Could you imagine if Corbyn stepped down after today's results and Tom Watson or Starmer took over for the election? I think we would see just how flakey the Tories lead actually is.
It's not going to happen of course.......
Could Labour fill a vacancy that quickly?
If not then they go into an election with a deputy leader and no real indication of who will take over afterwards. I can't see how that improves their prospects.
I read (through a link on here which I've forgotten, sorry) of one Labour MP who was telling his constituents that they could safely vote for him because he wouldn't vote for Mr Corbyn to be PM.
That sounded to me as though the PLP votes for PM candidates after a GE, which I never heard of before.
Anybody else notice this?
The PM has to command a majority of the House. So I suppose if enough of the PLP failed to support him on a confidence issue he wouldn't be PM, or not for very long.
Many thanks. So (some) Labour MPs hope to win the GE, vote down PM Corbyn's first measure, and install A. N. Other as PM within the first few weeks? The mind boggles.
They'd change their minds if Corbyn actually won the GE though, sure as night follows day. But they can't say that before the GE. The position of some of the Labour moderates is ludicrous.
Voted LibDem today even though the very nice secretary of our CLP is standing in my ward. Can't see myself voting for them at the GE, though, so it may be a spoiled ballot paper for me. There were a fair few people voting at the same time as me and I think close to 1,000 had been through the doors by 3.30 pm when I was there, which seems quite high for a local election.
Any idea what kind of turnout the place gets normally? I find it hard to judge - I'm told very poor turnout in some stations round my way, but its an area with turnout under 25% last time anyway.
Could you imagine if Corbyn stepped down after today's results and Tom Watson or Starmer took over for the election? I think we would see just how flakey the Tories lead actually is.
It's not going to happen of course.......
Could Labour fill a vacancy that quickly?
If not then they go into an election with a deputy leader and no real indication of who will take over afterwards. I can't see how that improves their prospects.
I read (through a link on here which I've forgotten, sorry) of one Labour MP who was telling his constituents that they could safely vote for him because he wouldn't vote for Mr Corbyn to be PM.
That sounded to me as though the PLP votes for PM candidates after a GE, which I never heard of before.
Anybody else notice this?
(edited for typo)
I presume that was JOhn Woodcock, who has says he cannot support Corbyn as PM, but I presume that does not mean the PLP votes for PM candidates after a GE, just that he personally will not back the man in such a role generally?
But at least he is honest, even if his position is a bit odd.
Ah, perhaps, that makes more sense.
I have been wondering how many of the people who refused to work in Mr Corbyn's shadow cabinet would further refuse to work in PM Corbyn's Cabinet.
Could you imagine if Corbyn stepped down after today's results and Tom Watson or Starmer took over for the election? I think we would see just how flakey the Tories lead actually is.
It's not going to happen of course.......
Could Labour fill a vacancy that quickly?
If not then they go into an election with a deputy leader and no real indication of who will take over afterwards. I can't see how that improves their prospects.
Indeed. And up until now, unless they've openly disavowed him like woodcock, they have implicitly been saying they want him to prime minister. Junking him now is too late, it's not credible and the Tories would hit them just as hard. They have to wait it once more.
It's not too late....it would completely change the momentum of the election into something completely unpredictable. It would have to be a coronation for Starmer or Watson; Starmer by virtue that he is leading Brexit/ a two year timetable with a backhand deal that the 5% change gets passed through the NEC. It is the only way IMO to avoid a terrible, acrimonious, battle for the heart of the party after a Corbyn landslide defeat.
But Starmer is, implicitly or explicitly, at the moment saying 'vote for Corbyn for PM', so even if a coronation the Tory argument that a vote for Labour is for Corbyn style policies works, with the added chaos of a sudden change in leader which would not be universally accepted by members even if Corbyn said it was of his volition - there would be disruption and infighting, even more chaos for the Tories topoint to.
Give Corbyn's had an ok start, it might even make things worse, and surely not that much better.
Labour would get my vote if Corbyn was not leader and was not replaced by another far left headbanger. I imagine there are fair few like me. But there is not a snowball's chance in hell of it happening. And he will not be standing down after the GE, either. He will need to be challenged.
Could you imagine if Corbyn stepped down after today's results and Tom Watson or Starmer took over for the election? I think we would see just how flakey the Tories lead actually is.
It's not going to happen of course.......
Could Labour fill a vacancy that quickly?
If not then they go into an election with a deputy leader and no real indication of who will take over afterwards. I can't see how that improves their prospects.
I read (through a link on here which I've forgotten, sorry) of one Labour MP who was telling his constituents that they could safely vote for him because he wouldn't vote for Mr Corbyn to be PM.
That sounded to me as though the PLP votes for PM candidates after a GE, which I never heard of before.
Anybody else notice this?
The PM has to command a majority of the House. So I suppose if enough of the PLP failed to support him on a confidence issue he wouldn't be PM, or not for very long.
Many thanks. So (some) Labour MPs hope to win the GE, vote down PM Corbyn's first measure, and install A. N. Other as PM within the first few weeks? The mind boggles.
They'd change their minds if Corbyn actually won the GE though, sure as night follows day. But they can't say that before the GE. The position of some of the Labour moderates is ludicrous.
Plenty of republicans were against Trump, until he won his nomination and they mostly fell inline. So it would be for most if Corbyn won the GE.
OT Premium bond holders can now type their holders' numbers into the NS website to be told how much they've won -- no need to log in. So much for security. It's the stupidest idea since someone asked Ed Miliband if he fancied a bacon roll.
How hard would it be for you to find out your partner's number?
Hint: browsers will auto-fill it anyway.
I receive mine online through their app which is very good
And anyone who knows or can find out your holder's number can get it from the website without needing to log into your account. That's the scary part.
Could you imagine if Corbyn stepped down after today's results and Tom Watson or Starmer took over for the election? I think we would see just how flakey the Tories lead actually is.
It's not going to happen of course.......
Could Labour fill a vacancy that quickly?
If not then they go into an election with a deputy leader and no real indication of who will take over afterwards. I can't see how that improves their prospects.
Indeed. And up until now, unless they've openly disavowed him like woodcock, they have implicitly been saying they want him to prime minister. Junking him now is too late, it's not credible and the Tories would hit them just as hard. They have to wait it once more.
It's not too late....it would completely change the momentum of the election into something completely unpredictable. It would have to be a coronation for Starmer or Watson; Starmer by virtue that he is leading Brexit/ a two year timetable with a backhand deal that the 5% change gets passed through the NEC. It is the only way IMO to avoid a terrible, acrimonious, destructive battle for the heart of the party after a Corbyn landslide defeat.
That battle has to happen. And if the far left wins again, there will have to be a Labour split.
I did argue that the PLP (and I said this quite early in Corbyn's misrule) either had to nominate one of their own number as a Commons leader and take whipping lead from him/her, or split.
If Corbyn wins a third leadership contest, assuming things go predictably in the election, then the PLP will have wasted some time and made their job a lot harder.
Could you imagine if Corbyn stepped down after today's results and Tom Watson or Starmer took over for the election? I think we would see just how flakey the Tories lead actually is.
It's not going to happen of course.......
Could Labour fill a vacancy that quickly?
If not then they go into an election with a deputy leader and no real indication of who will take over afterwards. I can't see how that improves their prospects.
Not a fan of Tom Watson, but right now Peter Sutcliffe would be a improvement on Jeremy Corbyn!
I'm not so sure. Tom Watson, you'd have to have a pretty low bar indeed to be outshone by a steaming pile of excrement like him. Corbyn is a low bar, of course, perhaps historically the lowest Labour have ever plummeted to (in a crowded field). There is nobody in the PLP who could avert the beating they are going to take on June 8th.
Another true story. My new girlfriend's name is Star.
That is literally her Christened name. STAR. I won't tell you her surname obv. But it fits.
STAR.
Well, it makes a change from puns on Brexit. Or talking about Brexit.
You should buy her diamond earrings (or nipple rings, or whatever). You'll probably never get another opportunity to use the line "twinkle, twinkle, little Star".
(Also - Flame? Prophesy? Really? Have you started dating Vampire LARPers?)
Could you imagine if Corbyn stepped down after today's results and Tom Watson or Starmer took over for the election? I think we would see just how flakey the Tories lead actually is.
It's not going to happen of course.......
Could Labour fill a vacancy that quickly?
If not then they go into an election with a deputy leader and no real indication of who will take over afterwards. I can't see how that improves their prospects.
Indeed. And up until now, unless they've openly disavowed him like woodcock, they have implicitly been saying they want him to prime minister. Junking him now is too late, it's not credible and the Tories would hit them just as hard. They have to wait it once more.
It's not too late....it would completely change the momentum of the election into something completely unpredictable. It would have to be a coronation for Starmer or Watson; Starmer by virtue that he is leading Brexit/ a two year timetable with a backhand deal that the 5% change gets passed through the NEC. It is the only way IMO to avoid a terrible, acrimonious, destructive battle for the heart of the party after a Corbyn landslide defeat.
That battle has to happen. And if the far left wins again, there will have to be a Labour split.
If Labour score where they are now, high 20s early 30s, I think the far left will win.
Could you imagine if Corbyn stepped down after today's results and Tom Watson or Starmer took over for the election? I think we would see just how flakey the Tories lead actually is.
It's not going to happen of course.......
Could Labour fill a vacancy that quickly?
If not then they go into an election with a deputy leader and no real indication of who will take over afterwards. I can't see how that improves their prospects.
Indeed. And up until now, unless they've openly disavowed him like woodcock, they have implicitly been saying they want him to prime minister. Junking him now is too late, it's not credible and the Tories would hit them just as hard. They have to wait it once more.
It's not too late....it would completely change the momentum of the election into something completely unpredictable. It would have to be a coronation for Starmer or Watson; Starmer by virtue that he is leading Brexit/ a two year timetable with a backhand deal that the 5% change gets passed through the NEC. It is the only way IMO to avoid a terrible, acrimonious, battle for the heart of the party after a Corbyn landslide defeat.
But Starmer is, implicitly or explicitly, at the moment saying 'vote for Corbyn for PM', so even if a coronation the Tory argument that a vote for Labour is for Corbyn style policies works, with the added chaos of a sudden change in leader which would not be universally accepted by members even if Corbyn said it was of his volition - there would be disruption and infighting, even more chaos for the Tories topoint to.
Give Corbyn's had an ok start, it might even make things worse, and surely not that much better.
I doubt Labour could sink lower than 25%...the upsides are it would electrify the election, and terrify the Tories.
At the moment the left are holding a fair few cards with Corbyn as leader. When they lose disastrously with Corbyn as leader and the moderates wrestle back control as they surely will after a protracted bloody battle in the summer they will also lose any kind off leverage over the party.
If Corbyn walks now, the left can extract a high price for his act of self sacrifice.
Could you imagine if Corbyn stepped down after today's results and Tom Watson or Starmer took over for the election? I think we would see just how flakey the Tories lead actually is.
It's not going to happen of course.......
Could Labour fill a vacancy that quickly?
If not then they go into an election with a deputy leader and no real indication of who will take over afterwards. I can't see how that improves their prospects.
Indeed. And up until now, unless they've openly disavowed him like woodcock, they have implicitly been saying they want him to prime minister. Junking him now is too late, it's not credible and the Tories would hit them just as hard. They have to wait it once more.
It's not too late....it would completely change the momentum of the election into something completely unpredictable. It would have to be a coronation for Starmer or Watson; Starmer by virtue that he is leading Brexit/ a two year timetable with a backhand deal that the 5% change gets passed through the NEC. It is the only way IMO to avoid a terrible, acrimonious, destructive battle for the heart of the party after a Corbyn landslide defeat.
That would be worse than keeping Corbyn.
Let's suppose a best-case scenario for Labour, where Corbyn stands down voluntarily. Frankly, I think the chances of that are about 50/1 at best but that's beside the point. Presumably, Watson takes over. So far, so smooth.
But what then? On what manifesto does he run? Who writes it and on what authority (the leader not having full power in that regard)? What happens to the Shadow Cabinet? Does Watson keep McDonnell and Abbott in place? If so, won't the Tories just portray it as more of the same? If not, shadow ministers will go into interviews with virtually no preparation.
And what of the membership? Will the ones who voted Corbyn in twice accept what would amount to a coup if there was any deviation from Corbyn's policies? Constituency campaigns up and down the country would be thrown into chaos.
Then there's what happens next. Watson could lead Labour for up to 18 months (IIRC) without an election but there *would be* a leadership election. Particularly if the 5% rule or similar was introduced, wouldn't that put the left's candidate in pole position? Again, isn't that just writing the Tory script for them? John McDonnell for PM? (There's a good chance it wouldn't be him but I doubt he'd rule himself out and that'd be enough).
Finally, there'd be some kind of stab-in-the-back / if-only myth. If Corbyn doesn't lead Labour into the election, the left would always cherish the dream of the Stolen Victory.
No, events are too far gone. The risks and costs of replacing Corbyn are now greater than those of keeping him.
Voted LibDem today even though the very nice secretary of our CLP is standing in my ward. Can't see myself voting for them at the GE, though, so it may be a spoiled ballot paper for me. There were a fair few people voting at the same time as me and I think close to 1,000 had been through the doors by 3.30 pm when I was there, which seems quite high for a local election.
Any idea what kind of turnout the place gets normally? I find it hard to judge - I'm told very poor turnout in some stations round my way, but its an area with turnout under 25% last time anyway.
No idea at all. But the flow when I was there was pretty similar to what I saw at the GE in 2015. Obviously turnout will not be close to that, but it wasn't just me and the polling staff which it usually is for a local!
OT Premium bond holders can now type their holders' numbers into the NS website to be told how much they've won -- no need to log in. So much for security. It's the stupidest idea since someone asked Ed Miliband if he fancied a bacon roll.
How hard would it be for you to find out your partner's number?
Hint: browsers will auto-fill it anyway.
I receive mine online through their app which is very good
And anyone who knows or can find out your holder's number can get it from the website without needing to log into your account. That's the scary part.
Scary, why? It simply tells you on a read-only basis what the current month's prize is. It doesn't let you deal with the prize money, let alone the bonds themselves, and the chances of the prize being a life-changing sum are negligible. If you kept a record over time you could estimate the size of the holding, given that with average luck you should be getting, on average, £25 per month per £29,000 invested. Exciting stuff.
Could you imagine if Corbyn stepped down after today's results and Tom Watson or Starmer took over for the election? I think we would see just how flakey the Tories lead actually is.
It's not going to happen of course.......
Could Labour fill a vacancy that quickly?
If not then they go into an election with a deputy leader and no real indication of who will take over afterwards. I can't see how that improves their prospects.
Indeed. And up until now, unless they've openly disavowed him like woodcock, they have implicitly been saying they want him to prime minister. Junking him now is too late, it's not credible and the Tories would hit them just as hard. They have to wait it once more.
It's not too late....it would completely change the momentum of the election into something completely unpredictable. It would have to be a coronation for Starmer or Watson; Starmer by virtue that he is leading Brexit/ a two year timetable with a backhand deal that the 5% change gets passed through the NEC. It is the only way IMO to avoid a terrible, acrimonious, battle for the heart of the party after a Corbyn landslide defeat.
But Starmer is, implicitly or explicitly, at the moment saying 'vote for Corbyn for PM', so even if a coronation the Tory argument that a vote for Labour is for Corbyn style policies works, with the added chaos of a sudden change in leader which would not be universally accepted by members even if Corbyn said it was of his volition - there would be disruption and infighting, even more chaos for the Tories topoint to.
Give Corbyn's had an ok start, it might even make things worse, and surely not that much better.
I doubt Labour could sink lower than 25%...the upsides are it would electrify the election, and terrify the Tories.
At the moment the left are holding a fair few cards with Corbyn as leader. When they lose disastrously with Corbyn as leader and the moderates wrestle back control as they surely will after a protracted bloody battle in the summer they will also lose any kind off leverage over the party.
If Corbyn walks now, the left can extract a high price for his act of self sacrifice.
I don't think that's true. Why would moderates connive in their defeat in the next leadership election? Sure, there are some MPs who might grasp at any opportunity to keep themselves afloat but when there aren't enough spaces in the lifeboats, the worst thing to do is overload them.
OT Premium bond holders can now type their holders' numbers into the NS website to be told how much they've won -- no need to log in. So much for security. It's the stupidest idea since someone asked Ed Miliband if he fancied a bacon roll.
How hard would it be for you to find out your partner's number?
Hint: browsers will auto-fill it anyway.
I receive mine online through their app which is very good
And anyone who knows or can find out your holder's number can get it from the website without needing to log into your account. That's the scary part.
Scary, why? It simply tells you on a read-only basis what the current month's prize is. It doesn't let you deal with the prize money, let alone the bonds themselves, and the chances of the prize being a life-changing sum are negligible. If you kept a record over time you could estimate the size of the holding, given that with average luck you should be getting, on average, £25 per month per £29,000 invested. Exciting stuff.
The site tells me which prizes *you* have won. If that is not scary, please post here how much is in your bank account. After all, we won't be able to spend it, and we promise not to use the information to decide whether to blackmail, defraud or divorce you.
I wonder if the GE will be a "Something for everyone" election? i.e. Small LD gains = "stopped the bleeding at Parliamentary level, and now recovering" Decent Tory majority (say about 60-80) = "Much more comfortable than the current position. More wiggle room for the PM" Labour with much fewer losses than expected (and vote share holding up) = "Much better base to recover from once the grown-ups recover the party / proof that socialism can attract votes ***" UKIP vote very small = "practically everybody else happy" SNP = "Same level of dominance, so reassured"
Could you imagine if Corbyn stepped down after today's results and Tom Watson or Starmer took over for the election? I think we would see just how flakey the Tories lead actually is.
It's not going to happen of course.......
Could Labour fill a vacancy that quickly?
If not then they go into an election with a deputy leader and no real indication of who will take over afterwards. I can't see how that improves their prospects.
Indeed. And up until now, unless they've openly disavowed him like woodcock, they have implicitly been saying they want him to prime minister. Junking him now is too late, it's not credible and the Tories would hit them just as hard. They have to wait it once more.
It's not too late....it would completely change the momentum of the election into something completely unpredictable. It would have to be a coronation for Starmer or Watson; Starmer by virtue that he is leading Brexit/ a two year timetable with a backhand deal that the 5% change gets passed through the NEC. It is the only way IMO to avoid a terrible, acrimonious, battle for the heart of the party after a Corbyn landslide defeat.
But Starmer is, implicitly or explicitly, at the moment saying 'vote for Corbyn for PM', so even if a coronation the Tory argument that a vote for Labour is for Corbyn style policies works, with the added chaos of a sudden change in leader which would not be universally accepted by members even if Corbyn said it was of his volition - there would be disruption and infighting, even more chaos for the Tories topoint to.
Give Corbyn's had an ok start, it might even make things worse, and surely not that much better.
If Corbyn stands down now, the new leader will only be interim. I guess "Vote Labour, if we win there will be another new PM in the autumn" might be more appealing than "Vote Labour for Jeremy Corbyn to be PM", but that's not saying too much.
I don't understand it, labour supporters revere Attlee, Morrison and Bevan. But when the current leader of the Labour party wants ro return the country to those days of starvation rationing, nationalisation and bankruptcy - they complain.
I can well believe that the Marmalade Monster's administration would do this. It seems that if you are not a well-heeled, WASP then the current administration see you as a cost, an inconvenience or an obstacle to stacking dollars away in bank accounts.
Sadly, I think that there is worse to come for the USA.
Speaking to friends voting in the West Midlands today, one has voted Tory for the first time. Another whose mum is a Labour member and has put in the miles on the campaign trail before might vote Andy Street too. With his business experience and Christianity he seems a decent sort, a gateway Tory if you will. I think his odds are great value and expect him to win. I also expect he'll have the ear of Theresa too for a bit of central government help, which will only enhance the West Midland's standing and is something neither Burnham or Rotherham cannot offer.
I'll also take a bit of pleasure in Sion Simon losing, after all his Web Cameron spoof all those years ago was a real nadir for political comedy. Given he's spent the last few years campaigning for this Mayoral role it would be amusing if it were snatched away from him at the last.
Christianity and the Tory party hardly go hand in hand.
And your basis for that sweeping assertion is?
How about: "Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God."
But not all Tories are rich. And some socialists are. So that won't do.
But such socialists are prepared to advocate policies which are at variance with their own material interests - eg higher direct taxes on income and wealth.
You mean like when rich Labour MPs send their children to private schools?
That is also hypocrisy - but you should not assume that those MPs are socialists.
Wow! Windies getting back into their Test against Pakistan by dint of their bowling. 31-5 Gabriel doing the damage. Wonder if the pitch is breaking up.
Could you imagine if Corbyn stepped down after today's results and Tom Watson or Starmer took over for the election? I think we would see just how flakey the Tories lead actually is.
It's not going to happen of course.......
Could Labour fill a vacancy that quickly?
If not then they go into an election with a deputy leader and no real indication of who will take over afterwards. I can't see how that improves their prospects.
Indeed. And up until now, unless they've openly disavowed him like woodcock, they have implicitly been saying they want him to prime minister. Junking him now is too late, it's not credible and the Tories would hit them just as hard. They have to wait it once more.
It's not too late....it would completely change the momentum of the election into something completely unpredictable. It would have to be a coronation for Starmer or Watson; Starmer by virtue that he is leading Brexit/ a two year timetable with a backhand deal that the 5% change gets passed through the NEC. It is the only way IMO to avoid a terrible, acrimonious, battle for the heart of the party after a Corbyn landslide defeat.
But Starmer is, implicitly or explicitly, at the moment saying 'vote for Corbyn for PM', so even if a coronation the Tory argument that a vote for Labour is for Corbyn style policies works, with the added chaos of a sudden change in leader which would not be universally accepted by members even if Corbyn said it was of his volition - there would be disruption and infighting, even more chaos for the Tories topoint to.
Give Corbyn's had an ok start, it might even make things worse, and surely not that much better.
If Corbyn stands down now, the new leader will only be interim. I guess "Vote Labour, if we win there will be another new PM in the autumn" might be more appealing than "Vote Labour for Jeremy Corbyn to be PM", but that's not saying too much.
"Vote Labour for a blank space to be filled in by the guys who elected Corbyn the last two times". Not that much more appealing.
OT Premium bond holders can now type their holders' numbers into the NS website to be told how much they've won -- no need to log in. So much for security. It's the stupidest idea since someone asked Ed Miliband if he fancied a bacon roll.
How hard would it be for you to find out your partner's number?
Hint: browsers will auto-fill it anyway.
I receive mine online through their app which is very good
And anyone who knows or can find out your holder's number can get it from the website without needing to log into your account. That's the scary part.
Scary, why? It simply tells you on a read-only basis what the current month's prize is. It doesn't let you deal with the prize money, let alone the bonds themselves, and the chances of the prize being a life-changing sum are negligible. If you kept a record over time you could estimate the size of the holding, given that with average luck you should be getting, on average, £25 per month per £29,000 invested. Exciting stuff.
The site tells me which prizes *you* have won. If that is not scary, please post here how much is in your bank account. After all, we won't be able to spend it, and we promise not to use the information to decide whether to blackmail, defraud or divorce you.
No, it tells you what I've won this month, which, as I've already said, is £50. Blackmail away. It's not that there could never be any circumstances ever where the problem you have identified might be a problem, but it isn't likely. You still need my holder number which I imagine is written down in, and only in, the same place as my full login details, so if you knew the one you'd know the other anyway.
I can well believe that the Marmalade Monster's administration would do this. It seems that if you are not a well-heeled, WASP then the current administration see you as a cost, an inconvenience or an obstacle to stacking dollars away in bank accounts.
Sadly, I think that there is worse to come for the USA.
I remembering reading one of Ben Shapiro's books, where he pretty much wants everyone to live a life of sex until marriage, no gay marriage, no pornography, hates contraception, abortion is murder, we shouldn't tolerate what he deems to be societal immorality etc.
OT Premium bond holders can now type their holders' numbers into the NS website to be told how much they've won -- no need to log in. So much for security. It's the stupidest idea since someone asked Ed Miliband if he fancied a bacon roll.
How hard would it be for you to find out your partner's number?
Hint: browsers will auto-fill it anyway.
I receive mine online through their app which is very good
And anyone who knows or can find out your holder's number can get it from the website without needing to log into your account. That's the scary part.
Scary, why? It simply tells you on a read-only basis what the current month's prize is. It doesn't let you deal with the prize money, let alone the bonds themselves, and the chances of the prize being a life-changing sum are negligible. If you kept a record over time you could estimate the size of the holding, given that with average luck you should be getting, on average, £25 per month per £29,000 invested. Exciting stuff.
The site tells me which prizes *you* have won. If that is not scary, please post here how much is in your bank account. After all, we won't be able to spend it, and we promise not to use the information to decide whether to blackmail, defraud or divorce you.
No, it tells you what I've won this month, which, as I've already said, is £50. Blackmail away. It's not that there could never be any circumstances ever where the problem you have identified might be a problem, but it isn't likely. You still need my holder number which I imagine is written down in, and only in, the same place as my full login details, so if you knew the one you'd know the other anyway.
When the TalkTalk hack became public, I phoned my bank and asked if I was at risk given that bank account details had apparently been stolen. They answered: "with those details they could possibly transfer money into your account."
Could you imagine if Corbyn stepped down after today's results and Tom Watson or Starmer took over for the election? I think we would see just how flakey the Tories lead actually is.
It's not going to happen of course.......
Could Labour fill a vacancy that quickly?
If not then they go into an election with a deputy leader and no real indication of who will take over afterwards. I can't see how that improves their prospects.
Indeed. And up until now, unless they've openly disavowed him like woodcock, they have implicitly been saying they want him to prime minister. Junking him now is too late, it's not credible and the Tories would hit them just as hard. They have to wait it once more.
It's not too late....it would completely change the momentum of the election into something completely unpredictable. It would have to be a coronation for Starmer or Watson; Starmer by virtue that he is leading Brexit/ a two year timetable with a backhand deal that the 5% change gets passed through the NEC. It is the only way IMO to avoid a terrible, acrimonious, destructive battle for the heart of the party after a Corbyn landslide defeat.
That battle has to happen. And if the far left wins again, there will have to be a Labour split.
If the results tonight are truly terrible the putsch could start tomorrow.
The left will never be so powerful in the Labour Party as they are today. If they have any sense of strategy they need to do something with it rather than just lead the party into a massacre and lose their hand completely.
Could you imagine if Corbyn stepped down after today's results and Tom Watson or Starmer took over for the election? I think we would see just how flakey the Tories lead actually is.
It's not going to happen of course.......
Could Labour fill a vacancy that quickly?
If not then they go into an election with a deputy leader and no real indication of who will take over afterwards. I can't see how that improves their prospects.
Indeed. And up until now, unless they've openly disavowed him like woodcock, they have implicitly been saying they want him to prime minister. Junking him now is too late, it's not credible and the Tories would hit them just as hard. They have to wait it once more.
It's not too late....it would completely change the momentum of the election into something completely unpredictable. It would have to be a coronation for Starmer or Watson; Starmer by virtue that he is leading Brexit/ a two year timetable with a backhand deal that the 5% change gets passed through the NEC. It is the only way IMO to avoid a terrible, acrimonious, battle for the heart of the party after a Corbyn landslide defeat.
But Starmer is, implicitly or explicitly, at the moment saying 'vote for Corbyn for PM', so even if a coronation the Tory argument that a vote for Labour is for Corbyn style policies works, with the added chaos of a sudden change in leader which would not be universally accepted by members even if Corbyn said it was of his volition - there would be disruption and infighting, even more chaos for the Tories topoint to.
Give Corbyn's had an ok start, it might even make things worse, and surely not that much better.
If Corbyn stands down now, the new leader will only be interim. I guess "Vote Labour, if we win there will be another new PM in the autumn" might be more appealing than "Vote Labour for Jeremy Corbyn to be PM", but that's not saying too much.
"Vote Labour for a blank space to be filled in by the guys who elected Corbyn the last two times". Not that much more appealing.
Well -it worked for Australian Labor with Bob Hawke in early 1983!
Yep, Corbynista tend to stay behind the keyboard, which is why moderates tend to win when the votes require people to be in attendance - see CLP candidate nominations, regional executive appointments etc. It's a reason why there is a very good chance the McDonnell amendment will not be passed at conference in the autumn.
The new healthcare legislation in the US is going to put premiums up massively for millions of Americans and deprive many of them of coverage. The Republicans will now focus on voter suppression to ensure that those affected do not get a chance to kick them out.
I can well believe that the Marmalade Monster's administration would do this. It seems that if you are not a well-heeled, WASP then the current administration see you as a cost, an inconvenience or an obstacle to stacking dollars away in bank accounts.
Sadly, I think that there is worse to come for the USA.
I remembering reading one of Ben Shapiro's books, where he pretty much wants everyone to live a life of sex until marriage, no gay marriage, no pornography, hates contraception, abortion is murder, we shouldn't tolerate what he deems to be societal immorality etc.
I can well believe that the Marmalade Monster's administration would do this. It seems that if you are not a well-heeled, WASP then the current administration see you as a cost, an inconvenience or an obstacle to stacking dollars away in bank accounts.
Sadly, I think that there is worse to come for the USA.
I remembering reading one of Ben Shapiro's books, where he pretty much wants everyone to live a life of sex until marriage, no gay marriage, no pornography, hates contraception, abortion is murder, we shouldn't tolerate what he deems to be societal immorality etc.
Try the Family Research Council which is very influential in Republican circles. A senior fellow, Ken Blackwell, has been appointed to lead Trump's domestic policy agenda
Could you imagine if Corbyn stepped down after today's results and Tom Watson or Starmer took over for the election? I think we would see just how flakey the Tories lead actually is.
It's not going to happen of course.......
Could Labour fill a vacancy that quickly?
If not then they go into an election with a deputy leader and no real indication of who will take over afterwards. I can't see how that improves their prospects.
Indeed. And up until now, unless they've openly disavowed him like woodcock, they have implicitly been saying they want him to prime minister. Junking him now is too late, it's not credible and the Tories would hit them just as hard. They have to wait it once more.
It's not too late....it would completely change the momentum of the election into something completely unpredictable. It would have to be a coronation for Starmer or Watson; Starmer by virtue that he is leading Brexit/ a two year timetable with a backhand deal that the 5% change gets passed through the NEC. It is the only way IMO to avoid a terrible, acrimonious, destructive battle for the heart of the party after a Corbyn landslide defeat.
That battle has to happen. And if the far left wins again, there will have to be a Labour split.
If the results tonight are truly terrible the putsch could start tomorrow.
The left will never be so powerful in the Labour Party as they are today. If they have any sense of strategy they need to do something with it rather than just lead the party into a massacre and lose their hand completely.
The left has no sense of anything except itself. The key to the next leadership election is whether Jon Lansmann can use his database to such devastating effect again and what voting rules the NEC decides to put in place. I suspect that post-election at least one nominally Corbyn-supporting union (Unison) is going to move into the anti column.
I can well believe that the Marmalade Monster's administration would do this. It seems that if you are not a well-heeled, WASP then the current administration see you as a cost, an inconvenience or an obstacle to stacking dollars away in bank accounts.
Sadly, I think that there is worse to come for the USA.
I remembering reading one of Ben Shapiro's books, where he pretty much wants everyone to live a life of sex until marriage, no gay marriage, no pornography, hates contraception, abortion is murder, we shouldn't tolerate what he deems to be societal immorality etc.
This, as far as I can tell, is a bona fide Christian (USA Baptist) website:
I can well believe that the Marmalade Monster's administration would do this. It seems that if you are not a well-heeled, WASP then the current administration see you as a cost, an inconvenience or an obstacle to stacking dollars away in bank accounts.
Sadly, I think that there is worse to come for the USA.
I remembering reading one of Ben Shapiro's books, where he pretty much wants everyone to live a life of sex until marriage, no gay marriage, no pornography, hates contraception, abortion is murder, we shouldn't tolerate what he deems to be societal immorality etc.
"...a life of sex until marriage..."
I'm sure a lot of married men can relate to that.
Reminds me of a cartoon I saw once. Bride and groom with thought bubbles coming out of each of their heads.
His: "I just have to say 'I do' and I can have sex whenever I want."
Hers: "I just have to say 'I do' and I never have to have sex again"
I can well believe that the Marmalade Monster's administration would do this. It seems that if you are not a well-heeled, WASP then the current administration see you as a cost, an inconvenience or an obstacle to stacking dollars away in bank accounts.
Sadly, I think that there is worse to come for the USA.
I remembering reading one of Ben Shapiro's books, where he pretty much wants everyone to live a life of sex until marriage, no gay marriage, no pornography, hates contraception, abortion is murder, we shouldn't tolerate what he deems to be societal immorality etc.
I can well believe that the Marmalade Monster's administration would do this. It seems that if you are not a well-heeled, WASP then the current administration see you as a cost, an inconvenience or an obstacle to stacking dollars away in bank accounts.
Sadly, I think that there is worse to come for the USA.
I remembering reading one of Ben Shapiro's books, where he pretty much wants everyone to live a life of sex until marriage, no gay marriage, no pornography, hates contraception, abortion is murder, we shouldn't tolerate what he deems to be societal immorality etc.
This, as far as I can tell, is a bona fide Christian (USA Baptist) website:
OT Premium bond holders can now type their holders' numbers into the NS website to be told how much they've won -- no need to log in. So much for security. It's the stupidest idea since someone asked Ed Miliband if he fancied a bacon roll.
How hard would it be for you to find out your partner's number?
Hint: browsers will auto-fill it anyway.
I receive mine online through their app which is very good
And anyone who knows or can find out your holder's number can get it from the website without needing to log into your account. That's the scary part.
Scary, why? It simply tells you on a read-only basis what the current month's prize is. It doesn't let you deal with the prize money, let alone the bonds themselves, and the chances of the prize being a life-changing sum are negligible. If you kept a record over time you could estimate the size of the holding, given that with average luck you should be getting, on average, £25 per month per £29,000 invested. Exciting stuff.
The site tells me which prizes *you* have won. If that is not scary, please post here how much is in your bank account. After all, we won't be able to spend it, and we promise not to use the information to decide whether to blackmail, defraud or divorce you.
No, it tells you what I've won this month, which, as I've already said, is £50. Blackmail away. It's not that there could never be any circumstances ever where the problem you have identified might be a problem, but it isn't likely. You still need my holder number which I imagine is written down in, and only in, the same place as my full login details, so if you knew the one you'd know the other anyway.
£50 is neither here nor there, you are right. Suppose it said £50,000. And yes, I do need your holder's number but if I were living with you, the browser on the family PC would tell me. As it would if you used a public or work computer.
Could you imagine if Corbyn stepped down after today's results and Tom Watson or Starmer took over for the election? I think we would see just how flakey the Tories lead actually is.
It's not going to happen of course.......
Could Labour fill a vacancy that quickly?
If not then they go into an election with a deputy leader and no real indication of who will take over afterwards. I can't see how that improves their prospects.
Indeed. And up until now, unless they've openly disavowed him like woodcock, they have implicitly been saying they want him to prime minister. Junking him now is too late, it's not credible and the Tories would hit them just as hard. They have to wait it once more.
It's not too late....it would completely change the momentum of the election into something completely unpredictable. It would have to be a coronation for Starmer or Watson; Starmer by virtue that he is leading Brexit/ a two year timetable with a backhand deal that the 5% change gets passed through the NEC. It is the only way IMO to avoid a terrible, acrimonious, destructive battle for the heart of the party after a Corbyn landslide defeat.
That battle has to happen. And if the far left wins again, there will have to be a Labour split.
If the results tonight are truly terrible the putsch could start tomorrow.
The left will never be so powerful in the Labour Party as they are today. If they have any sense of strategy they need to do something with it rather than just lead the party into a massacre and lose their hand completely.
Labourites frothing about this dream is hilarious. They've tried this before. There is no procedure that makes it happen. Until the rump of the Labour Party find their balls and realise the brand is as dead as the leadership is stubborn, they'll not move on.
OT Premium bond holders can now type their holders' numbers into the NS website to be told how much they've won -- no need to log in. So much for security. It's the stupidest idea since someone asked Ed Miliband if he fancied a bacon roll.
How hard would it be for you to find out your partner's number?
Hint: browsers will auto-fill it anyway.
I receive mine online through their app which is very good
And anyone who knows or can find out your holder's number can get it from the website without needing to log into your account. That's the scary part.
Scary, why? It simply tells you on a read-only basis what the current month's prize is. It doesn't let you deal with the prize money, let alone the bonds themselves, and the chances of the prize being a life-changing sum are negligible. If you kept a record over time you could estimate the size of the holding, given that with average luck you should be getting, on average, £25 per month per £29,000 invested. Exciting stuff.
The site tells me which prizes *you* have won. If that is not scary, please post here how much is in your bank account. After all, we won't be able to spend it, and we promise not to use the information to decide whether to blackmail, defraud or divorce you.
No, it tells you what I've won this month, which, as I've already said, is £50. Blackmail away. It's not that there could never be any circumstances ever where the problem you have identified might be a problem, but it isn't likely. You still need my holder number which I imagine is written down in, and only in, the same place as my full login details, so if you knew the one you'd know the other anyway.
£50 is neither here nor there, you are right. Suppose it said £50,000. And yes, I do need your holder's number but if I were living with you, the browser on the family PC would tell me. As it would if you used a public or work computer.
I genuinely feel you're looking for a problem where none exists except in a wholly theoretical sense.
I can well believe that the Marmalade Monster's administration would do this. It seems that if you are not a well-heeled, WASP then the current administration see you as a cost, an inconvenience or an obstacle to stacking dollars away in bank accounts.
Sadly, I think that there is worse to come for the USA.
I remembering reading one of Ben Shapiro's books, where he pretty much wants everyone to live a life of sex until marriage, no gay marriage, no pornography, hates contraception, abortion is murder, we shouldn't tolerate what he deems to be societal immorality etc.
"...a life of sex until marriage..."
I'm sure a lot of married men can relate to that.
Reminds me of a cartoon I saw once. Bride and groom with thought bubbles coming out of each of their heads.
His: "I just have to say 'I do' and I can have sex whenever I want."
Hers: "I just have to say 'I do' and I never have to have sex again"
Yep, Corbynista tend to stay behind the keyboard, which is why moderates tend to win when the votes require people to be in attendance - see CLP candidate nominations, regional executive appointments etc. It's a reason why there is a very good chance the McDonnell amendment will not be passed at conference in the autumn.
The new healthcare legislation in the US is going to put premiums up massively for millions of Americans and deprive many of them of coverage. The Republicans will now focus on voter suppression to ensure that those affected do not get a chance to kick them out.
That's the one saving grace for Labour.
24 million people according to original CBO score won't have health insurance....wow. And now with the amendment re pre-existing conditions....
Apparently, it's unlikely that the bill in its current form will pass the Senate. Seems as though Team Trump are just looking to say they 'passed' something. They don't actually care what's in it, they just want to say they passed it. How sad.
In regard to voter suppression, the worst affected will be Trump country - older, white, working-class voters voted for Trump big time, and a lot of them are on Obamacare. Presumably, they believed Trump's promises in regard to pre-existing conditions during the election. So I wonder how they'd manage to stop Trump's own base from voting, as it won't just be minorities who get badly affected from this legislation. Increasingly, polls are showing that more Americans are open to single payer. I wonder if this legislation will shift the healthcare debate in the US more in that direction.
@Beverley_C Yeah, I'm not surprised by the content of that link. Pro-life when it's fetus, or in cases of euthanasia - Republicans embrace a very narrow definition of 'pro-life'. How this healthcare bill is 'pro-life' only God knows.
@Ishmael_Z The Westboro Bapist Church. Awful. Too many of those types define Christianity by how much hate they can spread. I think Louis Theroux did a documentary on them.
Comments
The position of some of the Labour moderates is ludicrous.
I have been wondering how many of the people who refused to work in Mr Corbyn's shadow cabinet would further refuse to work in PM Corbyn's Cabinet.
I did argue that the PLP (and I said this quite early in Corbyn's misrule) either had to nominate one of their own number as a Commons leader and take whipping lead from him/her, or split.
If Corbyn wins a third leadership contest, assuming things go predictably in the election, then the PLP will have wasted some time and made their job a lot harder.
(Also - Flame? Prophesy? Really? Have you started dating Vampire LARPers?)
At the moment the left are holding a fair few cards with Corbyn as leader. When they lose disastrously with Corbyn as leader and the moderates wrestle back control as they surely will after a protracted bloody battle in the summer they will also lose any kind off leverage over the party.
If Corbyn walks now, the left can extract a high price for his act of self sacrifice.
Let's suppose a best-case scenario for Labour, where Corbyn stands down voluntarily. Frankly, I think the chances of that are about 50/1 at best but that's beside the point. Presumably, Watson takes over. So far, so smooth.
But what then? On what manifesto does he run? Who writes it and on what authority (the leader not having full power in that regard)? What happens to the Shadow Cabinet? Does Watson keep McDonnell and Abbott in place? If so, won't the Tories just portray it as more of the same? If not, shadow ministers will go into interviews with virtually no preparation.
And what of the membership? Will the ones who voted Corbyn in twice accept what would amount to a coup if there was any deviation from Corbyn's policies? Constituency campaigns up and down the country would be thrown into chaos.
Then there's what happens next. Watson could lead Labour for up to 18 months (IIRC) without an election but there *would be* a leadership election. Particularly if the 5% rule or similar was introduced, wouldn't that put the left's candidate in pole position? Again, isn't that just writing the Tory script for them? John McDonnell for PM? (There's a good chance it wouldn't be him but I doubt he'd rule himself out and that'd be enough).
Finally, there'd be some kind of stab-in-the-back / if-only myth. If Corbyn doesn't lead Labour into the election, the left would always cherish the dream of the Stolen Victory.
No, events are too far gone. The risks and costs of replacing Corbyn are now greater than those of keeping him.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-39802776
If the hard left win, then I'm worried about British democracy. This situation where we have no functioning opposition is absolutely ridiculous.
Meanwhile, I can't actually believe this: http://nymag.com/thecut/2017/05/under-new-healthcare-bill-rape-is-a-pre-existing-condition.html
Small LD gains = "stopped the bleeding at Parliamentary level, and now recovering"
Decent Tory majority (say about 60-80) = "Much more comfortable than the current position. More wiggle room for the PM"
Labour with much fewer losses than expected (and vote share holding up) = "Much better base to recover from once the grown-ups recover the party / proof that socialism can attract votes ***"
UKIP vote very small = "practically everybody else happy"
SNP = "Same level of dominance, so reassured"
*** delete according to your preference
http://www.lci.fr/elections/en-marche-vive-la-france-barack-obama-annonce-dans-une-video-son-soutien-a-emmanuel-macron-2050909.html
Your Ego is certainly planet-sized anyway.
Sadly, I think that there is worse to come for the USA.
Elizabeth Windsor @Queen_UK
Prince Philip, paper five pound notes and the Labour Party have all decided to retire from public life. #buckinghampalace
I remembering reading one of Ben Shapiro's books, where he pretty much wants everyone to live a life of sex until marriage, no gay marriage, no pornography, hates contraception, abortion is murder, we shouldn't tolerate what he deems to be societal immorality etc.
The left will never be so powerful in the Labour Party as they are today. If they have any sense of strategy they need to do something with it rather than just lead the party into a massacre and lose their hand completely.
The new healthcare legislation in the US is going to put premiums up massively for millions of Americans and deprive many of them of coverage. The Republicans will now focus on voter suppression to ensure that those affected do not get a chance to kick them out.
Worth noting Athens lost the war, and hubris was largely to blame.
I'm sure a lot of married men can relate to that.
http://www.frc.org/family-structure
http://www.godhatesfags.com/
His: "I just have to say 'I do' and I can have sex whenever I want."
Hers: "I just have to say 'I do' and I never have to have sex again"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westboro_Baptist_Church
Obama supported Remain; Brexit had Putin, Le Pen, Trump and of course Farage.
New Thread
ALVY'S THERAPIST: How often do you sleep together?
ANNIE'S THERAPIST: Do you have sex often?
ALVY: Hardly ever. Maybe three times a week.
ANNIE: Constantly. I'd say three times a week.
24 million people according to original CBO score won't have health insurance....wow. And now with the amendment re pre-existing conditions....
Apparently, it's unlikely that the bill in its current form will pass the Senate. Seems as though Team Trump are just looking to say they 'passed' something. They don't actually care what's in it, they just want to say they passed it. How sad.
In regard to voter suppression, the worst affected will be Trump country - older, white, working-class voters voted for Trump big time, and a lot of them are on Obamacare. Presumably, they believed Trump's promises in regard to pre-existing conditions during the election. So I wonder how they'd manage to stop Trump's own base from voting, as it won't just be minorities who get badly affected from this legislation. Increasingly, polls are showing that more Americans are open to single payer. I wonder if this legislation will shift the healthcare debate in the US more in that direction.
@Beverley_C Yeah, I'm not surprised by the content of that link. Pro-life when it's fetus, or in cases of euthanasia - Republicans embrace a very narrow definition of 'pro-life'. How this healthcare bill is 'pro-life' only God knows.
@Ishmael_Z The Westboro Bapist Church. Awful. Too many of those types define Christianity by how much hate they can spread. I think Louis Theroux did a documentary on them.