Details Result
1
Horse Racing
SANDOWN
15:15 ROYAL ARTILLERY GOLD CUP 3m 37y
17th of February 2017 3:15 pm
Win or E/W
Rathlin Rose @ 5/2 (GP)
Win
Aftertime Ansell 2.0 @ansellaftertime
Mr. Chestnut, well quite. Expecting retail sales to rise from December to January seems a little contrary to history and reason.
Edited extra bit: Mr. Eagles, cheers.
He is the REALLY REALLY hard left in my eyes.
This post was partly inspired by my betting slip that says John McDonnell as next Labour leader at 40/1
*this is a joke*
For the Tories.
I doubt McDonnell spends much time making jam from his allotment berries...
I think I'd prefer Khan or Lewis to get it, though. Not that I'm a fan of either, but given the options...
http://l-r-c.org.uk/news/story/momentum-and-the-lrc/
It is hard to see how McDonnell gets close to being Labour leader given that, even if manages to get the McDonnell amendment through Conference in October.
If the hardline Trots are moving in to take over Corbyn's office, then it will hasten the end of the far left's control of the party.
There is a suspicion that McDonnell has always seen Corbyn as a useful idiot.
https://twitter.com/spectator/status/832570814423777280
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/eprogs4gmc/TimesResults_160630_LabourMembers.pdf
If anything, McDonnell is even more disliked inside the PLP. I suspect that if he did somehow find his way to the leadership it would presage a split.
Because pre 23rd June that's definately the way lots of brexiteers saw themselves.
He comes across as more ruthless, competent, smart, and serious than Corbyn, who is a feeble scruffy joke in comparison. At least with McDonnell I actually get the feeling that he has a plan, he wants power, and wants to change things for his version of better. Corbyn just seems like he would be happier sitting in a tent outside parliament and protesting.
The risk is that the IRA stuff manages to stick and do damage to him, and his more competent image backfires (either it scares people that we may actually put a marxist in power, or it is proven to be misguided as he makes fuck-ups as leader). He may actually alienate a lot of labour members as he is less of a Green/New Age/Transgender Bathroom type leftie than Corbyn, and more of a good old fashioned marxist (i.e the opposite of many corbynistas).
Khan is, however, clearly better than a batshit insane communist.
Mr. City, Starmer's a humourless blighter who may as well have metropolitan elite tattooed on his forehead.
Better than Corbyn, of course, but Khan (even though he's mayor of London) would be better for Labour.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2017/02/simon-fletchers-resignation-victory-seumas-milne
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/jen-psaki-open-letter-cnn-sean-spicer-kellyanne-conway-235137
“It is highly unlikely that press secretary Sean Spicer and presidential counselor Kellyanne Conway loaded their boss up with Red Bull Thursday morning and advised him to become unhinged during the press conference...”
Let's leave this fake news crap for the US to sort out and not import to UK.
Not up to your Gina Miller photo's I grant you!
Got him the Newsnight gig though!
"Sean Spicer, Mr Trump's spokesman, said the suggestion was "100 per cent false". "
So, that's a yes then.
I actually haven't read this story, but they've succeeded in making everything murky and anything seem believable at this point.
The left has spent decades complaining about the slanting of news by Murdoch, the Mail etc. The right do likewise with left wing news outlets.
There was no spin. Watch the video.
Here's the transcript
Reporter: When you say inner cities, are you gonna include the CBC, mr. President, in the conversations with your urban agenda, your inner city agenda, as well as—
Trump: Am I gonna—am I gonna include who?
Reporter: Are you gonna include the Congressional Black Caucus and —
Trump: Well, I would. I tell you what, you want to set up the meeting? Do you want to set up the meeting?
Reporter: No, no, no I'm just a reporter.
Trump: Are they friends of yours?
Reporter: I know some of them —
Trump: No, go ahead, set up the meeting. Let's go. Set up a meeting, I would love to meet with the black caucus. I think it's great, the Congressional Black Caucus, I think it's great. I actually thought I had a meeting with Congressman Cummings, and he was all excited, and then he said, oh, I can't move. It might be bad for me politically. I can't have that meeting. I was all set to have that meeting. You know we called him and called him. And he was all set. I spoke to him on the phone, a nice guy.
Trump asked a black reporter to set up a meeting with the Black Congressional Caucus.
Where did you imagine the spin?
She actually said The black Caucus and Hispanics
You can fuck off now x
The quarterly comparison of money spent/value to the same period last year was a 4.9% increase.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywood/2017/02/16/fox-apologizes-cure-wellness-fake-news-marketing-campaign/
Good journalism? You should know
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-pyYoL9ngtE
Here is what I posted
@jamiemaxwell86: Trump just asked April Ryan, an African American reporter, if she would set-up a meeting for him with the Congressional Black Caucus.
@glcarlstrom: Trump is asking a black reporter to set up a meeting for him with the Congressional Black Caucus.
@mehdirhasan: Let's be clear: because she's a black journalist. All black people must know each other, right? twitter.com/JoyAnnReid/sta…
Which exactly matches the transcript
What spin did you imagine?
Everyone who commented on your post derided you for it, not just me. I rewatched it to check that I had heard and seen correctly, and I had.
https://twitter.com/LeftieLawyer/status/832586116364718081
The PB lads seem to want to give him a free pass though. Strange, they never believe anything anyone else says and often are deeply suspicious