politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The search for the answer to Labour’s woes
John Prescott’s view that Jeremy Corbyn and his top team are “not up to the f***ing job” which earned him a “potty mouth Prescott” headline in the Mail on Sunday won’t have come as surprise to the Labour leader.
The two main counter points are that Labour knocked on plenty of doors before the 2015 election and it didn't seem to help. In fact for Labour it was in the marginals where they seriously underperformed, their results in safe seats were perfectly fine.
More recently Labour flooded Stoke on Trent Central with activists and the result still saw a swing to the Tories, who soft pedaled. That should be very concerning for Labour and suggests a problem at a national level.
I'm not convinced that JC is the main part of the problem, there is a severe lack of leadership throughout the Labour Party going back to the post-Blair hangover - the Party seem incapable of understanding and articulating what their leader should be (ie a job description) hence Brown, through Miliband and now JC appear to offer drift. If we go back even further to Kinnock again the relationship between leader, party and Unions was also difficult at times (think Militant).
The solution needs to be more than retiring old JC to the club for aging Marxists as the systemic issues within the Labour party (ie role of Unions) are addressed. in this age of very fast comms, and a cynical electorate looking for clear (dare I say poulist) answers then no amount of door knocking will help a party stuck peddling a dull social democratic post-war model. The Scots referendum, is a case in point - wtf is Labour's (let alone JC's) position on this? its hardly a surprise and yet they seem caught like rabbits in the headlights- right rant over - back to bed.
Interesting conversation overnight, clearly Alex Salmond can see the numbers as well even if Nicola can't. He would have handled the U-turn a lot better were he still first minister. He probably wouldn't have even put EU membership front and centre, just left it as a "one day" sort of plan. That would have given enough to the No/Remainers (we'll join one day, just not today) and left the issue vague enough for the Yes/Leavers (we're not staying in, who knows what will happen in the future).
Nicola has played this very poorly and you can see she has been pushed into it by Salmond, her heart lies with the EU.
The article on the Telegraph laying out all of the SNP "meetings" with EU people is great btw. Nicola's meeting with the pest controller must have been particularly illuminating.
A separate survey of British voters by YouGov yesterday revealed strong opposition to a referendum while Brexit negotiations are under way, with 57 per cent against and 25 per cent in favour. However, 47 per cent said that a referendum should be granted after Britain has left the EU, with 30 per cent opposed.
Labour will need to find a way to craft a message that resonates with both the wwc and their metropolitan supporters.
As last years EU Referendum showed - the competing demands of these two cohorts will not easily be reconciled.
That coalition would barely keep the seats they still hold.
They need to craft a message that resonates with those currently voting Tory and UKIP.
Only one man has managed that, in more than forty years. But he is now reviled almost as much as the Devil to whom he sold his soul.
Plus. Tony Blair had the good fortune to walk into Downing Street buoyed by a very healthy economy - and promising not to mess with it for three years. It's just a shame Gordon Brown didn't get the memo. Brown was always intent on implementing Labour's broken business model - having the public sector be funded at levels that were unsustainable by the private sector. And there is no word from anybody in the Labour Party suggesting they wouldn't try implementing exactly the same failed policy yet again if they got near power.
I'm not convinced that JC is the main part of the problem, there is a severe lack of leadership throughout the Labour Party going back to the post-Blair hangover - the Party seem incapable of understanding and articulating what their leader should be (ie a job description) hence Brown, through Miliband and now JC appear to offer drift. If we go back even further to Kinnock again the relationship between leader, party and Unions was also difficult at times (think Militant).
The solution needs to be more than retiring old JC to the club for aging Marxists as the systemic issues within the Labour party (ie role of Unions) are addressed. in this age of very fast comms, and a cynical electorate looking for clear (dare I say poulist) answers then no amount of door knocking will help a party stuck peddling a dull social democratic post-war model. The Scots referendum, is a case in point - wtf is Labour's (let alone JC's) position on this? its hardly a surprise and yet they seem caught like rabbits in the headlights- right rant over - back to bed.
I'm not convinced that JC is the main part of the problem, there is a severe lack of leadership throughout the Labour Party going back to the post-Blair hangover - the Party seem incapable of understanding and articulating what their leader should be (ie a job description) hence Brown, through Miliband and now JC appear to offer drift. If we go back even further to Kinnock again the relationship between leader, party and Unions was also difficult at times (think Militant).
The solution needs to be more than retiring old JC to the club for aging Marxists as the systemic issues within the Labour party (ie role of Unions) are addressed. in this age of very fast comms, and a cynical electorate looking for clear (dare I say poulist) answers then no amount of door knocking will help a party stuck peddling a dull social democratic post-war model. The Scots referendum, is a case in point - wtf is Labour's (let alone JC's) position on this? its hardly a surprise and yet they seem caught like rabbits in the headlights- right rant over - back to bed.
Fully agree. Labour are stuck in a time warp...or rather two. One in the 1970s.. (Corbyn) and one in the 1990s (Blair).
There is no original thinking and few with the ability to think originally. They appear stuck..and need a really good blood letting to get rid of the muppets who choose policy by repeating mantras,,
I'm not convinced that JC is the main part of the problem, there is a severe lack of leadership throughout the Labour Party going back to the post-Blair hangover - the Party seem incapable of understanding and articulating what their leader should be (ie a job description) hence Brown, through Miliband and now JC appear to offer drift. If we go back even further to Kinnock again the relationship between leader, party and Unions was also difficult at times (think Militant).
The solution needs to be more than retiring old JC to the club for aging Marxists as the systemic issues within the Labour party (ie role of Unions) are addressed. in this age of very fast comms, and a cynical electorate looking for clear (dare I say poulist) answers then no amount of door knocking will help a party stuck peddling a dull social democratic post-war model. The Scots referendum, is a case in point - wtf is Labour's (let alone JC's) position on this? its hardly a surprise and yet they seem caught like rabbits in the headlights- right rant over - back to bed.
I'm not convinced that JC is the main part of the problem, there is a severe lack of leadership throughout the Labour Party going back to the post-Blair hangover - the Party seem incapable of understanding and articulating what their leader should be (ie a job description) hence Brown, through Miliband and now JC appear to offer drift. If we go back even further to Kinnock again the relationship between leader, party and Unions was also difficult at times (think Militant).
The solution needs to be more than retiring old JC to the club for aging Marxists as the systemic issues within the Labour party (ie role of Unions) are addressed. in this age of very fast comms, and a cynical electorate looking for clear (dare I say poulist) answers then no amount of door knocking will help a party stuck peddling a dull social democratic post-war model. The Scots referendum, is a case in point - wtf is Labour's (let alone JC's) position on this? its hardly a surprise and yet they seem caught like rabbits in the headlights- right rant over - back to bed.
Fully agree. Labour are stuck in a time warp...or rather two. One in the 1970s.. (Corbyn) and one in the 1990s (Blair).
There is no original thinking and few with the ability to think originally. They appear stuck..and need a really good blood letting to get rid of the muppets who choose policy by repeating mantras,,
In that sense they reflect British politics as a whole. The Tories are also utterly stuck in the past, with their preferred era being the 1920s. Fortunately for them, Britain runs on false nostalgia, but sooner or later they will find themselves in the same mess Labour is in.
Ironically, the answer to Labour’s woes does not end with the removal of Corbyn, the rot has gone further than just the head. The party needs new blood, new ideas and a platform fit for the 21st century, but above all, it needs to be honest with it's self about the problems it faces in a global world, and Labour don’t do honesty.
@BBCPhilipSim: Asked about policy on full EU membership Mr Russell says "we will set out our position in advance of the choice so it is an informed choice" pic.twitter.com/qmIQ9GE3Kf
@BBCPhilipSim: Mike Russell says there will be "absolute clarity" on ScotGov's position towards EU membership by the time of indyref2; asks for "patience".
So the SNP want 2 years to tell us whether they want to be in the EU, or not.
Fully agree. Labour are stuck in a time warp...or rather two. One in the 1970s.. (Corbyn) and one in the 1990s (Blair).
There is no original thinking and few with the ability to think originally. They appear stuck..and need a really good blood letting to get rid of the muppets who choose policy by repeating mantras,,
In that sense they reflect British politics as a whole. The Tories are also utterly stuck in the past, with their preferred era being the 1920s. Fortunately for them, Britain runs on false nostalgia, but sooner or later they will find themselves in the same mess Labour is in.
In my opinion, the whole of English politics wallows in nostalgia, a sort of 1950s B&W Ealing comedy world where schoolboys wore caps, policemen saluted and the war was just a few years ago. It is quite toxic, I dont think it was such a golden age, but its appeal to people of all classes and backgrounds (most of whom were not even alive at the time) has allowed a narrative peddled by UKIP, Johnson, Daily Express, Telegraph etc al to set an agenda that is entirely backwards looking. The mess is pan-political...........
@BBCPhilipSim: Asked about policy on full EU membership Mr Russell says "we will set out our position in advance of the choice so it is an informed choice" pic.twitter.com/qmIQ9GE3Kf
@BBCPhilipSim: Mike Russell says there will be "absolute clarity" on ScotGov's position towards EU membership by the time of indyref2; asks for "patience".
So the SNP want 2 years to tell us whether they want to be in the EU, or not.
Numpties
One wonders why Nicola jumped the gun on announcing the referendum then. Playing politics.
Fully agree. Labour are stuck in a time warp...or rather two. One in the 1970s.. (Corbyn) and one in the 1990s (Blair).
There is no original thinking and few with the ability to think originally. They appear stuck..and need a really good blood letting to get rid of the muppets who choose policy by repeating mantras,,
In that sense they reflect British politics as a whole. The Tories are also utterly stuck in the past, with their preferred era being the 1920s. Fortunately for them, Britain runs on false nostalgia, but sooner or later they will find themselves in the same mess Labour is in.
In my opinion, the whole of English politics wallows in nostalgia, a sort of 1950s B&W Ealing comedy world where schoolboys wore caps, policemen saluted and the war was just a few years ago. It is quite toxic, I dont think it was such a golden age, but its appeal to people of all classes and backgrounds (most of whom were not even alive at the time) has allowed a narrative peddled by UKIP, Johnson, Daily Express, Telegraph etc al to set an agenda that is entirely backwards looking. The mess is pan-political...........
You mean Dixon of Dock Green was "fake news" ? I'm shocked I tell you, shocked.
@BBCPhilipSim: Asked about policy on full EU membership Mr Russell says "we will set out our position in advance of the choice so it is an informed choice" pic.twitter.com/qmIQ9GE3Kf
@BBCPhilipSim: Mike Russell says there will be "absolute clarity" on ScotGov's position towards EU membership by the time of indyref2; asks for "patience".
So the SNP want 2 years to tell us whether they want to be in the EU, or not.
Numpties
But surely the whole point of Indyref2 is that Scotland is being "forced out of the EU against its will"?
@BBCPhilipSim: Asked about policy on full EU membership Mr Russell says "we will set out our position in advance of the choice so it is an informed choice" pic.twitter.com/qmIQ9GE3Kf
@BBCPhilipSim: Mike Russell says there will be "absolute clarity" on ScotGov's position towards EU membership by the time of indyref2; asks for "patience".
So the SNP want 2 years to tell us whether they want to be in the EU, or not.
Numpties
But surely the whole point of Indyref2 is that Scotland is being "forced out of the EU against its will"?
Indeed, Nicols Sturgeon told the the House of Commons that Scotland voted to stay in the EU because it “really matters” to Scots that they live in “an outward-looking country, not a diminished little Britain”. Seems her idea of staying in the EU is to leave it. #confused.
The question "Should the UK government agree to a second referendum" is not the same as "Should there be a second referendum". It is effectively asking whether or not the UK should agree to or turn down a demand to hold a vote made by the Scottish Parliament, so it is really a question on who should be able to call the referendum. Actual support for a second referendum pure and simple has been reported as being less in other earlier polls.
An early second referendum on Scottish secession is being justified purely on the grounds of Brexit. Given that, is it not important that the alternative position that Scotland is being asked to choose should be set out in the wording of the referendum, and that that position is clearly defined by the Scottish Parliament when it requests/demands a second referendum?
So, something along the lines of "Should Scotland leave the United Kingdom in order to seek to rejoin the European Union?". Or, as now seems to be SNP line "Should Scotland leave the United Kingdom and join the EFTA while remaining outside the European Union?".
On topic, Jeremy Corbyn's internal party opponents need to be identifying what they stand for rather than what they are against. Only Lisa Nandy seems to be doing that at present.
Getting rid of Jeremy Corbyn is only going to lead to a sustained improvement in Labour's position if the new leader offers a clear prospectus.
So...twice as many Yes voters as No voters have "switched sides"...(18% of Yes voters no longer support Indy, 9% of No voters do) ..Nicola's cunning plan of driving independence on the back of BREXIT has a wee problem - nearly half of Remain voters (49%) DON'T support independence.....and nearly a third of SNP voters don't support Indy.....but apart from that, it's all going terrrrrrrrribly well.....
Jeremy knocking on doors in Islington every week (and I am far from convinced that he does, by the way - I was born and brought up in the constituency next door, and also lived in Islington North, and I don't know anyone who has ever met him - anecdote, yes, but one based on close to 40 years of him being an MP) merely means that he is talking to a lot of people who already agree with him.
The road back for Labour is a very long one, whoever the leader is. But the idea that Labour is uniquely struggling with the modern world, how it works and how to deliver significant beneficial change to ordinary voters is a bit far-fetched. Currently, we are leaving the European Union on the back of advocacy from a group of wealthy Tory cabinet ministers and MPs who want to revive the royal yacht Britannia, bring back grammar schools while depriving other state schools of money and who believe that Europe should lie down and give us everything that we want in the Brexit negotiations.
The perspectives of people such as Boris, Fox, Davies, Leadsom and May are a very long way from reality and show little evidence of having developed to meet the challenges of this ever-shrinking, extremely interconnected world. Instead, like Corbyn, they hark back to a time that has long gone - if it ever existed - but unlike him they do it happily and enthusiastically waving a Union Jack, so the are always going to beat him. They are extremely lucky to be up against someone like Jeremy, who combines rank incompetence with electoral toxicity.
But surely the whole point of Indyref2 is that Scotland is being "forced out of the EU against its will"?
It's a cunning plan.
The question next time will be "do you want to be out of the EU?"
Yes
or
Yes
It's genius...
So, last time we didn't know what the currency was, but at least we knew Scotland would apply to join the EU.....this time we don't know either.....you'd think after 80 years they might have done a little preparation...
On topic, Jeremy Corbyn's internal party opponents need to be identifying what they stand for rather than what they are against. Only Lisa Nandy seems to be doing that at present.
Getting rid of Jeremy Corbyn is only going to lead to a sustained improvement in Labour's position if the new leader offers a clear prospectus.
Dare I suggest that my modest agenda for Labour a few threads ago (re education, training, taxation, security in employment, infrastructure and housing) was rather more than we have seen from either its current leadership or any potential leadership to date. As SLAB found out all too painfully in Scotland there comes a point when hating the Tories is just not enough.
So...twice as many Yes voters as No voters have "switched sides"...(18% of Yes voters no longer support Indy, 9% of No voters do) ..Nicola's cunning plan of driving independence on the back of BREXIT has a wee problem - nearly half of Remain voters (49%) DON'T support independence.....and nearly a third of SNP voters don't support Indy.....but apart from that, it's all going terrrrrrrrribly well.....
Her Manifesto, which she is apparently seeking to rely upon as a mandate, stated that she would not be seeking a second referendum unless there is clear evidence of a change of views by the Scottish people. It will be interesting to hear how she reconciles that position with these numbers.
On topic, Jeremy Corbyn's internal party opponents need to be identifying what they stand for rather than what they are against. Only Lisa Nandy seems to be doing that at present.
Getting rid of Jeremy Corbyn is only going to lead to a sustained improvement in Labour's position if the new leader offers a clear prospectus.
Good morning all. I am a Lisa Nandy fan. She at least acts like she's listening to the electorate. Of course, this means she has no chance of becoming leader.
I guess we should give Brind credit for finally producing an article on Labour that isn't full of obvious spin and bias.
On topic, whilst canvassing is clearly important for campaigning, and a very good way of picking up what people are thinking, for some Labour activists it does seem to have become something of an obsession. Many post incessant Labour doorstep tweets as if the mere act of knocking on doors is some sort of rain dance that will magic the votes to come. Few people are persuaded solely by a five minute chat at their front door.
So...twice as many Yes voters as No voters have "switched sides"...(18% of Yes voters no longer support Indy, 9% of No voters do) ..Nicola's cunning plan of driving independence on the back of BREXIT has a wee problem - nearly half of Remain voters (49%) DON'T support independence.....and nearly a third of SNP voters don't support Indy.....but apart from that, it's all going terrrrrrrrribly well.....
Her Manifesto, which she is apparently seeking to rely upon as a mandate, stated that she would not be seeking a second referendum unless there is clear evidence of a change of views by the Scottish people. It will be interesting to hear how she reconciles that position with these numbers.
Fully agree. Labour are stuck in a time warp...or rather two. One in the 1970s.. (Corbyn) and one in the 1990s (Blair).
There is no original thinking and few with the ability to think originally. They appear stuck..and need a really good blood letting to get rid of the muppets who choose policy by repeating mantras,,
In that sense they reflect British politics as a whole. The Tories are also utterly stuck in the past, with their preferred era being the 1920s. Fortunately for them, Britain runs on false nostalgia, but sooner or later they will find themselves in the same mess Labour is in.
In my opinion, the whole of English politics wallows in nostalgia, a sort of 1950s B&W Ealing comedy world where schoolboys wore caps, policemen saluted and the war was just a few years ago. It is quite toxic, I dont think it was such a golden age, but its appeal to people of all classes and backgrounds (most of whom were not even alive at the time) has allowed a narrative peddled by UKIP, Johnson, Daily Express, Telegraph etc al to set an agenda that is entirely backwards looking. The mess is pan-political...........
Yep, it's leaving us utterly unprepared for the challenges to come.
@BBCPhilipSim: Asked about policy on full EU membership Mr Russell says "we will set out our position in advance of the choice so it is an informed choice" pic.twitter.com/qmIQ9GE3Kf
@BBCPhilipSim: Mike Russell says there will be "absolute clarity" on ScotGov's position towards EU membership by the time of indyref2; asks for "patience".
So the SNP want 2 years to tell us whether they want to be in the EU, or not.
Numpties
But surely the whole point of Indyref2 is that Scotland is being "forced out of the EU against its will"?
Yep but the other option is to willingly leave both the EU and the rUK at the same time instead.. Unless Scotland find a way to stop Spain vetoing any approach
Jeremy knocking on doors in Islington every week (and I am far from convinced that he does, by the way - I was born and brought up in the constituency next door, and also lived in Islington North, and I don't know anyone who has ever met him - anecdote, yes, but one based on close to 40 years of him being an MP) merely means that he is talking to a lot of people who already agree with him.
The road back for Labour is a very long one, whoever the leader is. But the idea that Labour is uniquely struggling with the modern world, how it works and how to deliver significant beneficial change to ordinary voters is a bit far-fetched. Currently, we are leaving the European Union on the back of advocacy from a group of wealthy Tory cabinet ministers and MPs who want to revive the royal yacht Britannia, bring back grammar schools while depriving other state schools of money and who believe that Europe should lie down and give us everything that we want in the Brexit negotiations.
The perspectives of people such as Boris, Fox, Davies, Leadsom and May are a very long way from reality and show little evidence of having developed to meet the challenges of this ever-shrinking, extremely interconnected world. Instead, like Corbyn, they hark back to a time that has long gone - if it ever existed - but unlike him they do it happily and enthusiastically waving a Union Jack, so the are always going to beat him. They are extremely lucky to be up against someone like Jeremy, who combines rank incompetence with electoral toxicity.
I have knocked on plenty of doors myself at election time but I can only recall having such a call myself once. I would accept that when I lived where I was politically active I was automatically ignored, but almost 20 years ago I moved to (then) a marginal seat where I knew nobody. And even then we’ve only had the one call.
Morning. It's clear that Labour is a rudderless party, and it's not just because of Corbyn. Jeremy won because he was the only person in the contest who had a vision - most of us think that vision is bonkers, but he was talking to the electorate who went on to vote overwhelmingly for him.
Until the wider Labour Party decide what they're for, in a way that can attract the support of many current Tory and UKIP voters, they'll continue to go backwards. Right now, most people will say that Labour as a party stand for borrowing and spending more money, and for running public services for the benefit of the staff more than the customers - at the same time as loving low skilled immigration in the private sector. Until those attitudes change, Labour will struggle to be electable.
Someone needs to stand up and present a vision for "Labour in the 2020s", but until that happens they might as well leave Jeremy in place.
Fully agree. Labour are stuck in a time warp...or rather two. One in the 1970s.. (Corbyn) and one in the 1990s (Blair).
There is no original thinking and few with the ability to think originally. They appear stuck..and need a really good blood letting to get rid of the muppets who choose policy by repeating mantras,,
In that sense they reflect British politics as a whole. The Tories are also utterly stuck in the past, with their preferred era being the 1920s. Fortunately for them, Britain runs on false nostalgia, but sooner or later they will find themselves in the same mess Labour is in.
In my opinion, the whole of English politics wallows in nostalgia, a sort of 1950s B&W Ealing comedy world where schoolboys wore caps, policemen saluted and the war was just a few years ago. It is quite toxic, I dont think it was such a golden age, but its appeal to people of all classes and backgrounds (most of whom were not even alive at the time) has allowed a narrative peddled by UKIP, Johnson, Daily Express, Telegraph etc al to set an agenda that is entirely backwards looking. The mess is pan-political...........
Yep, it's leaving us utterly unprepared for the challenges to come.
Totally agree. Boris and Fox think a new royal yacht will help us get great trade deals! The only real difference between the two major parties when it comes to thinking about the challenges of the 21st century and how to deal with them is the willingness to wave the Union Jack.
I guess we should give Brind credit for finally producing an article on Labour that isn't full of obvious spin and bias.
On topic, whilst canvassing is clearly important for campaigning, and a very good way of picking up what people are thinking, for some Labour activists it does seem to have become something of an obsession. Many post incessant Labour doorstep tweets as if the mere act of knocking on doors is some sort of rain dance that will magic the votes to come. Few people are persuaded solely by a five minute chat at their front door.
Yep, the million conversations really didn't do much for Labour.
In my experience changing someone's mind on the door step is a rare achievement (and almost certainly means that they just want you to go away). I think it is more useful in encouraging those who are sympathetic to vote, applying for postal votes, etc. For that reason canvassing tends to be targeted at those who have already indicated some sympathy or support for your position. No wonder Corbyn still believes he is more popular than a fart in a spacesuit.
So...twice as many Yes voters as No voters have "switched sides"...(18% of Yes voters no longer support Indy, 9% of No voters do) ..Nicola's cunning plan of driving independence on the back of BREXIT has a wee problem - nearly half of Remain voters (49%) DON'T support independence.....and nearly a third of SNP voters don't support Indy.....but apart from that, it's all going terrrrrrrrribly well.....
Her Manifesto, which she is apparently seeking to rely upon as a mandate, stated that she would not be seeking a second referendum unless there is clear evidence of a change of views by the Scottish people. It will be interesting to hear how she reconciles that position with these numbers.
Weren't there two possible justifications given for a second referendum given in the SNP manifesto? I You've (no doubt inadvertently) forgotten to mention the other one. I know how important manifesto commitments are to you Tories!
So...twice as many Yes voters as No voters have "switched sides"...(18% of Yes voters no longer support Indy, 9% of No voters do) ..Nicola's cunning plan of driving independence on the back of BREXIT has a wee problem - nearly half of Remain voters (49%) DON'T support independence.....and nearly a third of SNP voters don't support Indy.....but apart from that, it's all going terrrrrrrrribly well.....
Her Manifesto, which she is apparently seeking to rely upon as a mandate, stated that she would not be seeking a second referendum unless there is clear evidence of a change of views by the Scottish people. It will be interesting to hear how she reconciles that position with these numbers.
Weren't there two possible justifications given for a second referendum given in the SNP manifesto? I You've (no doubt inadvertently) forgotten to mention the other one. I know how important manifesto commitments are to you Tories!
"We believe that the Scottish Parliament should have the right to hold another referendum if there is clear and sustained evidence that independence has become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people – or if there is a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will."
The second one was based on the premise that we would either stay in or at least rejoin pdq. That appears not to be the case so it is not applicable.
Jeremy knocking on doors in Islington every week (and I am far from convinced that he does, by the way - I was born and brought up in the constituency next door, and also lived in Islington North, and I don't know anyone who has ever met him - anecdote, yes, but one based on close to 40 years of him being an MP) merely means that he is talking to a lot of people who already agree with him.
The road back for Labour is a very long one, whoever the leader is. But the idea that Labour is uniquely struggling with the modern world, how it works and how to deliver significant beneficial change to ordinary voters is a bit far-fetched. Currently, we are leaving the European Union on the back of advocacy from a group of wealthy Tory cabinet ministers and MPs who want to revive the royal yacht Britannia, bring back grammar schools while depriving other state schools of money and who believe that Europe should lie down and give us everything that we want in the Brexit negotiations.
The perspectives of people such as Boris, Fox, Davies, Leadsom and May are a very long way from reality and show little evidence of having developed to meet the challenges of this ever-shrinking, extremely interconnected world. Instead, like Corbyn, they hark back to a time that has long gone - if it ever existed - but unlike him they do it happily and enthusiastically waving a Union Jack, so the are always going to beat him. They are extremely lucky to be up against someone like Jeremy, who combines rank incompetence with electoral toxicity.
I have knocked on plenty of doors myself at election time but I can only recall having such a call myself once. I would accept that when I lived where I was politically active I was automatically ignored, but almost 20 years ago I moved to (then) a marginal seat where I knew nobody. And even then we’ve only had the one call.
I am 52 and have never been canvassed.
But if an MP knocks on doors in his constituency for an hour every week, has 10 conversations as a result and has been an MP for 40 years that's 20,000 conversations. Given that, I am surprised I do not know anyone who has ever met Corbyn.
Fully agree. Labour are stuck in a time warp...or rather two. One in the 1970s.. (Corbyn) and one in the 1990s (Blair).
There is no original thinking and few with the ability to think originally. They appear stuck..and need a really good blood letting to get rid of the muppets who choose policy by repeating mantras,,
In that sense they reflect British politics as a whole. The Tories are also utterly stuck in the past, with their preferred era being the 1920s. Fortunately for them, Britain runs on false nostalgia, but sooner or later they will find themselves in the same mess Labour is in.
In my opinion, the whole of English politics wallows in nostalgia, a sort of 1950s B&W Ealing comedy world where schoolboys wore caps, policemen saluted and the war was just a few years ago. It is quite toxic, I dont think it was such a golden age, but its appeal to people of all classes and backgrounds (most of whom were not even alive at the time) has allowed a narrative peddled by UKIP, Johnson, Daily Express, Telegraph etc al to set an agenda that is entirely backwards looking. The mess is pan-political...........
Yep, it's leaving us utterly unprepared for the challenges to come.
Totally agree. Boris and Fox think a new royal yacht will help us get great trade deals! The only real difference between the two major parties when it comes to thinking about the challenges of the 21st century and how to deal with them is the willingness to wave the Union Jack.
I must be out of step with British politics - I get less nostalgic as I get older
And yes, I think the 50s rather than the 20s, which was a time of radical change.
So...twice as many Yes voters as No voters have "switched sides"...(18% of Yes voters no longer support Indy, 9% of No voters do) ..Nicola's cunning plan of driving independence on the back of BREXIT has a wee problem - nearly half of Remain voters (49%) DON'T support independence.....and nearly a third of SNP voters don't support Indy.....but apart from that, it's all going terrrrrrrrribly well.....
Her Manifesto, which she is apparently seeking to rely upon as a mandate, stated that she would not be seeking a second referendum unless there is clear evidence of a change of views by the Scottish people. It will be interesting to hear how she reconciles that position with these numbers.
Weren't there two possible justifications given for a second referendum given in the SNP manifesto? I You've (no doubt inadvertently) forgotten to mention the other one. I know how important manifesto commitments are to you Tories!
"We believe that the Scottish Parliament should have the right to hold another referendum if there is clear and sustained evidence that independence has become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people – or if there is a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will."
The second one was based on the premise that we would either stay in or at least rejoin pdq. That appears not to be the case so it is not applicable.
Scotland voted to stay in the EU, the English voted against. That looks very like a material change to me, especially as Scots were pretty much assured during the last referendum that the only way they would be leaving the EU was if they voted for independence.
Lead Stories Watch Twitter being hacked in real time...#Twitterhack #twitterhacked https://t.co/auhIZybbXm
Twitter hack? Not on Twitter so don't really appreciate what's going on. A little more detail please
What looks like a pro-Erdogan group have managed to get access to hundreds of thousands of twitter accounts - have posted a message re 16th ref and video/are changing users profile pix and mastheads to Ottoman symbols.
Thousands of verified/blue check accounts involved too. Twitter mgt meanwhile are asleep at the wheel.
Jeremy knocking on doors in Islington every week (and I am far from convinced that he does, by the way - I was born and brought up in the constituency next door, and also lived in Islington North, and I don't know anyone who has ever met him - anecdote, yes, but one based on close to 40 years of him being an MP) merely means that he is talking to a lot of people who already agree with him.
The road back for Labour is a very long one, whoever the leader is. But the idea that Labour is uniquely struggling with the modern world, how it works and how to deliver significant beneficial change to ordinary voters is a bit far-fetched. Currently, we are leaving the European Union on the back of advocacy from a group of wealthy Tory cabinet ministers and MPs who want to revive the royal yacht Britannia, bring back grammar schools while depriving other state schools of money and who believe that Europe should lie down and give us everything that we want in the Brexit negotiations.
The perspectives of people such as Boris, Fox, Davies, Leadsom and May are a very long way from reality and show little evidence of having developed to meet the challenges of this ever-shrinking, extremely interconnected world. Instead, like Corbyn, they hark back to a time that has long gone - if it ever existed - but unlike him they do it happily and enthusiastically waving a Union Jack, so the are always going to beat him. They are extremely lucky to be up against someone like Jeremy, who combines rank incompetence with electoral toxicity.
I have knocked on plenty of doors myself at election time but I can only recall having such a call myself once. I would accept that when I lived where I was politically active I was automatically ignored, but almost 20 years ago I moved to (then) a marginal seat where I knew nobody. And even then we’ve only had the one call.
I am 52 and have never been canvassed.
But if an MP knocks on doors in his constituency for an hour every week, has 10 conversations as a result and has been an MP for 40 years that's 20,000 conversations. Given that, I am surprised I do not know anyone who has ever met Corbyn.
I find that weird. I must have been canvassed at least a dozen times, mainly by the SNP. We have had several long conversations whilst I slowly overcame my reservations....
Should we take it that just as Nigel Farage was officially not used as a channel to Donald Trump, he is also not being used as a channel to Marine Le Pen?
Similarly, Emmanuel Macron campaigning among French people in London is double plus good, and an occasion for editors to proclaim how London is "France's sixth city", because it's home to about 300,000 French people. But when Turkish government ministers want to campaign in Randstad, which is home to about 150,000 Turks in the Netherlands, it's "Raus!" and double plus bad.
I hold no brief for Erdogan's disgusting regime; just remarking on the double standards.
" BREAKING 08:08 Twitter Accounts Appear to Be Hacked With Pro-Erdogan Content Twitter Accounts Appear to Be Hacked With Swastikas and Pro-Erdogan Content
Bloomberg News 15 March 2017, 07:59 GMT Twitter accounts belonging to a number of verified high-profile users appear to have been hacked with pro-Erdogan tweets, Bloomberg News reports.
Affected accounts include those of Sprint CEO Marcelo Claure, the U.K. Department of Health, Reuters Japan, Forbes, BBC North America, Duke University and Amnesty International. Others include those belonging to the Mayor of Bordeaux, Alain Juppe, and the European Parliament.
Jeremy knocking on doors in Islington every week (and I am far from convinced that he does, by the way - I was born and brought up in the constituency next door, and also lived in Islington North, and I don't know anyone who has ever met him - anecdote, yes, but one based on close to 40 years of him being an MP) merely means that he is talking to a lot of people who already agree with him.
The road back for Labour is a very long one, whoever the leader is. But the idea that Labour is uniquely struggling with the modern world, how it works and how to deliver significant beneficial change to ordinary voters is a bit far-fetched. Currently, we are leaving the European Union on the back of advocacy from a group of wealthy Tory cabinet ministers and MPs who want to revive the royal yacht Britannia, bring back grammar schools while depriving other state schools of money and who believe that Europe should lie down and give us everything that we want in the Brexit negotiations.
The perspectives of people such as Boris, Fox, Davies, Leadsom and May are a very long way from reality and show little evidence of having developed to meet the challenges of this ever-shrinking, extremely interconnected world. Instead, like Corbyn, they hark back to a time that has long gone - if it ever existed - but unlike him they do it happily and enthusiastically waving a Union Jack, so the are always going to beat him. They are extremely lucky to be up against someone like Jeremy, who combines rank incompetence with electoral toxicity.
I have knocked on plenty of doors myself at election time but I can only recall having such a call myself once. I would accept that when I lived where I was politically active I was automatically ignored, but almost 20 years ago I moved to (then) a marginal seat where I knew nobody. And even then we’ve only had the one call.
I am 52 and have never been canvassed.
But if an MP knocks on doors in his constituency for an hour every week, has 10 conversations as a result and has been an MP for 40 years that's 20,000 conversations. Given that, I am surprised I do not know anyone who has ever met Corbyn.
I find that weird. I must have been canvassed at least a dozen times, mainly by the SNP. We have had several long conversations whilst I slowly overcame my reservations....
I guess in Scotland it's slightly different as the SNP have been building a nationwide machine and the voting system is much more proportional for the assembly. FPTP encourages neglect.
Jeremy knocking on doors in Islington every week (and I am far from convinced that he does, by the way - I was born and brought up in the constituency next door, and also lived in Islington North, and I don't know anyone who has ever met him - anecdote, yes, but one based on close to 40 years of him being an MP) merely means that he is talking to a lot of people who already agree with him.
The road back for Labour is a very long one, whoever the leader is. But the idea that Labour is uniquely struggling with the modern world, how it works and how to deliver significant beneficial change to ordinary voters is a bit far-fetched. Currently, we are leaving the European Union on the back of advocacy from a group of wealthy Tory cabinet ministers and MPs who want to revive the royal yacht Britannia, bring back grammar schools while depriving other state schools of money and who believe that Europe should lie down and give us everything that we want in the Brexit negotiations.
The perspectives of people such as Boris, Fox, Davies, Leadsom and May are a very long way from reality and show little evidence of having developed to meet the challenges of this ever-shrinking, extremely interconnected world. Instead, like Corbyn, they hark back to a time that has long gone - if it ever existed - but unlike him they do it happily and enthusiastically waving a Union Jack, so the are always going to beat him. They are extremely lucky to be up against someone like Jeremy, who combines rank incompetence with electoral toxicity.
@BBCPhilipSim: Asked about policy on full EU membership Mr Russell says "we will set out our position in advance of the choice so it is an informed choice" pic.twitter.com/qmIQ9GE3Kf
@BBCPhilipSim: Mike Russell says there will be "absolute clarity" on ScotGov's position towards EU membership by the time of indyref2; asks for "patience".
So the SNP want 2 years to tell us whether they want to be in the EU, or not.
Numpties
But surely the whole point of Indyref2 is that Scotland is being "forced out of the EU against its will"?
Yep but the other option is to willingly leave both the EU and the rUK at the same time instead.. Unless Scotland find a way to stop Spain vetoing any approach
I love the way leaver unionists cling to Spain like a liferaft. If Germany and France and the rest of the EU want this to happen, Spain will be bought off. However, it's going to be all about high politics - how far the Brexiters piss off Europe with their demands for cake and the facility to eat it.
So...twice as many Yes voters as No voters have "switched sides"...(18% of Yes voters no longer support Indy, 9% of No voters do) ..Nicola's cunning plan of driving independence on the back of BREXIT has a wee problem - nearly half of Remain voters (49%) DON'T support independence.....and nearly a third of SNP voters don't support Indy.....but apart from that, it's all going terrrrrrrrribly well.....
Her Manifesto, which she is apparently seeking to rely upon as a mandate, stated that she would not be seeking a second referendum unless there is clear evidence of a change of views by the Scottish people. It will be interesting to hear how she reconciles that position with these numbers.
Weren't there two possible justifications given for a second referendum given in the SNP manifesto? I You've (no doubt inadvertently) forgotten to mention the other one. I know how important manifesto commitments are to you Tories!
"We believe that the Scottish Parliament should have the right to hold another referendum if there is clear and sustained evidence that independence has become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people – or if there is a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will."
The second one was based on the premise that we would either stay in or at least rejoin pdq. That appears not to be the case so it is not applicable.
Scotland voted to stay in the EU, the English voted against. That looks very like a material change to me, especially as Scots were pretty much assured during the last referendum that the only way they would be leaving the EU was if they voted for independence.
When the SNP stood with that in their manifesto last year, the Scottish people decided to take their majority away from them. The Scottish government have no mandate for a second referendum. If Sturgeon wants a mandate, let's have a Scottish general election. Polling is showing an even larger majority now against independence than there was in the 2014 referendum. Sturgeon and the SNP are fuller of it than any other major political party in Britain.
Jeremy knocking on doors in Islington every week (and I am far from convinced that he does, by the way - I was born and brought up in the constituency next door, and also lived in Islington North, and I don't know anyone who has ever met him - anecdote, yes, but one based on close to 40 years of him being an MP) merely means that he is talking to a lot of people who already agree with him.
The road back for Labour is a very long one, whoever the leader is. But the idea that Labour is uniquely struggling with the modern world, how it works and how to deliver significant beneficial change to ordinary voters is a bit far-fetched. Currently, we are leaving the European Union on the back of advocacy from a group of wealthy Tory cabinet ministers and MPs who want to revive the royal yacht Britannia, bring back grammar schools while depriving other state schools of money and who believe that Europe should lie down and give us everything that we want in the Brexit negotiations.
The perspectives of people such as Boris, Fox, Davies, Leadsom and May are a very long way from reality and show little evidence of having developed to meet the challenges of this ever-shrinking, extremely interconnected world. Instead, like Corbyn, they hark back to a time that has long gone - if it ever existed - but unlike him they do it happily and enthusiastically waving a Union Jack, so the are always going to beat him. They are extremely lucky to be up against someone like Jeremy, who combines rank incompetence with electoral toxicity.
@BBCPhilipSim: Asked about policy on full EU membership Mr Russell says "we will set out our position in advance of the choice so it is an informed choice" pic.twitter.com/qmIQ9GE3Kf
@BBCPhilipSim: Mike Russell says there will be "absolute clarity" on ScotGov's position towards EU membership by the time of indyref2; asks for "patience".
So the SNP want 2 years to tell us whether they want to be in the EU, or not.
Numpties
But surely the whole point of Indyref2 is that Scotland is being "forced out of the EU against its will"?
Yep but the other option is to willingly leave both the EU and the rUK at the same time instead.. Unless Scotland find a way to stop Spain vetoing any approach
I love the way leaver unionists cling to Spain like a liferaft. If Germany and France and the rest of the EU want this to happen, Spain will be bought off. However, it's going to be all about high politics - how far the Brexiters piss off Europe with their demands for cake and the facility to eat it.
We actually have a Remainer, May, leading the UK negotiations not a Brexiter even if they also form part of the team
Should we take it that just as Nigel Farage was officially not used as a channel to Donald Trump, he is also not being used as a channel to Marine Le Pen?
Similarly, Emmanuel Macron campaigning among French people in London is double plus good, and an occasion for editors to proclaim how London is "France's sixth city", because it's home to about 300,000 French people. But when Turkish government ministers want to campaign in Randstad, which is home to about 150,000 Turks in the Netherlands, it's "Raus!" and double plus bad.
I hold no brief for Erdogan's disgusting regime; just remarking on the double standards.
The Tim Marshall interview on Sky mentioned this and said normally the host nation turns a blind eye to this sort of thing so long as it's done discretely. In Holland, however, the crackdown was clearly an attempt to take votes from the PVV.
Moving away from the irrelevant trivialities that are the Dutch election, Scottish independence and Leicester City football club to the main business of the day but before that..
I would respectfully draw the Moderators' attention to the deeply offensive and patronising posts yesterday from one Pulpstar of this parish who, despite being told certain suggested horses were not to be backed, put £105 of his hard earned on a Lucky 15 and then spent the afternoon complaining about their lack of success.
As I was, to my knowledge, the only member of this so-called betting forum to put his gonads above the parapet with some thoughts on day one of the Cheltenham Festival, I feel my selections deserved more respect. You can denigrate my politics but I draw the line at denigrating my horse racing knowledge.
If Pulpstar could be banned until there is a Lib Dem majority in the Commons or until he issues a suitably fulsome apology, I would be obliged.
That unpleasantness aside...
Day 2 of Cheltenham beckons and drying ground in the Cotswolds isn't going to make finding the winners any easier. My suggestions for the Grade 1 events as follows (odds at time of writing with Hills):
1.30: MESSIRE DES OBEAUX - (10/1) - fielding against the top two in the market. 2.10: WHISPER (6/1) - stable in form and has won twice over course if not distance 3.30: GOD'S OWN (12/1) - Douvan will win but I'll leave Pulpstar to put his £40,000 down the back of the sofa money on at 1/4. 5.30: SOMEDAY (8/1) - it's the Bumper, no idea at all. Next Destination looks a big threat at 10s but it's often won by an outsider.
Jeremy knocking on doors in Islington every week (and I am far from convinced that he does, by the way - I was born and brought up in the constituency next door, and also lived in Islington North, and I don't know anyone who has ever met him - anecdote, yes, but one based on close to 40 years of him being an MP) merely means that he is talking to a lot of people who already agree with him.
The road back for Labour is a very long one, whoever the leader is. But the idea that Labour is uniquely struggling with the modern world, how it works and how to deliver significant beneficial change to ordinary voters is a bit far-fetched. Currently, we are leaving the European Union on the back of advocacy from a group of wealthy Tory cabinet ministers and MPs who want to revive the royal yacht Britannia, bring back grammar schools while depriving other state schools of money and who believe that Europe should lie down and give us everything that we want in the Brexit negotiations.
The perspectives of people such as Boris, Fox, Davies, Leadsom and May are a very long way from reality and show little evidence of having developed to meet the challenges of this ever-shrinking, extremely interconnected world. Instead, like Corbyn, they hark back to a time that has long gone - if it ever existed - but unlike him they do it happily and enthusiastically waving a Union Jack, so the are always going to beat him. They are extremely lucky to be up against someone like Jeremy, who combines rank incompetence with electoral toxicity.
I have knocked on plenty of doors myself at election time but I can only recall having such a call myself once. I would accept that when I lived where I was politically active I was automatically ignored, but almost 20 years ago I moved to (then) a marginal seat where I knew nobody. And even then we’ve only had the one call.
Like you, I have only been canvassed once. But then people who spend election evenings canvassing are going to mostly be out at canvassing time.
It always surprises me that people seem to talk to each other about when they were canvassed - quite often on the doorstep people will tell you where you were calling earlier in the week, or report instances of other party canvassing even if they weren't called on themselves. I guess as a rare event it seems more remarkable to the recipient than it does to the regular canvasser.
But if an MP knocks on doors in his constituency for an hour every week, has 10 conversations as a result and has been an MP for 40 years that's 20,000 conversations. Given that, I am surprised I do not know anyone who has ever met Corbyn.
I find that weird. I must have been canvassed at least a dozen times, mainly by the SNP. We have had several long conversations whilst I slowly overcame my reservations....
I guess in Scotland it's slightly different as the SNP have been building a nationwide machine and the voting system is much more proportional for the assembly. FPTP encourages neglect.
A friends wife ran into Corbyn walking round Islington last year. They had a good chat and she found him quite personable. I think it's wrong to say he's not visible in 'his' community. Indeed, his whole modus operandi is one of parish councillor.
Should we take it that just as Nigel Farage was officially not used as a channel to Donald Trump, he is also not being used as a channel to Marine Le Pen?
Similarly, Emmanuel Macron campaigning among French people in London is double plus good, and an occasion for editors to proclaim how London is "France's sixth city", because it's home to about 300,000 French people. But when Turkish government ministers want to campaign in Randstad, which is home to about 150,000 Turks in the Netherlands, it's "Raus!" and double plus bad.
I hold no brief for Erdogan's disgusting regime; just remarking on the double standards.
Different governments taking different decisions is the nature of national sovereignty not "double standards".
Should we take it that just as Nigel Farage was officially not used as a channel to Donald Trump, he is also not being used as a channel to Marine Le Pen?
Similarly, Emmanuel Macron campaigning among French people in London is double plus good, and an occasion for editors to proclaim how London is "France's sixth city", because it's home to about 300,000 French people. But when Turkish government ministers want to campaign in Randstad, which is home to about 150,000 Turks in the Netherlands, it's "Raus!" and double plus bad.
I hold no brief for Erdogan's disgusting regime; just remarking on the double standards.
The Tim Marshall interview on Sky mentioned this and said normally the host nation turns a blind eye to this sort of thing so long as it's done discretely. In Holland, however, the crackdown was clearly an attempt to take votes from the PVV.
Macron addressed 3000 French people in Central Hall in Westminster and he was invited to 10 Downing Street to meet Theresa May. Hardly discreet!
Should we take it that just as Nigel Farage was officially not used as a channel to Donald Trump, he is also not being used as a channel to Marine Le Pen?
Similarly, Emmanuel Macron campaigning among French people in London is double plus good, and an occasion for editors to proclaim how London is "France's sixth city", because it's home to about 300,000 French people. But when Turkish government ministers want to campaign in Randstad, which is home to about 150,000 Turks in the Netherlands, it's "Raus!" and double plus bad.
I hold no brief for Erdogan's disgusting regime; just remarking on the double standards.
There's actually less than 100,000 French citizens living in London.
66,000 according to the ONS (which doesn't include students) and 86,000 according to the 2011 census (which does include students).
Moving away from the irrelevant trivialities that are the Dutch election, Scottish independence and Leicester City football club to the main business of the day but before that..
I would respectfully draw the Moderators' attention to the deeply offensive and patronising posts yesterday from one Pulpstar of this parish who, despite being told certain suggested horses were not to be backed, put £105 of his hard earned on a Lucky 15 and then spent the afternoon complaining about their lack of success.
As I was, to my knowledge, the only member of this so-called betting forum to put his gonads above the parapet with some thoughts on day one of the Cheltenham Festival, I feel my selections deserved more respect. You can denigrate my politics but I draw the line at denigrating my horse racing knowledge.
If Pulpstar could be banned until there is a Lib Dem majority in the Commons or until he issues a suitably fulsome apology, I would be obliged.
Moving away from the irrelevant trivialities that are the Dutch election, Scottish independence and Leicester City football club to the main business of the day but before that..
I would respectfully draw the Moderators' attention to the deeply offensive and patronising posts yesterday from one Pulpstar of this parish who, despite being told certain suggested horses were not to be backed, put £105 of his hard earned on a Lucky 15 and then spent the afternoon complaining about their lack of success.
As I was, to my knowledge, the only member of this so-called betting forum to put his gonads above the parapet with some thoughts on day one of the Cheltenham Festival, I feel my selections deserved more respect. You can denigrate my politics but I draw the line at denigrating my horse racing knowledge.
If Pulpstar could be banned until there is a Lib Dem majority in the Commons or until he issues a suitably fulsome apology, I would be obliged.
That unpleasantness aside...
Day 2 of Cheltenham beckons and drying ground in the Cotswolds isn't going to make finding the winners any easier. My suggestions for the Grade 1 events as follows (odds at time of writing with Hills):
1.30: MESSIRE DES OBEAUX - (10/1) - fielding against the top two in the market. 2.10: WHISPER (6/1) - stable in form and has won twice over course if not distance 3.30: GOD'S OWN (12/1) - Douvan will win but I'll leave Pulpstar to put his £40,000 down the back of the sofa money on at 1/4. 5.30: SOMEDAY (8/1) - it's the Bumper, no idea at all. Next Destination looks a big threat at 10s but it's often won by an outsider.
Enjoy the sport - now back to the politics.
Just to be clear - are these horses also not to be backed ;-)?
Fully agree. Labour are stuck in a time warp...or rather two. One in the 1970s.. (Corbyn) and one in the 1990s (Blair).
There is no original thinking and few with the ability to think originally. They appear stuck..and need a really good blood letting to get rid of the muppets who choose policy by repeating mantras,,
In that sense they reflect British politics as a whole. The Tories are also utterly stuck in the past, with their preferred era being the 1920s. Fortunately for them, Britain runs on false nostalgia, but sooner or later they will find themselves in the same mess Labour is in.
In my opinion, the whole of English politics wallows in nostalgia, a sort of 1950s B&W Ealing comedy world where schoolboys wore caps, policemen saluted and the war was just a few years ago. It is quite toxic, I dont think it was such a golden age, but its appeal to people of all classes and backgrounds (most of whom were not even alive at the time) has allowed a narrative peddled by UKIP, Johnson, Daily Express, Telegraph etc al to set an agenda that is entirely backwards looking. The mess is pan-political...........
Should we take it that just as Nigel Farage was officially not used as a channel to Donald Trump, he is also not being used as a channel to Marine Le Pen?
Similarly, Emmanuel Macron campaigning among French people in London is double plus good, and an occasion for editors to proclaim how London is "France's sixth city", because it's home to about 300,000 French people. But when Turkish government ministers want to campaign in Randstad, which is home to about 150,000 Turks in the Netherlands, it's "Raus!" and double plus bad.
I hold no brief for Erdogan's disgusting regime; just remarking on the double standards.
There's actually less than 100,000 French citizens living in London.
66,000 according to the ONS (which doesn't include students) and 86,000 according to the 2011 census (which does include students).
So...twice as many Yes voters as No voters have "switched sides"...(18% of Yes voters no longer support Indy, 9% of No voters do) ..Nicola's cunning plan of driving independence on the back of BREXIT has a wee problem - nearly half of Remain voters (49%) DON'T support independence.....and nearly a third of SNP voters don't support Indy.....but apart from that, it's all going terrrrrrrrribly well.....
Her Manifesto, which she is apparently seeking to rely upon as a mandate, stated that she would not be seeking a second referendum unless there is clear evidence of a change of views by the Scottish people. It will be interesting to hear how she reconciles that position with these numbers.
Weren't there two possible justifications given for a second referendum given in the SNP manifesto? I You've (no doubt inadvertently) forgotten to mention the other one. I know how important manifesto commitments are to you Tories!
"We believe that the Scottish Parliament should have the right to hold another referendum if there is clear and sustained evidence that independence has become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people – or if there is a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will."
The second one was based on the premise that we would either stay in or at least rejoin pdq. That appears not to be the case so it is not applicable.
'or if there is a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will' = 'based on the premise that we would either stay in or at least rejoin pdq'?
Remarkable.
Was your inference based on some earlier version of the SNP manifesto that you caught sight of? I must say I prefer the precise clarity of the version I saw.
Should we take it that just as Nigel Farage was officially not used as a channel to Donald Trump, he is also not being used as a channel to Marine Le Pen?
Similarly, Emmanuel Macron campaigning among French people in London is double plus good, and an occasion for editors to proclaim how London is "France's sixth city", because it's home to about 300,000 French people. But when Turkish government ministers want to campaign in Randstad, which is home to about 150,000 Turks in the Netherlands, it's "Raus!" and double plus bad.
I hold no brief for Erdogan's disgusting regime; just remarking on the double standards.
The Tim Marshall interview on Sky mentioned this and said normally the host nation turns a blind eye to this sort of thing so long as it's done discretely. In Holland, however, the crackdown was clearly an attempt to take votes from the PVV.
Macron addressed 3000 French people in Central Hall in Westminster and he was invited to 10 Downing Street to meet Theresa May. Hardly discreet!
Fair point! Maybe the PM has a monkey on him for next president?
On topic, the wild and wacky world of canvassing or "street surveys" as I used to call it when we went door knocking between elections. Cold calling people, especially when it's cold (the weather rather than the calling) isn't easy. In the summer when people are in their front gardens and the evenings are warm and fine, it's a doddle. People want to talk then but in the winter it's much harder.
Canvassing is part intelligence gathering and part about maintaining a presence. The more you know about the electoral shifts in an area the better you can campaign - social media campaigning is another form of targeted canvassing looking at Facebook and seeing who's following who.
Before all that, canvassing was part art form as you tried to differentiate between the time wasters from other parties and those genuinely engaged with you. Don't waste time on your supporters or your known opponents. It was also good to have a "biggish name" whether it was a local Councillor, a prospective Parliamentary candidate or best of all an MP.
When I lived in Sutton and we went out with Tom Brake it was amazing how everyone wanted to talk to their MP if he was on their doorstep. Oddly enough, it did nothing for the intelligence gathering but it advertised our presence wonderfully.
I confess I find Corbyn affable and I'm sure I could have a tea and a jam sandwich with him without any problem - I find Theresa May much less personable by comparison. It wouldn't do her any harm to lighten up a bit but she loves being the Thatcher-esque "firm hand in a time of crisis". Yes, well, but it gets a bit dour and boring after a while.
So...twice as many Yes voters as No voters have "switched sides"...(18% of Yes voters no longer support Indy, 9% of No voters do) ..Nicola's cunning plan of driving independence on the back of BREXIT has a wee problem - nearly half of Remain voters (49%) DON'T support independence.....and nearly a third of SNP voters don't support Indy.....but apart from that, it's all going terrrrrrrrribly well.....
Her Manifesto, which she is apparently seeking to rely upon as a mandate, stated that she would not be seeking a second referendum unless there is clear evidence of a change of views by the Scottish people. It will be interesting to hear how she reconciles that position with these numbers.
Weren't there two possible justifications given for a second referendum given in the SNP manifesto? I You've (no doubt inadvertently) forgotten to mention the other one. I know how important manifesto commitments are to you Tories!
"We believe that the Scottish Parliament should have the right to hold another referendum if there is clear and sustained evidence that independence has become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people – or if there is a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will."
The second one was based on the premise that we would either stay in or at least rejoin pdq. That appears not to be the case so it is not applicable.
Scotland voted to stay in the EU, the English voted against. That looks very like a material change to me, especially as Scots were pretty much assured during the last referendum that the only way they would be leaving the EU was if they voted for independence.
When the SNP stood with that in their manifesto last year, the Scottish people decided to take their majority away from them. The Scottish government have no mandate for a second referendum. If Sturgeon wants a mandate, let's have a Scottish general election. Polling is showing an even larger majority now against independence than there was in the 2014 referendum. Sturgeon and the SNP are fuller of it than any other major political party in Britain.
Cool your jets, Tessy has said the council elections will be a poll on whether there should be another referendum. I'm sure that the massive drubbing that the EssEnPee & Greens will receive should provide some balm for that massive thistle that you have lodged up your fundament.
Good article that explains why it's stupid to use the poker analogy when talking about Brexit: http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2017/03/14/no-deal-brexit-govt-is-bluffing-with-cards-everyone-can-see "This is why the poker metaphor has always been so useless. We cannot bluff in these talks. Europe knows what happens if there is no deal. Everyone knows, even if the government is too deranged and paranoid to plan for it. Europe also knows, for that matter, what our advantages are: We have trade, security and intelligence cooperation, the PR of stable change and some welcome European financial service capacity to use as leverage.
So they know what we want, they know what we have to offer, and they know what the consequences are of the talks ending with no deal. They know everything. Anyone who reads a newspaper does.
Poker is a game based on the notion that you do not know the hand the other players hold. Article 50 is the precise opposite. But those fearful eyes from the Brexit trio tell us that they would likely fail at either poker or Article 50. Our problem is that before they do so, they will gamble away our future."
Should we take it that just as Nigel Farage was officially not used as a channel to Donald Trump, he is also not being used as a channel to Marine Le Pen?
Similarly, Emmanuel Macron campaigning among French people in London is double plus good, and an occasion for editors to proclaim how London is "France's sixth city", because it's home to about 300,000 French people. But when Turkish government ministers want to campaign in Randstad, which is home to about 150,000 Turks in the Netherlands, it's "Raus!" and double plus bad.
I hold no brief for Erdogan's disgusting regime; just remarking on the double standards.
There's actually less than 100,000 French citizens living in London.
66,000 according to the ONS (which doesn't include students) and 86,000 according to the 2011 census (which does include students).
On the wider defined metropolitan areas London would struggle to get in the top 100.
Your numbers are long out of date. There was a massive influx of French into London after Hollande became President and the French Consulate estimated there are between 300,000 and 400,000 French living in the UK with the vast majority living in London.
Should we take it that just as Nigel Farage was officially not used as a channel to Donald Trump, he is also not being used as a channel to Marine Le Pen?
Similarly, Emmanuel Macron campaigning among French people in London is double plus good, and an occasion for editors to proclaim how London is "France's sixth city", because it's home to about 300,000 French people. But when Turkish government ministers want to campaign in Randstad, which is home to about 150,000 Turks in the Netherlands, it's "Raus!" and double plus bad.
I hold no brief for Erdogan's disgusting regime; just remarking on the double standards.
There's actually less than 100,000 French citizens living in London.
66,000 according to the ONS (which doesn't include students) and 86,000 according to the 2011 census (which does include students).
On the wider defined metropolitan areas London would struggle to get in the top 100.
Your numbers are long out of date. There was a massive influx of French into London after Hollande became President and the French Consulate estimated there are between 300,000 and 400,000 French living in the UK with the vast majority living in London.
Indeed so. The degree of ignorance about London's civic life on here by some people who endlessly whine about our great city really is quite stunning.
In reality she isn't, the job offer requirement she will propose plus her acceptance of continued limited EU budget contributions for some bilateral agreements is not want hard line Brexiteers want even though she will also respect the referendum result and disappoint hard line Remainers too who want free movement to stay unchecked and full single market membership
Should we take it that just as Nigel Farage was officially not used as a channel to Donald Trump, he is also not being used as a channel to Marine Le Pen?
Similarly, Emmanuel Macron campaigning among French people in London is double plus good, and an occasion for editors to proclaim how London is "France's sixth city", because it's home to about 300,000 French people. But when Turkish government ministers want to campaign in Randstad, which is home to about 150,000 Turks in the Netherlands, it's "Raus!" and double plus bad.
I hold no brief for Erdogan's disgusting regime; just remarking on the double standards.
The Tim Marshall interview on Sky mentioned this and said normally the host nation turns a blind eye to this sort of thing so long as it's done discretely. In Holland, however, the crackdown was clearly an attempt to take votes from the PVV.
Macron addressed 3000 French people in Central Hall in Westminster and he was invited to 10 Downing Street to meet Theresa May. Hardly discreet!
Fair point! Maybe the PM has a monkey on him for next president?
May met Macron Garage this week met Le Pen which tells you something
Good article that explains why it's stupid to use the poker analogy when talking about Brexit: http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2017/03/14/no-deal-brexit-govt-is-bluffing-with-cards-everyone-can-see "This is why the poker metaphor has always been so useless. We cannot bluff in these talks. Europe knows what happens if there is no deal. Everyone knows, even if the government is too deranged and paranoid to plan for it. Europe also knows, for that matter, what our advantages are: We have trade, security and intelligence cooperation, the PR of stable change and some welcome European financial service capacity to use as leverage.
So they know what we want, they know what we have to offer, and they know what the consequences are of the talks ending with no deal. They know everything. Anyone who reads a newspaper does.
Poker is a game based on the notion that you do not know the hand the other players hold. Article 50 is the precise opposite. But those fearful eyes from the Brexit trio tell us that they would likely fail at either poker or Article 50. Our problem is that before they do so, they will gamble away our future."
Yeah but we're going to have a yacht - that will show them.
Comments
More recently Labour flooded Stoke on Trent Central with activists and the result still saw a swing to the Tories, who soft pedaled. That should be very concerning for Labour and suggests a problem at a national level.
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/722837/indyref2-indyref-nicola-sturgeon-scotland-independence/
https://stv.tv/news/politics/1383060-thousands-sign-petition-to-block-second-referendum/
Probably cross the 100,000 mark today guaranteeing a debate.
The solution needs to be more than retiring old JC to the club for aging Marxists as the systemic issues within the Labour party (ie role of Unions) are addressed. in this age of very fast comms, and a cynical electorate looking for clear (dare I say poulist) answers then no amount of door knocking will help a party stuck peddling a dull social democratic post-war model. The Scots referendum, is a case in point - wtf is Labour's (let alone JC's) position on this? its hardly a surprise and yet they seem caught like rabbits in the headlights- right rant over - back to bed.
As last years EU Referendum showed - the competing demands of these two cohorts will not easily be reconciled.
Nicola has played this very poorly and you can see she has been pushed into it by Salmond, her heart lies with the EU.
The article on the Telegraph laying out all of the SNP "meetings" with EU people is great btw. Nicola's meeting with the pest controller must have been particularly illuminating.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/14/nicola-sturgeon-will-not-get-much-help-europe-despite-charm/
Ben Shapiro
Imagine Geraldo's regret when he opened Al Capone's vault to find Rachel Maddow's report on Trump's taxes. https://t.co/RH3FRZtV66
I am available for consultation at vastly inflated rates commensurate with the magnitude of the political and culinary situation.
There isn't one.
They need to craft a message that resonates with those currently voting Tory and UKIP.
Only one man has managed that, in more than forty years. But he is now reviled almost as much as the Devil to whom he sold his soul.
Plus. Tony Blair had the good fortune to walk into Downing Street buoyed by a very healthy economy - and promising not to mess with it for three years. It's just a shame Gordon Brown didn't get the memo. Brown was always intent on implementing Labour's broken business model - having the public sector be funded at levels that were unsustainable by the private sector. And there is no word from anybody in the Labour Party suggesting they wouldn't try implementing exactly the same failed policy yet again if they got near power.
Labour are stuck in a time warp...or rather two. One in the 1970s.. (Corbyn) and one in the 1990s (Blair).
There is no original thinking and few with the ability to think originally.
They appear stuck..and need a really good blood letting to get rid of the muppets who choose policy by repeating mantras,,
Ironically, the answer to Labour’s woes does not end with the removal of Corbyn, the rot has gone further than just the head. The party needs new blood, new ideas and a platform fit for the 21st century, but above all, it needs to be honest with it's self about the problems it faces in a global world, and Labour don’t do honesty.
Just Wikipedia him.. its all there
@BBCPhilipSim: Mike Russell says there will be "absolute clarity" on ScotGov's position towards EU membership by the time of indyref2; asks for "patience".
So the SNP want 2 years to tell us whether they want to be in the EU, or not.
Numpties
Fully agree.
Labour are stuck in a time warp...or rather two. One in the 1970s.. (Corbyn) and one in the 1990s (Blair).
There is no original thinking and few with the ability to think originally.
They appear stuck..and need a really good blood letting to get rid of the muppets who choose policy by repeating mantras,,
In that sense they reflect British politics as a whole. The Tories are also utterly stuck in the past, with their preferred era being the 1920s. Fortunately for them, Britain runs on false nostalgia, but sooner or later they will find themselves in the same mess Labour is in.
In my opinion, the whole of English politics wallows in nostalgia, a sort of 1950s B&W Ealing comedy world where schoolboys wore caps, policemen saluted and the war was just a few years ago. It is quite toxic, I dont think it was such a golden age, but its appeal to people of all classes and backgrounds (most of whom were not even alive at the time) has allowed a narrative peddled by UKIP, Johnson, Daily Express, Telegraph etc al to set an agenda that is entirely backwards looking. The mess is pan-political...........
In my opinion, the whole of English politics wallows in nostalgia, a sort of 1950s B&W Ealing comedy world where schoolboys wore caps, policemen saluted and the war was just a few years ago. It is quite toxic, I dont think it was such a golden age, but its appeal to people of all classes and backgrounds (most of whom were not even alive at the time) has allowed a narrative peddled by UKIP, Johnson, Daily Express, Telegraph etc al to set an agenda that is entirely backwards looking. The mess is pan-political...........
You mean Dixon of Dock Green was "fake news" ? I'm shocked I tell you, shocked.
The question next time will be "do you want to be out of the EU?"
Yes
or
Yes
It's genius...
Survation and Social Attitudes also have polls on independence, showing 47/53% and 46/50% respectively.
Revoke apps access via your settings - this can only be done via desktop.
An early second referendum on Scottish secession is being justified purely on the grounds of Brexit. Given that, is it not important that the alternative position that Scotland is being asked to choose should be set out in the wording of the referendum, and that that position is clearly defined by the Scottish Parliament when it requests/demands a second referendum?
So, something along the lines of "Should Scotland leave the United Kingdom in order to seek to rejoin the European Union?". Or, as now seems to be SNP line "Should Scotland leave the United Kingdom and join the EFTA while remaining outside the European Union?".
Getting rid of Jeremy Corbyn is only going to lead to a sustained improvement in Labour's position if the new leader offers a clear prospectus.
The road back for Labour is a very long one, whoever the leader is. But the idea that Labour is uniquely struggling with the modern world, how it works and how to deliver significant beneficial change to ordinary voters is a bit far-fetched. Currently, we are leaving the European Union on the back of advocacy from a group of wealthy Tory cabinet ministers and MPs who want to revive the royal yacht Britannia, bring back grammar schools while depriving other state schools of money and who believe that Europe should lie down and give us everything that we want in the Brexit negotiations.
The perspectives of people such as Boris, Fox, Davies, Leadsom and May are a very long way from reality and show little evidence of having developed to meet the challenges of this ever-shrinking, extremely interconnected world. Instead, like Corbyn, they hark back to a time that has long gone - if it ever existed - but unlike him they do it happily and enthusiastically waving a Union Jack, so the are always going to beat him. They are extremely lucky to be up against someone like Jeremy, who combines rank incompetence with electoral toxicity.
Since 2014 Independence rose to 39% and now 46% in subsequent years.
On topic, whilst canvassing is clearly important for campaigning, and a very good way of picking up what people are thinking, for some Labour activists it does seem to have become something of an obsession. Many post incessant Labour doorstep tweets as if the mere act of knocking on doors is some sort of rain dance that will magic the votes to come. Few people are persuaded solely by a five minute chat at their front door.
"Feck it - FLAGS!!"
In my opinion, the whole of English politics wallows in nostalgia, a sort of 1950s B&W Ealing comedy world where schoolboys wore caps, policemen saluted and the war was just a few years ago. It is quite toxic, I dont think it was such a golden age, but its appeal to people of all classes and backgrounds (most of whom were not even alive at the time) has allowed a narrative peddled by UKIP, Johnson, Daily Express, Telegraph etc al to set an agenda that is entirely backwards looking. The mess is pan-political...........
Yep, it's leaving us utterly unprepared for the challenges to come.
Watch Twitter being hacked in real time...#Twitterhack #twitterhacked https://t.co/auhIZybbXm
Until the wider Labour Party decide what they're for, in a way that can attract the support of many current Tory and UKIP voters, they'll continue to go backwards. Right now, most people will say that Labour as a party stand for borrowing and spending more money, and for running public services for the benefit of the staff more than the customers - at the same time as loving low skilled immigration in the private sector. Until those attitudes change, Labour will struggle to be electable.
Someone needs to stand up and present a vision for "Labour in the 2020s", but until that happens they might as well leave Jeremy in place.
Yep, it's leaving us utterly unprepared for the challenges to come.
Totally agree. Boris and Fox think a new royal yacht will help us get great trade deals! The only real difference between the two major parties when it comes to thinking about the challenges of the 21st century and how to deal with them is the willingness to wave the Union Jack.
In my experience changing someone's mind on the door step is a rare achievement (and almost certainly means that they just want you to go away). I think it is more useful in encouraging those who are sympathetic to vote, applying for postal votes, etc. For that reason canvassing tends to be targeted at those who have already indicated some sympathy or support for your position. No wonder Corbyn still believes he is more popular than a fart in a spacesuit.
I remain perplexed as to why Sporting Index has the stupid championship ranking market up but not the points markets. Humbug!
On-topic: if Corbyn never wanted the job then standing for it twice appears not to have been the wisest of choices.
The second one was based on the premise that we would either stay in or at least rejoin pdq. That appears not to be the case so it is not applicable.
But if an MP knocks on doors in his constituency for an hour every week, has 10 conversations as a result and has been an MP for 40 years that's 20,000 conversations. Given that, I am surprised I do not know anyone who has ever met Corbyn.
Totally agree. Boris and Fox think a new royal yacht will help us get great trade deals! The only real difference between the two major parties when it comes to thinking about the challenges of the 21st century and how to deal with them is the willingness to wave the Union Jack.
I must be out of step with British politics - I get less nostalgic as I get older
And yes, I think the 50s rather than the 20s, which was a time of radical change.
Thousands of verified/blue check accounts involved too. Twitter mgt meanwhile are asleep at the wheel.
Similarly, Emmanuel Macron campaigning among French people in London is double plus good, and an occasion for editors to proclaim how London is "France's sixth city", because it's home to about 300,000 French people. But when Turkish government ministers want to campaign in Randstad, which is home to about 150,000 Turks in the Netherlands, it's "Raus!" and double plus bad.
I hold no brief for Erdogan's disgusting regime; just remarking on the double standards.
BREAKING
08:08 Twitter Accounts Appear to Be Hacked With Pro-Erdogan Content
Twitter Accounts Appear to Be Hacked With Swastikas and Pro-Erdogan Content
Bloomberg News
15 March 2017, 07:59 GMT
Twitter accounts belonging to a number of verified high-profile users appear to have been hacked with pro-Erdogan tweets, Bloomberg News reports.
Affected accounts include those of Sprint CEO Marcelo Claure, the U.K. Department of Health, Reuters Japan, Forbes, BBC North America, Duke University and Amnesty International. Others include those belonging to the Mayor of Bordeaux, Alain Juppe, and the European Parliament.
https://twitter.com/HulkHulkenberg/status/841732090823598080
Moving away from the irrelevant trivialities that are the Dutch election, Scottish independence and Leicester City football club to the main business of the day but before that..
I would respectfully draw the Moderators' attention to the deeply offensive and patronising posts yesterday from one Pulpstar of this parish who, despite being told certain suggested horses were not to be backed, put £105 of his hard earned on a Lucky 15 and then spent the afternoon complaining about their lack of success.
As I was, to my knowledge, the only member of this so-called betting forum to put his gonads above the parapet with some thoughts on day one of the Cheltenham Festival, I feel my selections deserved more respect. You can denigrate my politics but I draw the line at denigrating my horse racing knowledge.
If Pulpstar could be banned until there is a Lib Dem majority in the Commons or until he issues a suitably fulsome apology, I would be obliged.
That unpleasantness aside...
Day 2 of Cheltenham beckons and drying ground in the Cotswolds isn't going to make finding the winners any easier. My suggestions for the Grade 1 events as follows (odds at time of writing with Hills):
1.30: MESSIRE DES OBEAUX - (10/1) - fielding against the top two in the market.
2.10: WHISPER (6/1) - stable in form and has won twice over course if not distance
3.30: GOD'S OWN (12/1) - Douvan will win but I'll leave Pulpstar to put his £40,000 down the back of the sofa money on at 1/4.
5.30: SOMEDAY (8/1) - it's the Bumper, no idea at all. Next Destination looks a big threat at 10s but it's often won by an outsider.
Enjoy the sport - now back to the politics.
It always surprises me that people seem to talk to each other about when they were canvassed - quite often on the doorstep people will tell you where you were calling earlier in the week, or report instances of other party canvassing even if they weren't called on themselves. I guess as a rare event it seems more remarkable to the recipient than it does to the regular canvasser.
66,000 according to the ONS (which doesn't include students) and 86,000 according to the 2011 census (which does include students).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-26823489
Which means London isn't even in the top 50 of largest French cities, even on the narrow French definition of city:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_75_largest_cities_in_France_(2012_census)
On the wider defined metropolitan areas London would struggle to get in the top 100.
In my opinion, the whole of English politics wallows in nostalgia, a sort of 1950s B&W Ealing comedy world where schoolboys wore caps, policemen saluted and the war was just a few years ago. It is quite toxic, I dont think it was such a golden age, but its appeal to people of all classes and backgrounds (most of whom were not even alive at the time) has allowed a narrative peddled by UKIP, Johnson, Daily Express, Telegraph etc al to set an agenda that is entirely backwards looking. The mess is pan-political...........
Got to agree with that ...
Remarkable.
Was your inference based on some earlier version of the SNP manifesto that you caught sight of? I must say I prefer the precise clarity of the version I saw.
On topic, the wild and wacky world of canvassing or "street surveys" as I used to call it when we went door knocking between elections. Cold calling people, especially when it's cold (the weather rather than the calling) isn't easy. In the summer when people are in their front gardens and the evenings are warm and fine, it's a doddle. People want to talk then but in the winter it's much harder.
Canvassing is part intelligence gathering and part about maintaining a presence. The more you know about the electoral shifts in an area the better you can campaign - social media campaigning is another form of targeted canvassing looking at Facebook and seeing who's following who.
Before all that, canvassing was part art form as you tried to differentiate between the time wasters from other parties and those genuinely engaged with you. Don't waste time on your supporters or your known opponents. It was also good to have a "biggish name" whether it was a local Councillor, a prospective Parliamentary candidate or best of all an MP.
When I lived in Sutton and we went out with Tom Brake it was amazing how everyone wanted to talk to their MP if he was on their doorstep. Oddly enough, it did nothing for the intelligence gathering but it advertised our presence wonderfully.
I confess I find Corbyn affable and I'm sure I could have a tea and a jam sandwich with him without any problem - I find Theresa May much less personable by comparison. It wouldn't do her any harm to lighten up a bit but she loves being the Thatcher-esque "firm hand in a time of crisis". Yes, well, but it gets a bit dour and boring after a while.
May is a Rino - Remainer In Name Only
http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2017/03/14/no-deal-brexit-govt-is-bluffing-with-cards-everyone-can-see
"This is why the poker metaphor has always been so useless. We cannot bluff in these talks. Europe knows what happens if there is no deal. Everyone knows, even if the government is too deranged and paranoid to plan for it. Europe also knows, for that matter, what our advantages are: We have trade, security and intelligence cooperation, the PR of stable change and some welcome European financial service capacity to use as leverage.
So they know what we want, they know what we have to offer, and they know what the consequences are of the talks ending with no deal. They know everything. Anyone who reads a newspaper does.
Poker is a game based on the notion that you do not know the hand the other players hold. Article 50 is the precise opposite. But those fearful eyes from the Brexit trio tell us that they would likely fail at either poker or Article 50. Our problem is that before they do so, they will gamble away our future."