I think the USA would be entirely justified in a first strike against North Korea now.
Please don't say that, what if Trump lurks here?
Do you mean nuclear or conventional?
Nuclear.
Woah. Hang about.
You can't just launch a nuclear attack cold. Even on North Korea.
That would only be justified if there was incontrovertible evidence of an imminent nuclear attack on South Korea or Japan, and even then the targeting would need to be strictly military only and very low yield.
As soon as it was done, absolutely all hell would be let loose, so it would have been to be an overwhelming effective first strike, and you'd need China's blessing too.
Interesting response. The thing is, on these numbers, the centre-left would win a challenge well before 2020 (there are no transfer friendly candidates from the Far Left) so why would they accept the McDonnell amendment? I don't see the incentive.
I guess that the idea would be to get Corbyn out asap so the PLP would essentially agree to a contest that would be won by someone on the centre left. But I agree with you. Better to leave it a year, allow Corbyn's support to drop even more and get a contest triggered by the unions under the current rules. That locks the far left out forever.
I know it's counter-intuitive but there are 2 reasons:
1. Corbyn won't stand down before 2020 regardless of whether the unions or anyone else say he should, if he thinks that the consequence will be to lock the far left out forever. Trust me on that - I know him and there isn't a mechanism for it. So if they believe that he will produce a significantly worse result in 2020 (with a lot of Labour MPs of all flavours losing seats), they need to provide a route that he'd accept.
2. The centre-left needs to win the argument, not hide behind procedure. Tony understood that - it's why he had the Clause 4 referendum among members. They need to have a left-wing candidate and be confident that they can win against him or her. The poll suggests they have reason for precisely that confidence.
I've got a longer article on this for Labour List which will be published shortly.
The NHS requires far more money than it currently gets if it is to provide the type of service that the public expects.
Reform might also be useful.
If ‘Reform’ means naive politicians pushing ill-thought out ideas, conceived with political dogma as the main driver,on the health service AGAIN, then reform is the last thing the NHS needs.
Yes, but in the absence of as much money as it seems to need under current administration, which is definitely woeful in parts, then it does need genuine reform too. I'd be happy to increase the money if I thought it would solve the problems, but we all know there'll be another crisis no matter what.
The AFP announced concordant sources that the sarkozyst politicians, gathered around the former head of state on Monday morning, ask François Fillon to "take his responsibilities" and to choose himself a "successor" to his Candidacy for the presidential election. "Fillon's political line is the right one, but it can no longer guarantee the unity of the political family of the Right and the Center." Christian Jacob is in charge of going to see François Fillon to ask him to accept a meeting with Nicolas Sarkozy and Alain Juppé.
Interesting response. The thing is, on these numbers, the centre-left would win a challenge well before 2020 (there are no transfer friendly candidates from the Far Left) so why would they accept the McDonnell amendment? I don't see the incentive.
I guess that the idea would be to get Corbyn out asap so the PLP would essentially agree to a contest that would be won by someone on the centre left. But I agree with you. Better to leave it a year, allow Corbyn's support to drop even more and get a contest triggered by the unions under the current rules. That locks the far left out forever.
I know it's counter-intuitive but there are 2 reasons:
1. Corbyn won't stand down before 2020 regardless of whether the unions or anyone else say he should, if he thinks that the consequence will be to lock the far left out forever. Trust me on that - I know him and there isn't a mechanism for it. So if they believe that he will produce a significantly worse result in 2020 (with a lot of Labour MPs of all flavours losing seats), they need to provide a route that he'd accept.
2. The centre-left needs to win the argument, not hide behind procedure. Tony understood that - it's why he had the Clause 4 referendum among members. They need to have a left-wing candidate and be confident that they can win against him or her. The poll suggests they have reason for precisely that confidence.
I've got a longer article on this for Labour List which will be published shortly.
If the unions call for an election, then Corbyn will lose if he stands because the coup narrative cannot be used (and he loses a lot of practical help on top).
To get the McDonnell amendment through, a conference vote is needed. The centre-left cannot prevent that happening. If the amendment does not pass it will be because conference rejects it. And conference will reject it if the unions are opposed.
Interesting response. The thing is, on these numbers, the centre-left would win a challenge well before 2020 (there are no transfer friendly candidates from the Far Left) so why would they accept the McDonnell amendment? I don't see the incentive.
I guess that the idea would be to get Corbyn out asap so the PLP would essentially agree to a contest that would be won by someone on the centre left. But I agree with you. Better to leave it a year, allow Corbyn's support to drop even more and get a contest triggered by the unions under the current rules. That locks the far left out forever.
I know it's counter-intuitive but there are 2 reasons:
1. Corbyn won't stand down before 2020 regardless of whether the unions or anyone else say he should, if he thinks that the consequence will be to lock the far left out forever. Trust me on that - I know him and there isn't a mechanism for it. So if they believe that he will produce a significantly worse result in 2020 (with a lot of Labour MPs of all flavours losing seats), they need to provide a route that he'd accept.
2. The centre-left needs to win the argument, not hide behind procedure. Tony understood that - it's why he had the Clause 4 referendum among members. They need to have a left-wing candidate and be confident that they can win against him or her. The poll suggests they have reason for precisely that confidence.
I've got a longer article on this for Labour List which will be published shortly.
Why can't the centre-left just challenge him, if they wanted to? On these numbers he will be toast-walking in any leadership contest by the autumn...
Interesting response. The thing is, on these numbers, the centre-left would win a challenge well before 2020 (there are no transfer friendly candidates from the Far Left) so why would they accept the McDonnell amendment? I don't see the incentive.
I guess that the idea would be to get Corbyn out asap so the PLP would essentially agree to a contest that would be won by someone on the centre left. But I agree with you. Better to leave it a year, allow Corbyn's support to drop even more and get a contest triggered by the unions under the current rules. That locks the far left out forever.
I know it's counter-intuitive but there are 2 reasons:
1. Corbyn won't stand down before 2020 regardless of whether the unions or anyone else say he should, if he thinks that the consequence will be to lock the far left out forever. Trust me on that - I know him and there isn't a mechanism for it. So if they believe that he will produce a significantly worse result in 2020 (with a lot of Labour MPs of all flavours losing seats), they need to provide a route that he'd accept.
2. The centre-left needs to win the argument, not hide behind procedure. Tony understood that - it's why he had the Clause 4 referendum among members. They need to have a left-wing candidate and be confident that they can win against him or her. The poll suggests they have reason for precisely that confidence.
I've got a longer article on this for Labour List which will be published shortly.
He'd stay in place even if the Unions turned against him? Bolder than I thought. But surely staying on if MPs, Unions and significant portions of the members united against him (and this is not certain of course) would lock the far left out more than standing down at that point. When it was just the MPs, sure, standing down then would lock the far left out for a time, but if the Unions were demanding it too, well that consequences of going into an election with even the unions saying he should have gone earlier would surely result in an even worse result andlock the far left out for evenlonger?
I think the USA would be entirely justified in a first strike against North Korea now.
Please don't say that, what if Trump lurks here?
Do you mean nuclear or conventional?
Nuclear.
Woah. Hang about.
You can't just launch a nuclear attack cold. Even on North Korea.
That would only be justified if there was incontrovertible evidence of an imminent nuclear attack on South Korea or Japan, and even then the targeting would need to be strictly military only and very low yield.
As soon as it was done, absolutely all hell would be let loose, so it would have been to be an overwhelming effective first strike, and you'd need China's blessing too.
Mere details...
It would be the ultimate dead cat strategy for Trump.
The Labour Party selectorate isn't fixed in the way the national one is. As Corbyn stays in post, members who don't like him may defect or let their memberships lapse. Equally, there must be some nutty left-wingers out there who'd join Labour if they thought Corbyn was in trouble.
Interesting response. The thing is, on these numbers, the centre-left would win a challenge well before 2020 (there are no transfer friendly candidates from the Far Left) so why would they accept the McDonnell amendment? I don't see the incentive.
I guess that the idea would be to get Corbyn out asap so the PLP would essentially agree to a contest that would be won by someone on the centre left. But I agree with you. Better to leave it a year, allow Corbyn's support to drop even more and get a contest triggered by the unions under the current rules. That locks the far left out forever.
I know it's counter-intuitive but there are 2 reasons:
1. Corbyn won't stand down before 2020 regardless of whether the unions or anyone else say he should, if he thinks that the consequence will be to lock the far left out forever. Trust me on that - I know him and there isn't a mechanism for it. So if they believe that he will produce a significantly worse result in 2020 (with a lot of Labour MPs of all flavours losing seats), they need to provide a route that he'd accept.
2. The centre-left needs to win the argument, not hide behind procedure. Tony understood that - it's why he had the Clause 4 referendum among members. They need to have a left-wing candidate and be confident that they can win against him or her. The poll suggests they have reason for precisely that confidence.
I've got a longer article on this for Labour List which will be published shortly.
Would you support a return to the Electoral College with 33% MPs (but only requiring very few to nominate) and the other 2/3rds for the unions and party members, both on the basis of one person one vote? A far left candidate would be certain to be on the ballot, but the prospects of their winning would be rather lower.
Meeting tomorrow between Juppé, Fillon and Sarkozy confirmed, according to Le Figaro.
Ok lads, which of us hasn't been convicted of a serious offence yet? Ok, and now of those left, whose alleged offence is most serious? The one left gets to run.
I think the USA would be entirely justified in a first strike against North Korea now.
Please don't say that, what if Trump lurks here?
Do you mean nuclear or conventional?
Nuclear.
Woah. Hang about.
You can't just launch a nuclear attack cold. Even on North Korea.
That would only be justified if there was incontrovertible evidence of an imminent nuclear attack on South Korea or Japan, and even then the targeting would need to be strictly military only and very low yield.
As soon as it was done, absolutely all hell would be let loose, so it would have been to be an overwhelming effective first strike, and you'd need China's blessing too.
Mere details...
It would be the ultimate dead cat strategy for Trump.
Ask China for permission and N Korea would know the same day...
What sort of chap is Macron, by the way? I've seen him usually referred to as a centrist, but the other day I saw a piece calling him a liberal. He's not a cypher on to which people are projecting what they want to believe is he?
Meeting tomorrow between Juppé, Fillon and Sarkozy confirmed, according to Le Figaro.
Ok lads, which of us hasn't been convicted of a serious offence yet? Ok, and now of those left, whose alleged offence is most serious? The one left gets to run.
No, they will be asking him to choose his successor, it is the only face-saving way out for all sides.
The Labour Party selectorate isn't fixed in the way the national one is. As Corbyn stays in post, members who don't like him may defect or let their memberships lapse. Equally, there must be some nutty left-wingers out there who'd join Labour if they thought Corbyn was in trouble.
I expect to see him fight the next GE.
I think there might be more than a soupçon of wishful thinking for you there.
Is Jeremy Corbyn doing well as Labour leader Total Well 51% (-) Badly 48% (-1)
How likely do you think Corbyn will become PM Total likely 31% (+4) Total unlikely 60% (-6)
If there was another leadership contest how likely would you vote for Corbyn Total definitely/probably 52% (+2) Total definitely/probably not 46% (-1)
Barely any change, Corbyn would again win a leadership election despite everything that has gone on. Also McDonnell is more popular with members than was previously thought. I really don't see the positives for moderates?
Meeting tomorrow between Juppé, Fillon and Sarkozy confirmed, according to Le Figaro.
Ok lads, which of us hasn't been convicted of a serious offence yet? Ok, and now of those left, whose alleged offence is most serious? The one left gets to run.
No, they will be asking him to choose his successor, it is the only face-saving way out for all sides.
Meeting tomorrow between Juppé, Fillon and Sarkozy confirmed, according to Le Figaro.
Ok lads, which of us hasn't been convicted of a serious offence yet? Ok, and now of those left, whose alleged offence is most serious? The one left gets to run.
No, they will be asking him to choose his successor, it is the only face-saving way out for all sides.
I was not being entirely serious. Whatever any other qualities each holds, that the three main people being talked about are convicted or under investigation is a pretty poor situation to be in. Le Pen must be wondering what more it would take to have a real chance of winning.
Those who confidently assure us that the Scots won't vote for independence will probably take the even money on it not happening by 2024. A yes vote is shorter (1.73).
If the unions call for an election, then Corbyn will lose if he stands because the coup narrative cannot be used (and he loses a lot of practical help on top).
To get the McDonnell amendment through, a conference vote is needed. The centre-left cannot prevent that happening. If the amendment does not pass it will be because conference rejects it. And conference will reject it if the unions are opposed.
It's all about the unions.
It's illusory to think that the centre-left have no say in whether it passes: if prominent figures in the PLP call for it to pass, the message will be understood. In my view Corbyn will win any election that's forced on him, irrespective of the unions (and I expect McCluckey to win and to stay loyal, incidentally), and his opponents would be daft to assume otherwise.
The basic problem of the centre-left is that they've not set out a convincing agenda: that's why all the candidates against Corbyn failed. There are signs that this is being addressed, and it has to be - otherwise they won't win even amnong members, let alone the wider public. We really do not want another election where our central policy plank is a temporary electricity price freeze. A candidate needs to have a strong programme that convinces first the membership and then the public. Otherwise, really running the V&A looks a better option.
What sort of chap is Macron, by the way? I've seen him usually referred to as a centrist, but the other day I saw a piece calling him a liberal. He's not a cypher on to which people are projecting what they want to believe is he?
Traditionally, centrist and liberal meant the same thing.
My work filter will not allow me to access the page, shockingly. What odds before 2020 or before the end of 2021? That's my prediction for when it will happen.
Unfortunately, unless I've missed it, the Election Data YouGov poll of Labour members fails to ask the most important question: which of the following would you vote against if there were a leadership contest?
It's an AV system, after all. It's the least unpopular candidate who wins.
Meeting tomorrow between Juppé, Fillon and Sarkozy confirmed, according to Le Figaro.
Ok lads, which of us hasn't been convicted of a serious offence yet? Ok, and now of those left, whose alleged offence is most serious? The one left gets to run.
No, they will be asking him to choose his successor, it is the only face-saving way out for all sides.
I was not being entirely serious. Whatever any other qualities each holds, that the three main people being talked about are convicted or under investigation is a pretty poor situation to be in. Le Pen must be wondering what more it would take to have a real chance of winning.
Unfortunately, unless I've missed it, the Election Data YouGov poll of Labour members fails to ask the most important question: which of the following would you vote against if there were a leadership contest?
It's an AV system, after all. It's the least unpopular candidate who wins.
The key finding for me - alongside the significant drop in support for Corbyn and the fact that members think he should stand down before the GE - is the question on who members would consider voting for in an election that Corbyn did not take part in:
John McDonnell - 27% Yvette Cooper - 27% Chuka Umunna - 26% Keir Starmer - 26% Clive Lewis - 23% Hillary Benn - 21% Dan Jarvis - 17% Angela Rayner - 15% Emily Thornberry - 14% Rebecca Long Bailey - 10% Lisa Nandy - 8% Rachel Reeves - 5% Someone else - 13% Don't know - 17%
Putting to one side both McDonnell and Benn have ruled themselves out (yeah, right), looking at those numbers the chances are that the next leader is going to come from the centre or the soft left. If the McDonnell amendment does not get through conference, there will be no far left candidate at all when the leadership is next contended. If it does, there will be one - and he/she will be up against candidates who are far more vote transfer friendly. So, for example, in a contest featuring McDonnell, Cooper, Umunna and Starmer, McDonnell may just top the poll on a first round, but would get very few transfers from the contenders that then drop out in the following rounds.
Another interesting question is what members think Corbyn should do in the event of losing the support of the unions or the shadow cabinet. In both circumstances, they say he should stand down.
Watch this space.
Corbyn's support is dropping in the same way Texas is trending Democrat though.
In February 2016 63% of Labour members wanted Corbyn to lead the party into the next electio. That figure has now dropped to 44%. Last year 31% wanted him to step down by the election. Now 50% want to see that happen. A swing of 19% in barely a year is pretty big!
Le Pen must be wondering what more it would take to have a real chance of winning.
Fundamentally what's stopping Le Pen from breaking past her ceiling is the baggage of her family, both genetic and political. If she were not the daughter of Jean-Marie she might never have taken on the mantle of detoxifying the Front National and could have founded her own movement.
Meeting tomorrow between Juppé, Fillon and Sarkozy confirmed, according to Le Figaro.
Ok lads, which of us hasn't been convicted of a serious offence yet? Ok, and now of those left, whose alleged offence is most serious? The one left gets to run.
No, they will be asking him to choose his successor, it is the only face-saving way out for all sides.
Baroin is the only cap that fits !
Might even have been Fillon's gameplan all along. String them along with thoughts that he might quit and he holds the ultimate card that he is an official candidate and cannot be forced out. Then with time runing out, they are forced to accept his compromise.
By the way, the other day someone asked whether Macron's non-party status means that he won't have candidate for Parliament if he wins (normally a newly-elected President calls Parliamentary elecitons at once to get a supportive majority). Do we know his intentions on that?
Is Jeremy Corbyn doing well as Labour leader Total Well 51% (-) Badly 48% (-1)
How likely do you think Corbyn will become PM Total likely 31% (+4) Total unlikely 60% (-6)
If there was another leadership contest how likely would you vote for Corbyn Total definitely/probably 52% (+2) Total definitely/probably not 46% (-1)
Barely any change, Corbyn would again win a leadership election despite everything that has gone on. Also McDonnell is more popular with members than was previously thought. I really don't see the positives for moderates?
From 72% support in February 2016 to 54% support now. From a majority wanting him to stay on until the next GE to a majority wanting him to go before the next GE. McDonnell's support is far too low for him to hope to win the leadership. It is absolutely clear that the membership is turning against Corbyn and the far left. In London - where Labour's membership is most concentrated - Corbyn has gone from +40 to -1 in a year.
Unfortunately, unless I've missed it, the Election Data YouGov poll of Labour members fails to ask the most important question: which of the following would you vote against if there were a leadership contest?
It's an AV system, after all. It's the least unpopular candidate who wins.
The Labour Party selectorate isn't fixed in the way the national one is. As Corbyn stays in post, members who don't like him may defect or let their memberships lapse. Equally, there must be some nutty left-wingers out there who'd join Labour if they thought Corbyn was in trouble.
I expect to see him fight the next GE.
I think there might be more than a soupçon of wishful thinking for you there.
Meeting tomorrow between Juppé, Fillon and Sarkozy confirmed, according to Le Figaro.
Ok lads, which of us hasn't been convicted of a serious offence yet? Ok, and now of those left, whose alleged offence is most serious? The one left gets to run.
No, they will be asking him to choose his successor, it is the only face-saving way out for all sides.
Baroin is the only cap that fits !
Might even have been Fillon's gameplan all along. String them along with thoughts that he might quit and he holds the ultimate card that he is an official candidate and cannot be forced out. Then with time runing out, they are forced to accept his compromise.
Your book (And thus your judgement) has been astoundingly good & green this election. I think you were right when you called me out when I said Baroin had next to no chance. I've changed my mind on that.
If the unions call for an election, then Corbyn will lose if he stands because the coup narrative cannot be used (and he loses a lot of practical help on top).
To get the McDonnell amendment through, a conference vote is needed. The centre-left cannot prevent that happening. If the amendment does not pass it will be because conference rejects it. And conference will reject it if the unions are opposed.
It's all about the unions.
It's illusory to think that the centre-left have no say in whether it passes: if prominent figures in the PLP call for it to pass, the message will be understood. In my view Corbyn will win any election that's forced on him, irrespective of the unions (and I expect McCluckey to win and to stay loyal, incidentally), and his opponents would be daft to assume otherwise.
The basic problem of the centre-left is that they've not set out a convincing agenda: that's why all the candidates against Corbyn failed. There are signs that this is being addressed, and it has to be - otherwise they won't win even amnong members, let alone the wider public. We really do not want another election where our central policy plank is a temporary electricity price freeze. A candidate needs to have a strong programme that convinces first the membership and then the public. Otherwise, really running the V&A looks a better option.
If the unions call for an election, then Corbyn will lose if he stands because the coup narrative cannot be used (and he loses a lot of practical help on top).
To get the McDonnell amendment through, a conference vote is needed. The centre-left cannot prevent that happening. If the amendment does not pass it will be because conference rejects it. And conference will reject it if the unions are opposed.
It's all about the unions.
It's illusory to think that the centre-left have no say in whether it passes: if prominent figures in the PLP call for it to pass, the message will be understood. In my view Corbyn will win any election that's forced on him, irrespective of the unions (and I expect McCluckey to win and to stay loyal, incidentally), and his opponents would be daft to assume otherwise.
The basic problem of the centre-left is that they've not set out a convincing agenda: that's why all the candidates against Corbyn failed. There are signs that this is being addressed, and it has to be - otherwise they won't win even amnong members, let alone the wider public. We really do not want another election where our central policy plank is a temporary electricity price freeze. A candidate needs to have a strong programme that convinces first the membership and then the public. Otherwise, really running the V&A looks a better option.
I expect McCluskley to win and to stay loyal for now. That's why I am betting on Corbyn to go in 2018. The swing against him on London is extraordinary.
Another interesting snippet in the membership poll, btw, is that respondents thought that the leader should prioritise the views of the general public over the membership.
What sort of chap is Macron, by the way? I've seen him usually referred to as a centrist, but the other day I saw a piece calling him a liberal. He's not a cypher on to which people are projecting what they want to believe is he?
Traditionally, centrist and liberal meant the same thing.
He's a centrist pro-European with a populist streak but very strongly pro-refugee (aligned with Merkel on that). Wikipedia is fairly good on this:
What sort of chap is Macron, by the way? I've seen him usually referred to as a centrist, but the other day I saw a piece calling him a liberal. He's not a cypher on to which people are projecting what they want to believe is he?
I met Macron last January/February and posted my thoughts on him at the time. He's clearly a very bright pragmatist. I asked him about Brexit, and he basically said that it was the job of the French government to do the best for the French.
He's very aware of the failings of French state, and praised the Schroeder-Haartz reforms which freed up the German labour market at the start of the 2000s. He also recognises that the 35 hour work week and the early pension age are big problems for France.
I don't think he fits easily into any bucket. He's more reforming than a "steady as she goes" Cameron or Blair. But he's quite conciliatory in tone. I think he'd be a very tough guy to have sitting on the opposite side of the table in a negotiations.
If the unions call for an election, then Corbyn will lose if he stands because the coup narrative cannot be used (and he loses a lot of practical help on top).
To get the McDonnell amendment through, a conference vote is needed. The centre-left cannot prevent that happening. If the amendment does not pass it will be because conference rejects it. And conference will reject it if the unions are opposed.
It's all about the unions.
It's illusory to think that the centre-left have no say in whether it passes: if prominent figures in the PLP call for it to pass, the message will be understood. In my view Corbyn will win any election that's forced on him, irrespective of the unions (and I expect McCluckey to win and to stay loyal, incidentally), and his opponents would be daft to assume otherwise.
The basic problem of the centre-left is that they've not set out a convincing agenda: that's why all the candidates against Corbyn failed. There are signs that this is being addressed, and it has to be - otherwise they won't win even amnong members, let alone the wider public. We really do not want another election where our central policy plank is a temporary electricity price freeze. A candidate needs to have a strong programme that convinces first the membership and then the public. Otherwise, really running the V&A looks a better option.
I expect McCluskley to win and to stay loyal for now. That's why I am betting on Corbyn to go in 2018. The swing against him on London is extraordinary.
Another interesting snippet in the membership poll, btw, is that respondents thought that the leader should prioritise the views of the general public over the membership.
Isn't that the sort of thing people say but don't mean? Like they want politicians to work together, but discourage it by being hyper partisan. Or they want politicians to tell the blunt truth and admit when they make mistakes, but then the public reacts with ridicule to u-turns and harsh truths, preferring comforting obfuscations.
Interesting response. The thing is, on these numbers, the centre-left would win a challenge well before 2020 (there are no transfer friendly candidates from the Far Left) so why would they accept the McDonnell amendment? I don't see the incentive.
I guess that the idea would be to get Corbyn out asap so the PLP would essentially agree to a contest that would be won by someone on the centre left. But I agree with you. Better to leave it a year, allow Corbyn's support to drop even more and get a contest triggered by the unions under the current rules. That locks the far left out forever.
I know it's counter-intuitive but there are 2 reasons:
1. Corbyn won't stand down before 2020 regardless of whether the unions or anyone else say he should, if he thinks that the consequence will be to lock the far left out forever. Trust me on that - I know him and there isn't a mechanism for it. So if they believe that he will produce a significantly worse result in 2020 (with a lot of Labour MPs of all flavours losing seats), they need to provide a route that he'd accept.
2. The centre-left needs to win the argument, not hide behind procedure. Tony understood that - it's why he had the Clause 4 referendum among members. They need to have a left-wing candidate and be confident that they can win against him or her. The poll suggests they have reason for precisely that confidence.
I've got a longer article on this for Labour List which will be published shortly.
But surely if he won't stand down , he will face another challenge in 2018 which would be likely to succeed!
What sort of chap is Macron, by the way? I've seen him usually referred to as a centrist, but the other day I saw a piece calling him a liberal. He's not a cypher on to which people are projecting what they want to believe is he?
I met Macron last January/February and posted my thoughts on him at the time. He's clearly a very bright pragmatist. I asked him about Brexit, and he basically said that it was the job of the French government to do the best for the French.
He's very aware of the failings of French state, and praised the Schroeder-Haartz reforms which freed up the German labour market at the start of the 2000s. He also recognises that the 35 hour work week and the early pension age are big problems for France.
I don't think he fits easily into any bucket. He's more reforming than a "steady as she goes" Cameron or Blair. But he's quite conciliatory in tone. I think he'd be a very tough guy to have sitting on the opposite side of the table in a negotiations.
But at least you'd know what he was looking for.
I'm not going to deny, I liked him.
' I asked him about Brexit, and he basically said that it was the job of the French government to do the best for the French. '
You mean Macron doesn't think that its the job of the French government to maximise the net welfare of humanity irrespective of its effect on France ?
Clearly Macron would never have reached the higher positions in the British Civil Service.
Comments
1. Corbyn won't stand down before 2020 regardless of whether the unions or anyone else say he should, if he thinks that the consequence will be to lock the far left out forever. Trust me on that - I know him and there isn't a mechanism for it. So if they believe that he will produce a significantly worse result in 2020 (with a lot of Labour MPs of all flavours losing seats), they need to provide a route that he'd accept.
2. The centre-left needs to win the argument, not hide behind procedure. Tony understood that - it's why he had the Clause 4 referendum among members. They need to have a left-wing candidate and be confident that they can win against him or her. The poll suggests they have reason for precisely that confidence.
I've got a longer article on this for Labour List which will be published shortly.
Juppe ought to be longer, mind.
To get the McDonnell amendment through, a conference vote is needed. The centre-left cannot prevent that happening. If the amendment does not pass it will be because conference rejects it. And conference will reject it if the unions are opposed.
It's all about the unions.
I expect to see him fight the next GE.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-is-behaving-like-a-petulant-child-chuka-umunna-hits-out-10395856.html
https://twitter.com/thejeremyvine/status/838717394008801280
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/eprogs4gmc/TimesResults_160630_LabourMembers.pdf
Is Jeremy Corbyn doing well as Labour leader
Total Well 51% (-) Badly 48% (-1)
How likely do you think Corbyn will become PM
Total likely 31% (+4) Total unlikely 60% (-6)
If there was another leadership contest how likely would you vote for Corbyn
Total definitely/probably 52% (+2) Total definitely/probably not 46% (-1)
Barely any change, Corbyn would again win a leadership election despite everything that has gone on. Also McDonnell is more popular with members than was previously thought. I really don't see the positives for moderates?
Those who confidently assure us that the Scots won't vote for independence will probably take the even money on it not happening by 2024. A yes vote is shorter (1.73).
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/scottish-politics/scotland-to-vote-for-independence-by-end-of-2024
The basic problem of the centre-left is that they've not set out a convincing agenda: that's why all the candidates against Corbyn failed. There are signs that this is being addressed, and it has to be - otherwise they won't win even amnong members, let alone the wider public. We really do not want another election where our central policy plank is a temporary electricity price freeze. A candidate needs to have a strong programme that convinces first the membership and then the public. Otherwise, really running the V&A looks a better option.
It's an AV system, after all. It's the least unpopular candidate who wins.
The trend is your friend, as someone once said.
A thread on this may be useful.
NEW THREAD
Membership already is falling as anti-democrats europhiles go elsewhere (or nowhere). The other bit is more of a theory, I'll grant you.
Another interesting snippet in the membership poll, btw, is that respondents thought that the leader should prioritise the views of the general public over the membership.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmanuel_Macron
He's very aware of the failings of French state, and praised the Schroeder-Haartz reforms which freed up the German labour market at the start of the 2000s. He also recognises that the 35 hour work week and the early pension age are big problems for France.
I don't think he fits easily into any bucket. He's more reforming than a "steady as she goes" Cameron or Blair. But he's quite conciliatory in tone. I think he'd be a very tough guy to have sitting on the opposite side of the table in a negotiations.
But at least you'd know what he was looking for.
I'm not going to deny, I liked him.
You mean Macron doesn't think that its the job of the French government to maximise the net welfare of humanity irrespective of its effect on France ?
Clearly Macron would never have reached the higher positions in the British Civil Service.