Watson isn't a Blairite. Nor is Miliband or indeed Cooper. But I suppose in the strange parallel universe inhabited by the Jezaster's followers Brownites and Blairites were the equivalent of two follically challenged men squabbling over a comb.
As an aside, how bloody awful are things getting when putting a rude, lazy, stupid, dishonest bully like Watson on the airwaves could conceivably improve them?
Cooper is not a big hitter. She is a failed ex minister for HIPS (a disaster) who gets a bit shouty from time to time.
If she is to be described as a "big hitter", then Labour really are in deep shit.
Sadly, there is very little talent in the Labour party.
In fact, the talent across the political spectrum is limited these days. Is there a reason for this? Are talented people just giving politics a miss these days?
I remember having thus discussion with Alastair Meeks at one time. I have once been asked to stand in an unwinnable seat in order to build a profile to win a seat in the future. I decided against it because I didn't want or need the hassle of it, not to mention the lifetime pay cut it comes with compared to my current career (then career trajectory). The other main reason is that to get anywhere within the party, one must climb the greasy pole and eventually the suit becomes the man. I think that was Alastair's main objection to running for a seat.
Our politics is too poorly paid and too tightly controlled by a few rich donors/unions to put too many with any talent and common sense off going into it.
The other route of becoming a councillor is completely off putting, I have no interest in who collects the bins and how often.
Serious question. What device is used to signal a Scottish Labour Surge?
The mating call of a Giant Dodo
You calling to your great leader Scott
Morning Malc - My predictions in the North East of a conservative revival was genuinely based on my knowledge of the fishing communities and I am sure you will have the courtesy to accept that.
However, the battle between the SNP and the conservatives is for the future of the Union and it does look as if Nicola may have been premature in her drive for indy2 but I do think Salmond overcame her instinct and pressured her into the move she made.
I am not suggesting that Ruth Davidson is about to become FM anytime soon but at last there is a real opposition to Nicola for the first time in a long time
Morning G, looks like all the riff raff and dodgy organisations are coalesing around the Tories. Not a pretty sight to be sure. Will end in tears.
Mr. Jim, that's true. Reinforcing existing concerns is a different kettle of monkeys to giving time for new ideas to sink in.
In writing, I've heard it said you should mention something (a plague symptom, for example) three times before showing it, otherwise people might think it's a bit left field.
Watson isn't a Blairite. Nor is Miliband or indeed Cooper. But I suppose in the strange parallel universe inhabited by the Jezaster's followers Brownites and Blairites were the equivalent of two follically challenged men squabbling over a comb.
As an aside, how bloody awful are things getting when putting a rude, lazy, stupid, dishonest bully like Watson on the airwaves could conceivably improve them?
Cooper is not a big hitter. She is a failed ex minister for HIPS (a disaster) who gets a bit shouty from time to time.
If she is to be described as a "big hitter", then Labour really are in deep shit.
Cooper or anyone else only has to be a match for the opposition. When you look at the deep mediocrity - at best - of the current cabinet it's clear that Labour would have no problem on that front if there was a full team to choose from.
So what is going wrong that both Labour and the Conservatives fail to attract the best and brightest into politics at that level? Were they really so much better in the days of our youth, or are we (and I do agree with you on this) wearing rose tinted spectacles for the past?
Politics is too managed and too adversarial. It's also full-time way before you get to be an MP and there are an awful lot of folk to brown-nose along the way. Once elected, your chances of making much difference to anything are close to zero. That's not a great package to put in front of people.
And the pay is pathetic compared to what really bright people can earn (says the teacher!) and the job security is non-existent. Plus you have to live in two different places, which may be 800 miles apart.
Cameron's still got the knack: "David Cameron showed his face at the Oval last week for a fundraising dinner for a new cricket stadium in Rwanda. With guests still reeling from the news that he spent £25,000 on a garden shed, the forgotten man of Tory politics thanked them for “getting me out of my shepherd hut”. Cameron risked the wrath of his successor by explaining the purchase thus: “I know Theresa talks about strong and stable leadership but I only heard the first part about getting a strong stable.”" S.T.
That's a good one. He'll never be short of bookings as a Speaker if ever he's in need of a few quid. Much more room for risqué jokes when out of active politics too.
On topic, we've had one of those wrap-arounds this week in the Wakefield Express.
In other reports from the front line, I did my first serious canvass session of the election yesterday. Without coming across a bit Nick, it was very positive indeed. Not just the expected Ukip-on switchers but a sizeable number of direct Lab-Con as well.
Watson isn't a Blairite. Nor is Miliband or indeed Cooper. But I suppose in the strange parallel universe inhabited by the Jezaster's followers Brownites and Blairites were the equivalent of two follically challenged men squabbling over a comb.
As an aside, how bloody awful are things getting when putting a rude, lazy, stupid, dishonest bully like Watson on the airwaves could conceivably improve them?
Cooper is not a big hitter. She is a failed ex minister for HIPS (a disaster) who gets a bit shouty from time to time.
If she is to be described as a "big hitter", then Labour really are in deep shit.
Cooper or anyone else only has to be a match for the opposition. When you look at the deep mediocrity - at best - of the current cabinet it's clear that Labour would have no problem on that front if there was a full team to choose from.
I cannot help but point in the direction of Jon Ashworth, who I first didn't like*. He has some proper organising skills, and has recently become a lot more comfortable in his media appearances. He has a reasonable backstory, and is fairly Brownite, yet willing to serve in the shadow cabinet. He will get a lot of Union support too.
* While backing him at long odds (still good on BF) helps, he has particularly campaigned on a few issues concerning alcoholism and addiction. He has grown on me, and he is a fresh face rather than a New Labour retread.
Ashworth for Labour leader!
Bragging rights for those who tipped him at 80/1 I mean, the man who can reunite Labour and stick it to the Tories!
I cannot help but point in the direction of Jon Ashworth, who I first didn't like*. He has some proper organising skills, and has recently become a lot more comfortable in his media appearances. He has a reasonable backstory, and is fairly Brownite, yet willing to serve in the shadow cabinet. He will get a lot of Union support too.
* While backing him at long odds (still good on BF) helps, he has particularly campaigned on a few issues concerning alcoholism and addiction. He has grown on me, and he is a fresh face rather than a New Labour retread.
Good Morning. I see a few of the usual suspects are up and about already.
Are there any Tory seats vulnerable to the Lib Dem ? What are the current odds on Twickenham, Kingston & Surbiton , Brighton Kemptown ?
We're stumbling into a disaster here. Corbyn and Farron are the least impressive leaders of their respective parties in my lifetime. Though I can't say the same of May I think she'll be as dangerous as Thatcher with a large majority.
I can't accept that there is no mechanism short of a bus that can get rid of at least one of them so they can be replaced by someone with voter appeal.
That's a bit harsh on Farron, who seems an ok enough chap, if not exactly enough of a slick performer to transform the party's fortunes. As I see it, the Lib Dems have several problems, none of which can be laid at his door but which only a leader of immense cunning and skill could rectify.
1. Large numbers of the seats they unexpectedly lost in 2015, so what should be the lowest hanging fruit, are in the west country, which has its own political dynamic and is more pro-leave. I'd imagine there will be a Lib Dem surge in places like Twickenham and Sutton, but in Cornwall and Somerset, where the Lib Dems used to benefit from an anti-establishment vote, some of those voters will have gone Tory to express their desire for Brexit. Not a lot Farron can do about this
2. One of the few groups Corbyn does relatively well with is the studenty left, who are also still angry about fees. Thus even though Labour are doing appallingly, ultimately there's probably a churn which benefits the Tories - working and middle class voters out, young radical voters who went Lib Dem in 2010 in, hampering the Lib Dems.
3. The 2015 wipeout was so severe that they struggle to be the plausible 'opposition'. There isn't a lot you can do with 9 MPs and pro-EU Labour MPs are able to make the argument that even if you think Corbyn's a waste of space you need to vote for them to provide opposition, not the Lib Dem who may have even fallen to third.
The Lib Dems were never going to have a 2010esque Cleggasm - they need to be trying to get to 15 to 20 MPs and close the gap elsewhere so their in a strong enough position to challenge Labour should Corbyn and his acolytes continue to stink out the party, and/or Brexit prove very bad.
Cameron's still got the knack: "David Cameron showed his face at the Oval last week for a fundraising dinner for a new cricket stadium in Rwanda. With guests still reeling from the news that he spent £25,000 on a garden shed, the forgotten man of Tory politics thanked them for “getting me out of my shepherd hut”. Cameron risked the wrath of his successor by explaining the purchase thus: “I know Theresa talks about strong and stable leadership but I only heard the first part about getting a strong stable.”" S.T.
I really miss his wit. Politicians, on the whole, are absolutely terrible at running anything including countries. Keeping us amused is some compensation. Ideally not in a Diane Abbott kind of way either, that is too depressing.
Cameron's still got the knack: "David Cameron showed his face at the Oval last week for a fundraising dinner for a new cricket stadium in Rwanda. With guests still reeling from the news that he spent £25,000 on a garden shed, the forgotten man of Tory politics thanked them for “getting me out of my shepherd hut”. Cameron risked the wrath of his successor by explaining the purchase thus: “I know Theresa talks about strong and stable leadership but I only heard the first part about getting a strong stable.”" S.T.
Now he's resigned it doesn't matter if he makes an ass of himself?
Watson isn't a Blairite. Nor is Miliband or indeed Cooper. But I suppose in the strange parallel universe inhabited by the Jezaster's followers Brownites and Blairites were the equivalent of two follically challenged men squabbling over a comb.
As an aside, how bloody awful are things getting when putting a rude, lazy, stupid, dishonest bully like Watson on the airwaves could conceivably improve them?
Cooper is not a big hitter. She is a failed ex minister for HIPS (a disaster) who gets a bit shouty from time to time.
If she is to be described as a "big hitter", then Labour really are in deep shit.
Cooper or anyone else only has to be a match for the opposition. When you look at the deep mediocrity - at best - of the current cabinet it's clear that Labour would have no problem on that front if there was a full team to choose from.
So what is going wrong that both Labour and the Conservatives fail to attract the best and brightest into politics at that level? Were they really so much better in the days of our youth, or are we (and I do agree with you on this) wearing rose tinted spectacles for the past?
Politics is too managed and too adversarial. It's also full-time way before you get to be an MP and there are an awful lot of folk to brown-nose along the way. Once elected, your chances of making much difference to anything are close to zero. That's not a great package to put in front of people.
And the pay is pathetic compared to what really bright people can earn (says the teacher!) and the job security is non-existent. Plus you have to live in two different places, which may be 800 miles apart.
Lol, unlike how there have been four answers to the question and they are all broadly the same (poorly paid, too much arse kissing). I'm not sure if that's funny or lamentable.
As was said about Tsar Nicholas II, he’s not fit to run a village post office – just imagine Diane Abbott doing the figures.
I think that is very unfair.
Nicholas may have been a dreadful Tsar who was as Witte said unfit to run a post office, but he was a good husband and devoted father.
You can't even say that about Jeremy Corbyn.
How do you know ? There is no need for personal comments like that. You do not like him politically, fair enough. He has not personally harmed you as far as we are aware.
Care to review some of your own personal comments about Theresa May?
On topic, we've had one of those wrap-arounds this week in the Wakefield Express.
In other reports from the front line, I did my first serious canvass session of the election yesterday. Without coming across a bit Nick, it was very positive indeed. Not just the expected Ukip-on switchers but a sizeable number of direct Lab-Con as well.
I have to say, if the Tories fail to take Wakefield from Mary Creagh they will have had a pretty poor night.
I decided against it because I didn't want or need the hassle of it, not to mention the lifetime pay cut it comes with compared to my current career (then career trajectory).
Watson isn't a Blairite. Nor is Miliband or indeed Cooper. But I suppose in the strange parallel universe inhabited by the Jezaster's followers Brownites and Blairites were the equivalent of two follically challenged men squabbling over a comb.
As an aside, how bloody awful are things getting when putting a rude, lazy, stupid, dishonest bully like Watson on the airwaves could conceivably improve them?
Cooper is not a big hitter. She is a failed ex minister for HIPS (a disaster) who gets a bit shouty from time to time.
If she is to be described as a "big hitter", then Labour really are in deep shit.
Cooper or anyone else only has to be a match for the opposition. When you look at the deep mediocrity - at best - of the current cabinet it's clear that Labour would have no problem on that front if there was a full team to choose from.
A match for the opposition? Cooper?. I know there will be infighting (there is now) !!! but I cannot see her being the answer. If she is , God help Labour.
I noticed some form of protest vote doing the rounds on Twitter yesterday petitioning the Gazette's publishers not to take the Tory wrap around.
Edit: Forget the first bit. I misunderstood daodao.
Was that the paper that carried a wrap-round ad from Labour in the by-election which said (and I paraphrase a bit) vote Labour or the baby gets it?
Different local paper, but the right idea. For some reason Labour think it's fine when they do it, but not for others. More likely is they can't afford it at general election scale.
How much would it cost to do it for a National paper?
That's a good question. Lots will be the answer. ISTR a full page inside ad in the Times runs to something like £15k, so a wraparound probably close to £50k if they'd take it.
Alternatively the national parties can just take advantage of the free publicity they get from the editorial and opinion team of their supportive newspapers.
"One cannot hope to bribe or twist Thank God! the British journalist. But seeing what the man will do Unbribed, there's no occasion to".
Problems for my girlfriend today trying to vote. Many train lines are closed going from Paris to suburbs for long weekend engineering works. Difficult to get to your suburb polling booth to vote. Luckily my girlfriends mother was going to vote 'blanc' (NDA supporter in R1) but will vote Macron in her place. She seems to know a lot of people who will vote blanc or abstain (in France voting blanc is counted separately to a 'spoiled' ballot) - even amongst her younger friends. wonder if high abstention may depress the Macron vote share slightly
Serious question. What device is used to signal a Scottish Labour Surge?
The mating call of a Giant Dodo
You calling to your great leader Scott
Morning Malc - My predictions in the North East of a conservative revival was genuinely based on my knowledge of the fishing communities and I am sure you will have the courtesy to accept that.
However, the battle between the SNP and the conservatives is for the future of the Union and it does look as if Nicola may have been premature in her drive for indy2 but I do think Salmond overcame her instinct and pressured her into the move she made.
I am not suggesting that Ruth Davidson is about to become FM anytime soon but at last there is a real opposition to Nicola for the first time in a long time
Morning G, looks like all the riff raff and dodgy organisations are coalesing around the Tories. Not a pretty sight to be sure. Will end in tears.
I am sure you are not calling the fisher folk 'riff raff
Watson isn't a Blairite. Nor is Miliband or indeed Cooper. But I suppose in the strange parallel universe inhabited by the Jezaster's followers Brownites and Blairites were the equivalent of two follically challenged men squabbling over a comb.
As an aside, how bloody awful are things getting when putting a rude, lazy, stupid, dishonest bully like Watson on the airwaves could conceivably improve them?
Cooper is not a big hitter. She is a failed ex minister for HIPS (a disaster) who gets a bit shouty from time to time.
If she is to be described as a "big hitter", then Labour really are in deep shit.
Sadly, there is very little talent in the Labour party.
In fact, the talent across the political spectrum is limited these days. Is there a reason for this? Are talented people just giving politics a miss these days?
I would say yes. Way too much risk and a very small chance of a reward compared to what is available in the private sector, or possibly even the public or third sector.
You could spend years pounding the pavement, kissing the right arses, carrying the bags of more important people, whilst earning less than you would as a junior manager at most blue chip companies, and then one day you have a slight slip of the keyboard on Twitter, and get torn apart by the keyboard activists and lambasted by the press, and your incipient career is over, if you are lucky with your family intact....
Even worse, you can spend years kissing arses, only to find out you were kissing the wrong arses.
As many in both main parties can attest over the past couple of years.
Watson isn't a Blairite. Nor is Miliband or indeed Cooper. But I suppose in the strange parallel universe inhabited by the Jezaster's followers Brownites and Blairites were the equivalent of two follically challenged men squabbling over a comb.
As an aside, how bloody awful are things getting when putting a rude, lazy, stupid, dishonest bully like Watson on the airwaves could conceivably improve them?
Cooper is not a big hitter. She is a failed ex minister for HIPS (a disaster) who gets a bit shouty from time to time.
If she is to be described as a "big hitter", then Labour really are in deep shit.
Cooper or anyone else only has to be a match for the opposition. When you look at the deep mediocrity - at best - of the current cabinet it's clear that Labour would have no problem on that front if there was a full team to choose from.
So what is going wrong that both Labour and the Conservatives fail to attract the best and brightest into politics at that level? Were they really so much better in the days of our youth, or are we (and I do agree with you on this) wearing rose tinted spectacles for the past?
Politics is too managed and too adversarial. It's also full-time way before you get to be an MP and there are an awful lot of folk to brown-nose along the way. Once elected, your chances of making much difference to anything are close to zero. That's not a great package to put in front of people.
And the pay is pathetic compared to what really bright people can earn (says the teacher!) and the job security is non-existent. Plus you have to live in two different places, which may be 800 miles apart.
Lol, unlike how there have been four answers to the question and they are all broadly the same (poorly paid, too much arse kissing). I'm not sure if that's funny or lamentable.
It's instructive to think we're all politics geeks on here from all over the country and abroad and a wide variety of backgrounds and professions. Yet there is precisely one person on the board who has ever been an MP (assuming 'Snowflake' doesn't read the threads any more) and about five or six I think who have actually been candidates or seriously considered it - just one this time in Tissue Price I think, plus Cicero who was a candidate a few years ago.
Either it's a sign we need to get out more or it's a sign that there's something wrong with our political system.
Watson isn't a Blairite. Nor is Miliband or indeed Cooper. But I suppose in the strange parallel universe inhabited by the Jezaster's followers Brownites and Blairites were the equivalent of two follically challenged men squabbling over a comb.
As an aside, how bloody awful are things getting when putting a rude, lazy, stupid, dishonest bully like Watson on the airwaves could conceivably improve them?
Cooper is not a big hitter. She is a failed ex minister for HIPS (a disaster) who gets a bit shouty from time to time.
If she is to be described as a "big hitter", then Labour really are in deep shit.
Cooper or anyone else only has to be a match for the opposition. When you look at the deep mediocrity - at best - of the current cabinet it's clear that Labour would have no problem on that front if there was a full team to choose from.
A match for the opposition? Cooper?. I know there will be infighting (there is now) !!! but I cannot see her being the answer. If she is , God help Labour.
I decided against it because I didn't want or need the hassle of it, not to mention the lifetime pay cut it comes with compared to my current career (then career trajectory).
This seems like the system functioning correctly.
But it leads to mediocrity in Parliament which is not what the intention is. In a country where top professionals can earn £300k+ the attraction of being an MP isn't there.
As was said about Tsar Nicholas II, he’s not fit to run a village post office – just imagine Diane Abbott doing the figures.
I think that is very unfair.
Nicholas may have been a dreadful Tsar who was as Witte said unfit to run a post office, but he was a good husband and devoted father.
You can't even say that about Jeremy Corbyn.
How do you know ? There is no need for personal comments like that. You do not like him politically, fair enough. He has not personally harmed you as far as we are aware.
I was thinking of the number of times he has been divorced (is it two or three?) plus his extra marital affairs, one of course with his current SHS. One of them was because he wanted to send his son to a failing school to make a political point.
If you're saying this shows him as a good husband and father, then I have to say I think you have a somewhat different view of a 'good' family man from mine.
That's not personal, just a statement of fact. I realise that speaking the truth about Corbyn will not make me popular with Labour diehards such as yourself.
Jezzas son Seb went to Cambridge, and is very close to him politically and socially.
I am not sure about his third son, but It does seem that he is a reasonably good father.
My understanding was that after their mother divorced him there was a frosty period before they re-established relations, because she sent them to grammar schools not comprehensives. But I do not know in detail (as surbiton rightly points out, I do not know the family personally) and given the disasters I see from broken families every day of the week I would be delighted to think I was wrong about that.
Jezzas relationship with the boys seems genuinely good. I think most divorces have a period of frostiness if not actual hostility immediately post break up, but many seem to become more civil with time. Brexit will be the same.
I don't particularly object to Jezzas politics, and I rather like his slightly other worldy hobbies of his allorment, jam making and manhole cover photography.
What I do object to is his ineffectual leadership, particularly over Brexit, and his tolerance of some very nasty acolytes, particularly Trots and Islamists. I am not bothered by the IRA, that is now history.
I decided against it because I didn't want or need the hassle of it, not to mention the lifetime pay cut it comes with compared to my current career (then career trajectory).
This seems like the system functioning correctly.
But it leads to mediocrity in Parliament which is not what the intention is. In a country where top professionals can earn £300k+ the attraction of being an MP isn't there.
I would see that as a feature not a bug. Parliament needs to represent the people. There is far too much representation of professionals already, including a half a dozen doctors.
Problems for my girlfriend today trying to vote. Many train lines are closed going from Paris to suburbs for long weekend engineering works. Difficult to get to your suburb polling booth to vote. Luckily my girlfriends mother was going to vote 'blanc' (NDA supporter in R1) but will vote Macron in her place. She seems to know a lot of people who will vote blanc or abstain (in France voting blanc is counted separately to a 'spoiled' ballot) - even amongst her younger friends. wonder if high abstention may depress the Macron vote share slightly
I caught some vox pops on R5 this morning from France and several were saying they could not bring themselves to vote for either of these candidates. Even if one was marginally less terrible than the other the view was that voting for that one gave them an endorsement that they did not deserve.
Macron may yet surprise us but I fear that the lack of quality and talent being attracted to politics in a time of twitter is by means just a UK phenomenon.
I decided against it because I didn't want or need the hassle of it, not to mention the lifetime pay cut it comes with compared to my current career (then career trajectory).
This seems like the system functioning correctly.
But it leads to mediocrity in Parliament which is not what the intention is. In a country where top professionals can earn £300k+ the attraction of being an MP isn't there.
Mediocrity or obsessives. Neither of which is healthy and neither of which is what the public wants, even if it's the natural consequence of their other demands and expectations.
Watson isn't a Blairite. Nor is Miliband or indeed Cooper. But I suppose in the strange parallel universe inhabited by the Jezaster's followers Brownites and Blairites were the equivalent of two follically challenged men squabbling over a comb.
As an aside, how bloody awful are things getting when putting a rude, lazy, stupid, dishonest bully like Watson on the airwaves could conceivably improve them?
Cooper is not a big hitter. She is a failed ex minister for HIPS (a disaster) who gets a bit shouty from time to time.
If she is to be described as a "big hitter", then Labour really are in deep shit.
Cooper or anyone else only has to be a match for the opposition. When you look at the deep mediocrity - at best - of the current cabinet it's clear that Labour would have no problem on that front if there was a full team to choose from.
So what is going wrong that both Labour and the Conservatives fail to attract the best and brightest into politics at that level? Were they really so much better in the days of our youth, or are we (and I do agree with you on this) wearing rose tinted spectacles for the past?
Politics is too managed and too adversarial. It's also full-time way before you get to be an MP and there are an awful lot of folk to brown-nose along the way. Once elected, your chances of making much difference to anything are close to zero. That's not a great package to put in front of people.
And the pay is pathetic compared to what really bright people can earn (says the teacher!) and the job security is non-existent. Plus you have to live in two different places, which may be 800 miles apart.
Lol, unlike how there have been four answers to the question and they are all broadly the same (poorly paid, too much arse kissing). I'm not sure if that's funny or lamentable.
I guess the answer is more people like Andy Street - people who have had their career and now want to give something back, although I do note that he got a PPE from Oxford many years ago!
Another answer is for the media not to get blown up over minor indescretions and faux-pas, but concentrate solely on corruption, nepotism and hypocrisy - fat chance of that happening.
I decided against it because I didn't want or need the hassle of it, not to mention the lifetime pay cut it comes with compared to my current career (then career trajectory).
This seems like the system functioning correctly.
But it leads to mediocrity in Parliament which is not what the intention is. In a country where top professionals can earn £300k+ the attraction of being an MP isn't there.
I would see that as a feature not a bug. Parliament needs to represent the people. There is far too much representation of professionals already, including a half a dozen doctors.
I agree.
In any case, MPs are not underpaid for the job that they do.
I decided against it because I didn't want or need the hassle of it, not to mention the lifetime pay cut it comes with compared to my current career (then career trajectory).
This seems like the system functioning correctly.
But it leads to mediocrity in Parliament which is not what the intention is. In a country where top professionals can earn £300k+ the attraction of being an MP isn't there.
I would see that as a feature not a bug. Parliament needs to represent the people. There is far too much representation of professionals already, including a half a dozen doctors.
Can't think of any teachers off-hand. Surely there must be some?
Watson isn't a Blairite. Nor is Miliband or indeed Cooper. ?
Cooper is not a big hitter. She is a failed ex minister for HIPS (a disaster) who gets a bit shouty from time to time.
If she is to be described as a "big hitter", then Labour really are in deep shit.
Cooper or anyone else only has to be a match for the opposition. When you look at the deep mediocrity - at best - of the current cabinet it's clear that Labour would have no problem on that front if there was a full team to choose from.
So what is going wrong that both Labour and the Conservatives fail to attract the best and brightest into politics at that level? Were they really so much better in the days of our youth, or are we (and I do agree with you on this) wearing rose tinted spectacles for the past?
Politics is too managed and too adversarial. It's also full-time way before you get to be an MP and there are an awful lot of folk to brown-nose along the way. Once elected, your chances of making much difference to anything are close to zero. That's not a great package to put in front of people.
And the pay is pathetic compared to what really bright people can earn (says the teacher!) and the job security is non-existent. Plus you have to live in two different places, which may be 800 miles apart.
Lol, unlike how there have been four answers to the question and they are all broadly the same (poorly paid, too much arse kissing). I'm not sure if that's funny or lamentable.
Also worth noting that the safe seat feature of our voting system hugely reduces the amount of effective competition built into the system. The LibDems do at least have the advantage that most of them have won their seats by hard campaigning over a number of years, which self-selects those with a bit of drive and ability. In the Labour and Tory backwoods, knowing the right people and serving enough time to get up the greasy pole can set you up with a job for life.
A big advantage of STV is that if you can see your MP isn't up to it or is taking things for granted, you can switch your vote to another candidate from the same party. Thus some of the power that currently sits with five party officials in a dark room transfers to the voters, which is surely a good thing?
I don't particularly object to Jezzas politics, and I rather like his slightly other worldy hobbies of his allorment, jam making and manhole cover photography.
Is that the most surreal euphemism since Bill Clinton or is that a real hobby?
I don't particularly object to Jezzas politics, and I rather like his slightly other worldy hobbies of his allorment, jam making and manhole cover photography.
Is that the most surreal euphemism since Bill Clinton or is that a real hobby?
On topic, we've had one of those wrap-arounds this week in the Wakefield Express.
In other reports from the front line, I did my first serious canvass session of the election yesterday. Without coming across a bit Nick, it was very positive indeed. Not just the expected Ukip-on switchers but a sizeable number of direct Lab-Con as well.
I have to say, if the Tories fail to take Wakefield from Mary Creagh they will have had a pretty poor night.
That's true. But as in all seats with small Lab majorities, the question is not just who wins but also by how much. I'm already sketching out a strategy for 2022.
How do you know ? There is no need for personal comments like that. You do not like him politically, fair enough. He has not personally harmed you as far as we are aware.
I was thinking of the number of times he has been divorced (is it two or three?) plus his extra marital affairs, one of course with his current SHS. One of them was because he wanted to send his son to a failing school to make a political point.
If you're saying this shows him as a good husband and father, then I have to say I think you have a somewhat different view of a 'good' family man from mine.
That's not personal, just a statement of fact. I realise that speaking the truth about Corbyn will not make me popular with Labour diehards such as yourself.
And on your final point, he is damaging me personally because he is smashing the Labour Party to pieces and leaving a poor government with no opposition. That damages all of us. A man of honour would have realised his unfitness and resigned long ago to let someone more competent pick up the pieces as best they could.
He is a loathsome person, an utter failure and has no redeeming features, being a genuine blight upon our democracy. Personal or not, whether you like it or not, that is the truth.
While I'm bored by your hysteria about Corbyn, you shouldn't be allowed to make stuff up. He's been divorced once, 18 years ago, though they remain on good terms. I don't know what you call an extra-marital affairs - he had an affair before he was married, like, uh, many of us (do you feel that politicians should be virgins when they marry, or everyone?), but I'm not aware of any during his marriages.
Unlike you, I know him personally and he's a gentle, polite and sincere man (also, I suspect, unlike you). The problems of Labour are part of a general problem of social democracy replicated across the West. I can see an argument that he's not Blair-level persuasive, and you're entitled to your view that someone else would do better. But I think you should stop lying about him.
I decided against it because I didn't want or need the hassle of it, not to mention the lifetime pay cut it comes with compared to my current career (then career trajectory).
This seems like the system functioning correctly.
But it leads to mediocrity in Parliament which is not what the intention is. In a country where top professionals can earn £300k+ the attraction of being an MP isn't there.
I would see that as a feature not a bug. Parliament needs to represent the people. There is far too much representation of professionals already, including a half a dozen doctors.
I agree.
In any case, MPs are not underpaid for the job that they do.
Ministers are ridiculously underpaid, however.
Especially when one takes into consideration the pay of local council executives.
On topic, we've had one of those wrap-arounds this week in the Wakefield Express.
In other reports from the front line, I did my first serious canvass session of the election yesterday. Without coming across a bit Nick, it was very positive indeed. Not just the expected Ukip-on switchers but a sizeable number of direct Lab-Con as well.
I have to say, if the Tories fail to take Wakefield from Mary Creagh they will have had a pretty poor night.
That's true. But as in all seats with small Lab majorities, the question is not just who wins but also by how much. I'm already sketching out a strategy for 2022.
A fair answer. I think pretty well both of my 'homes' - Staffordshire (where I live) and Gloucestershire (where I was born and my family still live) are going to be fairly safely Conservative all the way through by then. Stoke and Bristol may have some Labour holdouts, but technically they're in different counties now. So it seems unlikely my vote will make much difference going forward unless Labour change pretty radically.
I noticed some form of protest vote doing the rounds on Twitter yesterday petitioning the Gazette's publishers not to take the Tory wrap around.
Edit: Forget the first bit. I misunderstood daodao.
Was that the paper that carried a wrap-round ad from Labour in the by-election which said (and I paraphrase a bit) vote Labour or the baby gets it?
Different local paper, but the right idea. For some reason Labour think it's fine when they do it, but not for others. More likely is they can't afford it at general election scale.
I don't particularly object to Jezzas politics, and I rather like his slightly other worldy hobbies of his allorment, jam making and manhole cover photography.
Is that the most surreal euphemism since Bill Clinton or is that a real hobby?
It's a real hobby.
Good grief.
I am almost literally speechless.
On that bombshell, I shall go and inflate the organ (and that is not a euphemism of any sort). Have a good morning everyone.
Problems for my girlfriend today trying to vote. Many train lines are closed going from Paris to suburbs for long weekend engineering works. Difficult to get to your suburb polling booth to vote. Luckily my girlfriends mother was going to vote 'blanc' (NDA supporter in R1) but will vote Macron in her place. She seems to know a lot of people who will vote blanc or abstain (in France voting blanc is counted separately to a 'spoiled' ballot) - even amongst her younger friends. wonder if high abstention may depress the Macron vote share slightly
A friend of ours (London based French national) is having to go to Wembley to vote - which seems a bit odd. South Kensington would be the obvious place.
I don't particularly object to Jezzas politics, and I rather like his slightly other worldy hobbies of his allorment, jam making and manhole cover photography.
Is that the most surreal euphemism since Bill Clinton or is that a real hobby?
When he first mentioned his love of manhole covers, my mind went to the fact female cricketers call their different shaped boxes, manhole covers.
Niall Ferguson on the end of the left's chapter in history (Sunday Times) "The old coalition between progressive elites and the proletariat is broken. The former are too liberal on immigration, too in love with multiculturalism. The latter loathe both. As David Goodhart shrewdly observed 13 years ago, a redistributive welfare state is viable only in an ethnically homogeneous society. He was vilified for saying it. He has been vindicated by events."
Which is doubly ironic as a non-redistributive state leads to the ur-Darwinistic, neoliberal, war of all-against-all in which migrants tend to do better 'cos they've less to lose.
I don't particularly object to Jezzas politics, and I rather like his slightly other worldy hobbies of his allorment, jam making and manhole cover photography.
Is that the most surreal euphemism since Bill Clinton or is that a real hobby?
It's a real hobby.
Good grief.
I am almost literally speechless.
On that bombshell, I shall go and inflate the organ (and that is not a euphemism of any sort). Have a good morning everyone.
Not sure it's much different from us here obsessing over Dunny-on-the-wold by elections...
for Fox in Sox (having trouble responding to your post re not being bothered by the IRA..)
Corbyn's and his acolytes support for the IRA will be featured in this election as well as his support for other v nasty people, of that you can be sure. Will it resonate. Hell yes.(possibly not with the young, but they don't vote enough to matter) It will just reinforce voters views of the lack of suitability of any in the current leadership. (and the backup such as Milne)
Watson isn't a Blairite. Nor is Miliband or indeed Cooper. But I suppose in the strange parallel universe inhabited by the Jezaster's followers Brownites and Blairites were the equivalent of two follically challenged men squabbling over a comb.
As an aside, how bloody awful are things getting when putting a rude, lazy, stupid, dishonest bully like Watson on the airwaves could conceivably improve them?
Cooper is not a big hitter. She is a failed ex minister for HIPS (a disaster) who gets a bit shouty from time to time.
If she is to be described as a "big hitter", then Labour really are in deep shit.
Cooper or anyone else only has to be a match for the opposition. When you look at the deep mediocrity - at best - of the current cabinet it's clear that Labour would have no problem on that front if there was a full team to choose from.
A match for the opposition? Cooper?. I know there will be infighting (there is now) !!! but I cannot see her being the answer. If she is , God help Labour.
You fail to appreciate the implications if any Labour challenger takes on and is seen to beat Corbyn or whoever is the annointed Corbyn successor in waiting in a bruising battle. The gratitude of traditional Labour supporters will be so great that the successful challenger will be received as a prodigal son (or daughter). Infighting could be very cathartic for Labour for the winner is seen to turn back the tide of Momentum they will enjoy a political honeymoon.
And judging from her strong performance in opposition, Cooper has everything going for her. As things stand, Cooper as LOTO and Starmer as Shadow Chancellor (in a dull but effectively forensic John Smith/Alistair Darlingesque role) is probably Labour's best choice.
The problems of Labour are part of a general problem of social democracy replicated across the West. I can see an argument that he's not Blair-level persuasive
That bit made me laugh out loud! Do you do any standup?
The problems of Labour are part of a general problem of social democracy replicated across the West. I can see an argument that he's not Blair-level persuasive
That bit made me laugh out loud! Do you do any standup?
Tick tock? Sins of commission or sins of omission?
I think I've spotted the 51% figure tweeted by Yougov. Buried in The Sunday Times article on Selmayr: Agree with May that Brussels is trying to influence General Election 51% - Disagree 24%
Watson isn't a Blairite. Nor is Miliband or indeed Cooper. But I suppose in the strange parallel universe inhabited by the Jezaster's followers Brownites and Blairites were the equivalent of two follically challenged men squabbling over a comb.
Cooper is not a big hitter. She is a failed ex minister for HIPS (a disaster) who gets a bit shouty from time to time.
If she is to be described as a "big hitter", then Labour really are in deep shit.
Sadly, there is very little talent in the Labour party.
In fact, the talent across the political spectrum is limited these days. Is there a reason for this? Are talented people just giving politics a miss these days?
I remember having thus discussion with Alastair Meeks at one time. I have once been asked to stand in an unwinnable seat in order to build a profile to win a seat in the future. I decided against it because I didn't want or need the hassle of it, not to mention the lifetime pay cut it comes with compared to my current career (then career trajectory). The other main reason is that to get anywhere within the party, one must climb the greasy pole and eventually the suit becomes the man. I think that was Alastair's main objection to running for a seat.
Our politics is too poorly paid and too tightly controlled by a few rich donors/unions to put too many with any talent and common sense off going into it.
The other route of becoming a councillor is completely off putting, I have no interest in who collects the bins and how often.
Depends how you define success. It's not that hard to become an MP - I did it while living 1000 miles from the constituency (where I had zero contacts - I'd never visited or even heard of it before I applied), and I had been reasonably successful in private life by most standards (I gave up a £90K senior pharma management job in 1997 to do it). I had no support from unions or rich people or contacts: I just persuaded the members that I'd be a good candidate. I had to work at it - I'd applied to 17 other seats before - but if you aren't willing to work you definitely shouldn't be an MP.
If you need to be a Cabinet Minister or even PM to call yourself successful in politics, then I think it does help to have contacts. But for lots of us it's sufficient to be part of the team working for what we believe would be a better society.
I tihnk that people in comfortable professional lives talk themselves out of politics unnecessarily.
Problems for my girlfriend today trying to vote. Many train lines are closed going from Paris to suburbs for long weekend engineering works. Difficult to get to your suburb polling booth to vote. Luckily my girlfriends mother was going to vote 'blanc' (NDA supporter in R1) but will vote Macron in her place. She seems to know a lot of people who will vote blanc or abstain (in France voting blanc is counted separately to a 'spoiled' ballot) - even amongst her younger friends. wonder if high abstention may depress the Macron vote share slightly
A friend of ours (London based French national) is having to go to Wembley to vote - which seems a bit odd. South Kensington would be the obvious place.
When round 1 was on, I went past on a coach to the London Marathon finish (where I was marshalling) and there were already huge queues before 8am. So they may well have arranged some additional capacity
While I'm bored by your hysteria about Corbyn, you shouldn't be allowed to make stuff up. He's been divorced once, 18 years ago, though they remain on good terms. I don't know what you call an extra-marital affairs - he had an affair before he was married, like, uh, many of us (do you feel that politicians should be virgins when they marry, or everyone?), but I'm not aware of any during his marriages.
Unlike you, I know him personally and he's a gentle, polite and sincere man (also, I suspect, unlike you). The problems of Labour are part of a general problem of social democracy replicated across the West. I can see an argument that he's not Blair-level persuasive, and you're entitled to your view that someone else would do better. But I think you should stop lying about him.
You know him so well you don't know he's been married three times? OK, fair enough. Does wreck your point of course. Or was the first marriage an annulment? She's still alive so it wasn't death.
Gentle, polite and sincere? I am always sincere. The Welsh have a deserved reputation for telling it like it is. I work hard on being polite. A man who supports terrorism isn't gentle so that's irrelevant. Somebody who does that and pretends to be a pacifist isn't actually sincere. Unfortunately sincerity can be brutal to those who don't want to hear it and is mistaken for impoliteness.
I am equally bored with your attempts to justify thrusting this loathsome man on us due to some aberration about the Greens and a need to feel good about yourself. You made a mistake. Get over it. That's also very sincere and it certainly isn't hysteria. But the rather amusing irony of your post will doubtless pass you by.
I noticed some form of protest vote doing the rounds on Twitter yesterday petitioning the Gazette's publishers not to take the Tory wrap around.
Edit: Forget the first bit. I misunderstood daodao.
Was that the paper that carried a wrap-round ad from Labour in the by-election which said (and I paraphrase a bit) vote Labour or the baby gets it?
Different local paper, but the right idea. For some reason Labour think it's fine when they do it, but not for others. More likely is they can't afford it at general election scale.
Personally not a fan of front page wrap-arounds, but if it keeps local journalism running then I guess it's a good thing overall.
Are we skirting the issue of the Conservatives again using national expenditure for local campaigning?
No.
Its completely legal so long as the advert is for the national brand not the local candidate, just as it was for the Labour advert for "Vote Labour or the baby gets it" during the Copeland byelection.
"The more Jeremy...hold rallies, the more people will warm to him". Oh, good, 31 days of Sheffields.
Is it normal for leaders to hold rallies during election campaigns? I can't remember any except Sheffield (which went well) think Corbyn did it 2 days running last week and the sight of him preaching to a sea of Labour banners shows how feeble the attack line on May that she avoids the public is. To Jezza, politics is rallies; that is why he missed his chance to bugger things up over the FTPA - parliamentary shenanigans are of no interest, and campaigning is what he lives for.
On topic, we've had one of those wrap-arounds this week in the Wakefield Express.
In other reports from the front line, I did my first serious canvass session of the election yesterday. Without coming across a bit Nick, it was very positive indeed. Not just the expected Ukip-on switchers but a sizeable number of direct Lab-Con as well.
I have to say, if the Tories fail to take Wakefield from Mary Creagh they will have had a pretty poor night.
That's true. But as in all seats with small Lab majorities, the question is not just who wins but also by how much. I'm already sketching out a strategy for 2022.
This is the key for keeping your campaigning sanity over the next four weeks. This is a campaign for 2022, not really 2017, and it's about a) gaining visibility for a candidate, and b) sweating out every vote to build your base for next time. There's nothing that can be done about a Tory majority, but the rules of electoral gravity mean there's everything to play for in 2022 when we emerge shattered and broke on the other side of Brexit.
(I know this is screamingly obvious, but one of the good things about Brexit is a lot of new, idealistic young activists are about to be blooded in this election. They need to be schooled in long-term thinking, which isn't exactly part of the zeitgeist...)
How do you know ? There is no need for personal comments like that. You do not like him politically, fair enough. He has not personally harmed you as far as we are aware.
I was thinking of the number of times he has been divorced (is it two or three?) plus his extra marital affairs, one of course with his current SHS. One of them was because he wanted to send his son to a failing school to make a political point.
If you're saying this shows him as a good husband and father, then I have to say I think you have a somewhat different view of a 'good' family man from mine.
That's not personal, just a statement of fact. I realise that speaking the truth about Corbyn will not make me popular with Labour diehards such as yourself.
And on your final point, he is damaging me personally because he is smashing the Labour Party to pieces and leaving a poor government with no opposition. That damages all of us. A man of honour would have realised his unfitness and resigned long ago to let someone more competent pick up the pieces as best they could.
He is a loathsome person, an utter failure and has no redeeming features, being a genuine blight upon our democracy. Personal or not, whether you like it or not, that is the truth.
While I'm bored by your hysteria about Corbyn, you shouldn't be allowed to make stuff up. He's been divorced once, 18 years ago, though they remain on good terms. I don't know what you call an extra-marital affairs - he had an affair before he was married, like, uh, many of us (do you feel that politicians should be virgins when they marry, or everyone?), but I'm not aware of any during his marriages.
Unlike you, I know him personally and he's a gentle, polite and sincere man (also, I suspect, unlike you). The problems of Labour are part of a general problem of social democracy replicated across the West. I can see an argument that he's not Blair-level persuasive, and you're entitled to your view that someone else would do better. But I think you should stop lying about him.
for Fox in Sox (having trouble responding to your post re not being bothered by the IRA..)
Corbyn's and his acolytes support for the IRA will be featured in this election as well as his support for other v nasty people, of that you can be sure. Will it resonate. Hell yes.(possibly not with the young, but they don't vote enough to matter) It will just reinforce voters views of the lack of suitability of any in the current leadership. (and the backup such as Milne)
I remember the Seventies well, and my dad's office in Birmingham was a few minutes walk to the pub bombing. A cousin of mine did a couple of tours in NI during the troubles
However, those days are gone, and I am very happy for them to remain history. If the Tories ramp up rhetoric over this and bring armed conflict back to Ireland we will all be losers.
for Fox in Sox (having trouble responding to your post re not being bothered by the IRA..)
Corbyn's and his acolytes support for the IRA will be featured in this election as well as his support for other v nasty people, of that you can be sure. Will it resonate. Hell yes.(possibly not with the young, but they don't vote enough to matter) It will just reinforce voters views of the lack of suitability of any in the current leadership. (and the backup such as Milne)
Wonder if they'll bring up his connection to Labour Briefing, which published an article praising the Brighton bombings. From wiki:
In December 1984, the magazine carried a reader’s letter praising the “audacity” of the IRA attack and stating: “What do you call four dead Tories? A start." It mocked Norman Tebbit, the trade secretary who was dug out of the rubble of the Grand Hotel and who's wife was left permanently paralysed, saying: “Try riding your bike now, Norman.” The same issue carried an editorial piece from the editorial board which “disassociated itself” from an article the previous month criticising the bombing, saying the criticism was a “serious political misjudgment.”
Hmm. On the basis of those polls the Tories and the LDs seem to have gone up by 11.3 points between them since 2015, and Labour and UKIP to have gone down by 4.8.
Can anyone explain where the extra 6.5 points came from?
Are you sure you are not comparing them with the GE result which, unlike most polls, includes Northern Ireland?
Thanks. I am comparing with the general election result, so Northern Ireland would account for perhaps 2.5 points of the discrepancy. The Green vote is unusually low in these three polls, so perhaps that accounts for 2 more points, the SNP for another 0.7, and I suppose rounding errors and micro-parties for the rest.
As was said about Tsar Nicholas II, he’s not fit to run a village post office – just imagine Diane Abbott doing the figures.
I think that is very unfair.
Nicholas may have been a dreadful Tsar who was as Witte said unfit to run a post office, but he was a good husband and devoted father.
You can't even say that about Jeremy Corbyn.
How do you know ? There is no need for personal comments like that. You do not like him politically, fair enough. He has not personally harmed you as far as we are aware.
I was thinking of the number of times he has been divorced (is it two or three?) plus his extra marital affairs, one of course with his current SHS. One of them was because he wanted to send his son to a failing school to make a political point.
If you're saying this shows him as a good husband and father, then I have to say I think you have a somewhat different view of a 'good' family man from mine.
That's not personal, just a statement of fact. I realise that speaking the truth about Corbyn will not make me popular with Labour diehards such as yourself.
Jezzas son Seb went to Cambridge, and is very close to him politically and socially.
I am not sure about his third son, but It does seem that he is a reasonably good father.
My understanding was that after their g about that.
Jezzas relationship with the boys seems genuinely good. I think most divorces have a period of frostiness if not actual hostility immediately post break up, but many seem to become more civil with time. Brexit will be the same.
I don't particularly object to Jezzas politics, and I rather like his slightly other worldy hobbies of his allorment, jam making and manhole cover photography.
What I do object to is his ineffectual leadership, particularly over Brexit, and his tolerance of some very nasty acolytes, particularly Trots and Islamists. I am not bothered by the IRA, that is now history.
I am not bothered by the IRA, that is now history
so youre fine with young kids in estates in West Belfast getting their limbs broken or forced into "exile" ?
for Fox in Sox (having trouble responding to your post re not being bothered by the IRA..)
Corbyn's and his acolytes support for the IRA will be featured in this election as well as his support for other v nasty people, of that you can be sure. Will it resonate. Hell yes.(possibly not with the young, but they don't vote enough to matter) It will just reinforce voters views of the lack of suitability of any in the current leadership. (and the backup such as Milne)
I remember the Seventies well, and my dad's office in Birmingham was a few minutes walk to the pub bombing. A cousin of mine did a couple of tours in NI during the troubles
However, those days are gone, and I am very happy for them to remain history. If the Tories ramp up rhetoric over this and bring armed conflict back to Ireland we will all be losers.
What do you think is more likely to bring back armed conflict in NI; the Tories reminding people that Corbyn supports terrorism, or the UK having a PM who supports the IRA and a united Ireland?
How do you know ? There is no need for personal comments like that. You do not like him politically, fair enough. He has not personally harmed you as far as we are aware.
I was thinking of the number of times he has been divorced (is it two or three?) plus his extra marital affairs, one of course with his current SHS. One of them was because he wanted to send his son to a failing school to make a political point.
If you're saying this shows him as a good husband and father, then I have to say I think you have a somewhat different view of a 'good' family man from mine.
That's not personal, just a statement of fact. I realise that speaking the truth about Corbyn will not make me popular with Labour diehards such as yourself.
And on your final point, he is damaging me personally because he is smashing the Labour Party to pieces and leaving a poor government with no opposition. That damages all of us. A man of honour would have realised his unfitness and resigned long ago to let someone more competent pick up the pieces as best they could.
He is a loathsome person, an utter failure and has no redeeming features, being a genuine blight upon our democracy. Personal or not, whether you like it or not, that is the truth.
While I'm bored by your hysteria about Corbyn, you shouldn't be allowed to make stuff up. He's been divorced once, 18 years ago, though they remain on good terms. I don't know what you call an extra-marital affairs - he had an affair before he was married, like, uh, many of us (do you feel that politicians should be virgins when they marry, or everyone?), but I'm not aware of any during his marriages.
Unlike you, I know him personally and he's a gentle, polite and sincere man (also, I suspect, unlike you). The problems of Labour are part of a general problem of social democracy replicated across the West. I can see an argument that he's not Blair-level persuasive, and you're entitled to your view that someone else would do better. But I think you should stop lying about him.
TBF faking "gentle, polite and sincere" is a core political skill. I don't think this is gentle or polite, and the value of sincerity rather varies with the subject matter. No one has ever accused Nick Griffin of a lack of it.
While I'm bored by your hysteria about Corbyn, you shouldn't be allowed to make stuff up. He's been divorced once, 18 years ago, though they remain on good terms. I don't know what you call an extra-marital affairs - he had an affair before he was married, like, uh, many of us (do you feel that politicians should be virgins when they marry, or everyone?), but I'm not aware of any during his marriages.
Unlike you, I know him personally and he's a gentle, polite and sincere man (also, I suspect, unlike you). The problems of Labour are part of a general problem of social democracy replicated across the West. I can see an argument that he's not Blair-level persuasive, and you're entitled to your view that someone else would do better. But I think you should stop lying about him.
You know him so well you don't know he's been married three times? OK, fair enough. Does wreck your point of course. Or was the first marriage an annulment? She's still alive so it wasn't death.
Gentle, polite and sincere? I am always sincere. The Welsh have a deserved reputation for telling it like it is. I work hard on being polite. A man who supports terrorism isn't gentle so that's irrelevant. Somebody who does that and pretends to be a pacifist isn't actually sincere. Unfortunately sincerity can be brutal to those who don't want to hear it and is mistaken for impoliteness.
I am equally bored with your attempts to justify thrusting this loathsome man on us due to some aberration about the Greens and a need to feel good about yourself. You made a mistake. Get over it. That's also very sincere and it certainly isn't hysteria. But the rather amusing irony of your post will doubtless pass you by.
Being called an insincere liar by the king of optimistic canvassing is quite a tick in your box.
"The more Jeremy...hold rallies, the more people will warm to him". Oh, good, 31 days of Sheffields.
Is it normal for leaders to hold rallies during election campaigns? I can't remember any except Sheffield (which went well) think Corbyn did it 2 days running last week and the sight of him preaching to a sea of Labour banners shows how feeble the attack line on May that she avoids the public is. To Jezza, politics is rallies; that is why he missed his chance to bugger things up over the FTPA - parliamentary shenanigans are of no interest, and campaigning is what he lives for.
The problem though is he only holds rallies for the faithfull. Not even Labour party members (or the local MP) were invited to the Manchester rally. Just Momentum members
Hmm. On the basis of those polls the Tories and the LDs seem to have gone up by 11.3 points between them since 2015, and Labour and UKIP to have gone down by 4.8.
Can anyone explain where the extra 6.5 points came from?
Are you sure you are not comparing them with the GE result which, unlike most polls, includes Northern Ireland?
Thanks. I am comparing with the general election result, so Northern Ireland would account for perhaps 2.5 points of the discrepancy. The Green vote is unusually low in these three polls, so perhaps that accounts for 2 more points, the SNP for another 0.7, and I suppose rounding errors and micro-parties for the rest.
How do you know ? There is no need for personal comments like that. You do not like him politically, fair enough. He has not personally harmed you as far as we are aware.
I was thinking of the number of times he has been divorced (is it two or three?) plus his extra marital affairs, one of course with his current SHS. One of them was because he wanted to send his son to a failing school to make a political point.
If you're saying this shows him as a good husband and father, then I have to say I think you have a somewhat different view of a 'good' family man from mine.
That's not personal, just a statement of fact. I realise that speaking the truth about Corbyn will not make me popular with Labour diehards such as yourself.
And on your final point, he is damaging me personally because he is smashing the Labour Party to pieces and leaving a poor government with no opposition. That damages all of us. A man of honour would have realised his unfitness and resigned long ago to let someone more competent pick up the pieces as best they could.
He is a loathsome person, an utter failure and has no redeeming features, being a genuine blight upon our democracy. Personal or not, whether you like it or not, that is the truth.
While I'm bored by your hysteria about Corbyn, you shouldn't be allowed to make stuff up. He's been divorced once, 18 years ago, though they remain on good terms. I don't know what you call an extra-marital affairs - he had an affair before he was married, like, uh, many of us (do you feel that politicians should be virgins when they marry, or everyone?), but I'm not aware of any during his marriages.
Unlike you, I know him personally and he's a gentle, polite and sincere man (also, I suspect, unlike you). The problems of Labour are part of a general problem of social democracy replicated across the West. I can see an argument that he's not Blair-level persuasive, and you're entitled to your view that someone else would do better. But I think you should stop lying about him.
As was said about Tsar Nicholas II, he’s not fit to run a village post office – just imagine Diane Abbott doing the figures.
I think that is very unfair.
Nicholas may have been a dreadful Tsar who was as Witte said unfit to run a post office, but he was a good husband and devoted father.
You can't even say that about Jeremy Corbyn.
How do you know ? There is no need for personal comments like that. You do not like him politically, fair enough. He has not personally harmed you as far as we are aware.
I was thinking of the number of times he has been divorced (is it two or three?
Jezzas son Seb went to Cambridge, and is very close to him politically and socially.
I am not sure about his third son, but It does seem that he is a reasonably good father.
My understanding was that after their g about that.
Jezzas relationship with the boys seems genuinely good. I think most divorces have a period of frostiness if not actual hostility immediately post break up, but many seem to become more civil with time. Brexit will be the same.
I don't particularly object to Jezzas politics, and I rather like his slightly other worldy hobbies of his allorment, jam making and manhole cover photography.
What I do object to is his ineffectual leadership, particularly over Brexit, and his tolerance of some very nasty acolytes, particularly Trots and Islamists. I am not bothered by the IRA, that is now history.
I am not bothered by the IRA, that is now history
so youre fine with young kids in estates in West Belfast getting their limbs broken or forced into "exile" ?
Sure, things still have some way to go in Ireland, but undeniably better than in past decades. I don't want to see things go into reverse. The rapprochement in NI is one clear bit of progress in Britain over my lifetime.
May ramping up jingoism against Europe is bad enough, but in Northern Ireland is very risky indeed.
"The more Jeremy...hold rallies, the more people will warm to him". Oh, good, 31 days of Sheffields.
Is it normal for leaders to hold rallies during election campaigns? I can't remember any except Sheffield (which went well) think Corbyn did it 2 days running last week and the sight of him preaching to a sea of Labour banners shows how feeble the attack line on May that she avoids the public is. To Jezza, politics is rallies; that is why he missed his chance to bugger things up over the FTPA - parliamentary shenanigans are of no interest, and campaigning is what he lives for.
Sshh - Labour is now a united party; I just heard it on the TV
I decided against it because I didn't want or need the hassle of it, not to mention the lifetime pay cut it comes with compared to my current career (then career trajectory).
This seems like the system functioning correctly.
But it leads to mediocrity in Parliament which is not what the intention is. In a country where top professionals can earn £300k+ the attraction of being an MP isn't there.
I would see that as a feature not a bug. Parliament needs to represent the people. There is far too much representation of professionals already, including a half a dozen doctors.
I agree.
In any case, MPs are not underpaid for the job that they do.
Ministers are ridiculously underpaid, however.
Especially when one takes into consideration the pay of local council executives.
They are very much overpaid,
Although a lot of the exposed 'scandal' of high local authority pay requires some digging under the surface to get to the real story, there's an awful lot of six figure salaries and a lot of people moving around from council to council taking golden goodbyes.
Good Morning. I see a few of the usual suspects are up and about already.
Are there any Tory seats vulnerable to the Lib Dem ? What are the current odds on Twickenham, Kingston & Surbiton , Brighton Kemptown ?
We're stumbling into a disaster here. Corbyn and Farron are the least impressive leaders of their respective parties in my lifetime. Though I can't say the same of May I think she'll be as dangerous as Thatcher with a large majority.
I can't accept that there is no mechanism short of a bus that can get rid of at least one of them so they can be replaced by someone with voter appeal.
That's a bit harsh on Farron, who seems an ok enough chap, if not exactly enough of a slick performer to transform the party's fortunes. As I see it, the Lib Dems have several problems, none of which can be laid at his door but which only a leader of immense cunning and skill could rectify.
1. Large numbers of the seats they unexpectedly lost in 2015, so what should be the lowest hanging fruit, are in the west country, which has its own political dynamic and is more pro-leave. I'd imagine there will be a Lib Dem surge in places like Twickenham and Sutton, but in Cornwall and Somerset, where the Lib Dems used to benefit from an anti-establishment vote, some of those voters will have gone Tory to express their desire for Brexit. Not a lot Farron can do about this
2. One of the few groups Corbyn does relatively well with is the studenty left, who are also still angry about fees. Thus even though Labour are doing appallingly, ultimately there's probably a churn which benefits the Tories - working and middle class voters out, young radical voters who went Lib Dem in 2010 in, hampering the Lib Dems.
3. The 2015 wipeout was so severe that they struggle to be the plausible 'opposition'. There isn't a lot you can do with 9 MPs and pro-EU Labour MPs are able to make the argument that even if you think Corbyn's a waste of space you need to vote for them to provide opposition, not the Lib Dem who may have even fallen to third.
The Lib Dems were never going to have a 2010esque Cleggasm - they need to be trying to get to 15 to 20 MPs and close the gap elsewhere so their in a strong enough position to challenge Labour should Corbyn and his acolytes continue to stink out the party, and/or Brexit prove very bad.
Why Sutton? It wint happen there. The LDs have parachuted a non local in and also the constituency voted leave.
"The more Jeremy...hold rallies, the more people will warm to him". Oh, good, 31 days of Sheffields.
Is it normal for leaders to hold rallies during election campaigns? I can't remember any except Sheffield (which went well) think Corbyn did it 2 days running last week and the sight of him preaching to a sea of Labour banners shows how feeble the attack line on May that she avoids the public is. To Jezza, politics is rallies; that is why he missed his chance to bugger things up over the FTPA - parliamentary shenanigans are of no interest, and campaigning is what he lives for.
The problem though is he only holds rallies for the faithfull. Not even Labour party members (or the local MP) were invited to the Manchester rally. Just Momentum members
Not hard to believe at all, from the way they look on telly.
"The more Jeremy...hold rallies, the more people will warm to him". Oh, good, 31 days of Sheffields.
Is it normal for leaders to hold rallies during election campaigns? I can't remember any except Sheffield (which went well) think Corbyn did it 2 days running last week and the sight of him preaching to a sea of Labour banners shows how feeble the attack line on May that she avoids the public is. To Jezza, politics is rallies; that is why he missed his chance to bugger things up over the FTPA - parliamentary shenanigans are of no interest, and campaigning is what he lives for.
"Is it normal for leaders to hold rallies during election campaigns?" It was for Trump.
"The more Jeremy...hold rallies, the more people will warm to him". Oh, good, 31 days of Sheffields.
Is it normal for leaders to hold rallies during election campaigns? I can't remember any except Sheffield (which went well) think Corbyn did it 2 days running last week and the sight of him preaching to a sea of Labour banners shows how feeble the attack line on May that she avoids the public is. To Jezza, politics is rallies; that is why he missed his chance to bugger things up over the FTPA - parliamentary shenanigans are of no interest, and campaigning is what he lives for.
The problem though is he only holds rallies for the faithfull. Not even Labour party members (or the local MP) were invited to the Manchester rally. Just Momentum members
He may as well buy a Zil limo to swan around the country in.
"The more Jeremy...hold rallies, the more people will warm to him". Oh, good, 31 days of Sheffields.
Is it normal for leaders to hold rallies during election campaigns? I can't remember any except Sheffield (which went well) think Corbyn did it 2 days running last week and the sight of him preaching to a sea of Labour banners shows how feeble the attack line on May that she avoids the public is. To Jezza, politics is rallies; that is why he missed his chance to bugger things up over the FTPA - parliamentary shenanigans are of no interest, and campaigning is what he lives for.
"Is it normal for leaders to hold rallies during election campaigns?" It was for Trump.
Yes, and for Hillary and that's how they do things there. But in the UK?
I decided against it because I didn't want or need the hassle of it, not to mention the lifetime pay cut it comes with compared to my current career (then career trajectory).
This seems like the system functioning correctly.
But it leads to mediocrity in Parliament which is not what the intention is. In a country where top professionals can earn £300k+ the attraction of being an MP isn't there.
I would see that as a feature not a bug. Parliament needs to represent the people. There is far too much representation of professionals already, including a half a dozen doctors.
I agree.
In any case, MPs are not underpaid for the job that they do.
Ministers are ridiculously underpaid, however.
Especially when one takes into consideration the pay of local council executives.
Are we really doing that thing again where we compare the pay of elected politicians at one level of government with the pay of career officials at another?
Ministers earn more than Council Cabinet Members, by a multiple of several times. MPs earn more than Councillors by the same.
If there's a relevant comparison, that's it. Council Chief Executives' pay is broadly the same as that of the Senior Civil Service, with the CXs of the smallest districts earning about the same as a newly appointed Deputy Director, and the CXs of the largest councils with budgets over £1bn on salaries comparable to that of a middling Perm Sec.
I noticed some form of protest vote doing the rounds on Twitter yesterday petitioning the Gazette's publishers not to take the Tory wrap around.
Edit: Forget the first bit. I misunderstood daodao.
Was that the paper that carried a wrap-round ad from Labour in the by-election which said (and I paraphrase a bit) vote Labour or the baby gets it?
Different local paper, but the right idea. For some reason Labour think it's fine when they do it, but not for others. More likely is they can't afford it at general election scale.
Personally not a fan of front page wrap-arounds, but if it keeps local journalism running then I guess it's a good thing overall.
Are we skirting the issue of the Conservatives again using national expenditure for local campaigning?
No, this was well before the restricted period, which I think starts this coming week. Unless the local paper wrap-around is cheaper than delivering their own leaflets, the focus will change from now until the election.
As was said about Tsar Nicholas II, he’s not fit to run a village post office – just imagine Diane Abbott doing the figures.
I think that is very unfair.
Nicholas may have been a dreadful Tsar who was as Witte said unfit to run a post office, but he was a good husband and devoted father.
You can't even say that about Jeremy Corbyn.
How do you know ? There is no need for personal comments like that. You do not like him politically, fair enough. He has not personally harmed you as far as we are aware.
I was thinking of the number of times he has been divorced (is it two or three?
Jezzas son Seb went to Cambridge, and is very close to him politically and socially.
I am not sure about his third son, but It does seem that he is a reasonably good father.
My understanding was that after their g about that.
Jezzas relationship with the boys seems genuinely goo bothered by the IRA, that is now history.
I am not bothered by the IRA, that is now history
so youre fine with young kids in estates in West Belfast getting their limbs broken or forced into "exile" ?
Sure, things still have some way to go in Ireland, but undeniably better than in past decades. I don't want to see things go into reverse. The rapprochement in NI is one clear bit of progress in Britain over my lifetime.
May ramping up jingoism against Europe is bad enough, but in Northern Ireland is very risky indeed.
It never ceases to impress me how people who never gave a toss about NI suddenly see it as their main concern when thy put their brexit goggles on.
For the record theres no reason or excuse why children should be maimed just because some paramilitary likes imposing pain. A normal civilised society puts thugs in jail.
for Fox in Sox (having trouble responding to your post re not being bothered by the IRA..)
Corbyn's and his acolytes support for the IRA will be featured in this election as well as his support for other v nasty people, of that you can be sure. Will it resonate. Hell yes.(possibly not with the young, but they don't vote enough to matter) It will just reinforce voters views of the lack of suitability of any in the current leadership. (and the backup such as Milne)
I remember the Seventies well, and my dad's office in Birmingham was a few minutes walk to the pub bombing. A cousin of mine did a couple of tours in NI during the troubles
However, those days are gone, and I am very happy for them to remain history. If the Tories ramp up rhetoric over this and bring armed conflict back to Ireland we will all be losers.
What do you think is more likely to bring back armed conflict in NI; the Tories reminding people that Corbyn supports terrorism, or the UK having a PM who supports the IRA and a united Ireland?
Whoever was leading Labour would be facing an annihilation, because the Party has no coherent position on the main issue, Brexit. Labour have been caught up in a firestorm.
Yvette would have been as unequal to the task as Jeremy. In fact, I suspect Yvette might be worse as she has a very clear-cut position on freedom of movement and the EU, whereas Corbyn's is more ambiguous.
The only advice to give to those facing electoral annihilation is ... remember McGovern.
Nixon annihilated McGovern in the most devastating 49-1 defeat. A year later, it all looked very different. And Nixon was dragged from office.
The name of Nixon still gives off a malodorous smell, but McGovern is now thought of as a principled politician.
"The more Jeremy...hold rallies, the more people will warm to him". Oh, good, 31 days of Sheffields.
Is it normal for leaders to hold rallies during election campaigns? I can't remember any except Sheffield (which went well) think Corbyn did it 2 days running last week and the sight of him preaching to a sea of Labour banners shows how feeble the attack line on May that she avoids the public is. To Jezza, politics is rallies; that is why he missed his chance to bugger things up over the FTPA - parliamentary shenanigans are of no interest, and campaigning is what he lives for.
"Is it normal for leaders to hold rallies during election campaigns?" It was for Trump.
Motivating the troops is part of a GOTV programme.
I saw a young family shopping in town yesterday. It was a twenty something dad wearing a red "a new kind of politics" Jezza t shirt pushing the buggy along from the Saffron Lane Estate. Whether he had been canvassing earlier, or just wanted to show his colours, I don't know.
Thinking the IRA to be evil, murdering scum is not jingoistic. A friend of mine lost his son when the IRA blew up the barracks in Deal in the 80s. Corbyn and his sycophants have a romantic notion of Republicans fighting for a united Ireland, Adams, McGuinness etc are filth who will justify anything to achieve their ai
Thany you for this excellent thread. I guess I have had something to do with pushing this story here.
When I first suggested about 5 weeks ago that Farron was in trouble I was intensely flamed. When I repeated it 2 weeks ago I was not - very significant.
Some facts, the Westmorland Gazette is the paper of south Westmorland and the Sedbergh part of the old West Riding. The Evening Mail is the paper of Barrow, Furness and Ulverston so there is little play into Barrow and Furness. The Westmorland Gazette appeared to be edited by a team in Farron's office until about eight years ago when Newsquest marched into the then editor's office and sacked him. Since then it has moved to take a more centrist view and the website comments are now virtually all hostile to Farron.
I believe that I was ahead in the CC election and likewise two other candidates and that we lost it on election day. One of Farron's paid staff was in charge at Sedbergh and they brought in paid organisers from God knows where. We can comfort ourselves that there are safe Tory majorities in Somerset, Devon and Dorset in part because these organisers were up here and not down there.
The fact no hope candidates gained over 700 votes each in two uncontested divisions last Thursday must be bad news for Farron. Compare the excellent councillor Helen Fearon in Penrith who won for the Tories with only 530 votes.
The WG cover over repeated the arguments and design in leaflets which central office produced about a week before the election. It was suggested we handed them out with our GOTV leaflets - which I did.
As was said about Tsar Nicholas II, he’s not fit to run a village post office – just imagine Diane Abbott doing the figures.
I think that is very unfair.
Nicholas may have been a dreadful Tsar who was as Witte said unfit to run a post office, but he was a good husband and devoted father.
You can't even say that about Jeremy Corbyn.
How do you know ? There is no need for personal comments like that. You do not like him politically, fair enough. He has not personally harmed you as far as we are aware.
I was thinking of the number of times he has been divorced (is it two or three?
Jezzas son Seb went to Cambridge, and is very close to him politically and socially.
I am not sure about his third son, but It does seem that he is a reasonably good father.
My understanding was that after their g about that.
Jezzas relationship with the boys seems genuinely goo bothered by the IRA, that is now history.
I am not bothered by the IRA, that is now history
so youre fine with young kids in estates in West Belfast getting their limbs broken or forced into "exile" ?
Sure, things still have some way to go in Ireland, but undeniably better than in past decades. I don't want to see things go into reverse. The rapprochement in NI is one clear bit of progress in Britain over my lifetime.
May ramping up jingoism against Europe is bad enough, but in Northern Ireland is very risky indeed.
It never ceases to impress me how people who never gave a toss about NI suddenly see it as their main concern when thy put their brexit goggles on.
For the record theres no reason or excuse why children should be maimed just because some paramilitary likes imposing pain. A normal civilised society puts thugs in jail.
My Ulster Orangeman ancestors left some time ago, and I would never claim for NI to be my main concern.
It is just that the Troubles and the Cold war should be allowed to drift into history. We have enough new feuds in the country to make reopening old wounds superfluous.
for Fox in Sox (having trouble responding to your post re not being bothered by the IRA..)
Corbyn's and his acolytes support for the IRA will be featured in this election as well as his support for other v nasty people, of that you can be sure. Will it resonate. Hell yes.(possibly not with the young, but they don't vote enough to matter) It will just reinforce voters views of the lack of suitability of any in the current leadership. (and the backup such as Milne)
I remember the Seventies well, and my dad's office in Birmingham was a few minutes walk to the pub bombing. A cousin of mine did a couple of tours in NI during the troubles
However, those days are gone, and I am very happy for them to remain history. If the Tories ramp up rhetoric over this and bring armed conflict back to Ireland we will all be losers.
What do you think is more likely to bring back armed conflict in NI; the Tories reminding people that Corbyn supports terrorism, or the UK having a PM who supports the IRA and a united Ireland?
T May mishandling Brexit
Do you think J Corbyn would handle it better?! It's obviously comedy hour on PB..
It's in the Express, so handle with extreme care ... but the recent Unite elections saw the far left lose a large number of executive seats to moderates, so Champagne Len may have his hands tied a lot more than he has up to now:
Comments
Our politics is too poorly paid and too tightly controlled by a few rich donors/unions to put too many with any talent and common sense off going into it.
The other route of becoming a councillor is completely off putting, I have no interest in who collects the bins and how often.
In writing, I've heard it said you should mention something (a plague symptom, for example) three times before showing it, otherwise people might think it's a bit left field.
In other reports from the front line, I did my first serious canvass session of the election yesterday. Without coming across a bit Nick, it was very positive indeed. Not just the expected Ukip-on switchers but a sizeable number of direct Lab-Con as well.
Bragging rights for those who tipped him at 80/1I mean, the man who can reunite Labour and stick it to the Tories!https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/watch-dithering-labour-frontbencher-jon-ashworth-hounded-by-piers-morgan/
1. Large numbers of the seats they unexpectedly lost in 2015, so what should be the lowest hanging fruit, are in the west country, which has its own political dynamic and is more pro-leave. I'd imagine there will be a Lib Dem surge in places like Twickenham and Sutton, but in Cornwall and Somerset, where the Lib Dems used to benefit from an anti-establishment vote, some of those voters will have gone Tory to express their desire for Brexit. Not a lot Farron can do about this
2. One of the few groups Corbyn does relatively well with is the studenty left, who are also still angry about fees. Thus even though Labour are doing appallingly, ultimately there's probably a churn which benefits the Tories - working and middle class voters out, young radical voters who went Lib Dem in 2010 in, hampering the Lib Dems.
3. The 2015 wipeout was so severe that they struggle to be the plausible 'opposition'. There isn't a lot you can do with 9 MPs and pro-EU Labour MPs are able to make the argument that even if you think Corbyn's a waste of space you need to vote for them to provide opposition, not the Lib Dem who may have even fallen to third.
The Lib Dems were never going to have a 2010esque Cleggasm - they need to be trying to get to 15 to 20 MPs and close the gap elsewhere so their in a strong enough position to challenge Labour should Corbyn and his acolytes continue to stink out the party, and/or Brexit prove very bad.
Thank God! the British journalist.
But seeing what the man will do
Unbribed, there's no occasion to".
I which I could remember who that comes from.
Either it's a sign we need to get out more or it's a sign that there's something wrong with our political system.
I don't particularly object to Jezzas politics, and I rather like his slightly other worldy hobbies of his allorment, jam making and manhole cover photography.
What I do object to is his ineffectual leadership, particularly over Brexit, and his tolerance of some very nasty acolytes, particularly Trots and Islamists. I am not bothered by the IRA, that is now history.
Macron may yet surprise us but I fear that the lack of quality and talent being attracted to politics in a time of twitter is by means just a UK phenomenon.
Another answer is for the media not to get blown up over minor indescretions and faux-pas, but concentrate solely on corruption, nepotism and hypocrisy - fat chance of that happening.
In any case, MPs are not underpaid for the job that they do.
Ministers are ridiculously underpaid, however.
A big advantage of STV is that if you can see your MP isn't up to it or is taking things for granted, you can switch your vote to another candidate from the same party. Thus some of the power that currently sits with five party officials in a dark room transfers to the voters, which is surely a good thing?
I'd vote for him as a way of returning Kate Hoey to Parliament, without voting for Corbyn.
That's as odd an observation as when Mr. Eagles comments on my spelling of Cunctator.
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/861001306986696705
Unlike you, I know him personally and he's a gentle, polite and sincere man (also, I suspect, unlike you). The problems of Labour are part of a general problem of social democracy replicated across the West. I can see an argument that he's not Blair-level persuasive, and you're entitled to your view that someone else would do better. But I think you should stop lying about him.
I am almost literally speechless.
On that bombshell, I shall go and inflate the organ (and that is not a euphemism of any sort). Have a good morning everyone.
Corbyn's and his acolytes support for the IRA will be featured in this election as well as his support for other v nasty people, of that you can be sure. Will it resonate. Hell yes.(possibly not with the young, but they don't vote enough to matter)
It will just reinforce voters views of the lack of suitability of any in the current leadership. (and the backup such as Milne)
And judging from her strong performance in opposition, Cooper has everything going for her. As things stand, Cooper as LOTO and Starmer as Shadow Chancellor (in a dull but effectively forensic John Smith/Alistair Darlingesque role) is probably Labour's best choice.
Agree with May that Brussels is trying to influence General Election 51% - Disagree 24%
If you need to be a Cabinet Minister or even PM to call yourself successful in politics, then I think it does help to have contacts. But for lots of us it's sufficient to be part of the team working for what we believe would be a better society.
I tihnk that people in comfortable professional lives talk themselves out of politics unnecessarily.
Gentle, polite and sincere? I am always sincere. The Welsh have a deserved reputation for telling it like it is. I work hard on being polite. A man who supports terrorism isn't gentle so that's irrelevant. Somebody who does that and pretends to be a pacifist isn't actually sincere. Unfortunately sincerity can be brutal to those who don't want to hear it and is mistaken for impoliteness.
I am equally bored with your attempts to justify thrusting this loathsome man on us due to some aberration about the Greens and a need to feel good about yourself. You made a mistake. Get over it. That's also very sincere and it certainly isn't hysteria. But the rather amusing irony of your post will doubtless pass you by.
Its completely legal so long as the advert is for the national brand not the local candidate, just as it was for the Labour advert for "Vote Labour or the baby gets it" during the Copeland byelection.
Is it normal for leaders to hold rallies during election campaigns? I can't remember any except Sheffield (which went well) think Corbyn did it 2 days running last week and the sight of him preaching to a sea of Labour banners shows how feeble the attack line on May that she avoids the public is. To Jezza, politics is rallies; that is why he missed his chance to bugger things up over the FTPA - parliamentary shenanigans are of no interest, and campaigning is what he lives for.
(I know this is screamingly obvious, but one of the good things about Brexit is a lot of new, idealistic young activists are about to be blooded in this election. They need to be schooled in long-term thinking, which isn't exactly part of the zeitgeist...)
Quite a nice story about how he met his current wife though.
However, those days are gone, and I am very happy for them to remain history. If the Tories ramp up rhetoric over this and bring armed conflict back to Ireland we will all be losers.
In December 1984, the magazine carried a reader’s letter praising the “audacity” of the IRA attack and stating: “What do you call four dead Tories? A start." It mocked Norman Tebbit, the trade secretary who was dug out of the rubble of the Grand Hotel and who's wife was left permanently paralysed, saying: “Try riding your bike now, Norman.” The same issue carried an editorial piece from the editorial board which “disassociated itself” from an article the previous month criticising the bombing, saying the criticism was a “serious political misjudgment.”
so youre fine with young kids in estates in West Belfast getting their limbs broken or forced into "exile" ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ipYmMt1i84
May ramping up jingoism against Europe is bad enough, but in Northern Ireland is very risky indeed.
Although a lot of the exposed 'scandal' of high local authority pay requires some digging under the surface to get to the real story, there's an awful lot of six figure salaries and a lot of people moving around from council to council taking golden goodbyes.
It wint happen there. The LDs have parachuted a non local in and also the constituency voted leave.
It was for Trump.
Ministers earn more than Council Cabinet Members, by a multiple of several times. MPs earn more than Councillors by the same.
If there's a relevant comparison, that's it. Council Chief Executives' pay is broadly the same as that of the Senior Civil Service, with the CXs of the smallest districts earning about the same as a newly appointed Deputy Director, and the CXs of the largest councils with budgets over £1bn on salaries comparable to that of a middling Perm Sec.
For the record theres no reason or excuse why children should be maimed just because some paramilitary likes imposing pain. A normal civilised society puts thugs in jail.
Yvette would have been as unequal to the task as Jeremy. In fact, I suspect Yvette might be worse as she has a very clear-cut position on freedom of movement and the EU, whereas Corbyn's is more ambiguous.
The only advice to give to those facing electoral annihilation is ... remember McGovern.
Nixon annihilated McGovern in the most devastating 49-1 defeat. A year later, it all looked very different. And Nixon was dragged from office.
The name of Nixon still gives off a malodorous smell, but McGovern is now thought of as a principled politician.
I saw a young family shopping in town yesterday. It was a twenty something dad wearing a red "a new kind of politics" Jezza t shirt pushing the buggy along from the Saffron Lane Estate. Whether he had been canvassing earlier, or just wanted to show his colours, I don't know.
When I first suggested about 5 weeks ago that Farron was in trouble I was intensely flamed. When I repeated it 2 weeks ago I was not - very significant.
Some facts, the Westmorland Gazette is the paper of south Westmorland and the Sedbergh part of the old West Riding. The Evening Mail is the paper of Barrow, Furness and Ulverston so there is little play into Barrow and Furness. The Westmorland Gazette appeared to be edited by a team in Farron's office until about eight years ago when Newsquest marched into the then editor's office and sacked him. Since then it has moved to take a more centrist view and the website comments are now virtually all hostile to Farron.
I believe that I was ahead in the CC election and likewise two other candidates and that we lost it on election day. One of Farron's paid staff was in charge at Sedbergh and they brought in paid organisers from God knows where. We can comfort ourselves that there are safe Tory majorities in Somerset, Devon and Dorset in part because these organisers were up here and not down there.
The fact no hope candidates gained over 700 votes each in two uncontested divisions last Thursday must be bad news for Farron. Compare the excellent councillor Helen Fearon in Penrith who won for the Tories with only 530 votes.
The WG cover over repeated the arguments and design in leaflets which central office produced about a week before the election. It was suggested we handed them out with our GOTV leaflets - which I did.
It is just that the Troubles and the Cold war should be allowed to drift into history. We have enough new feuds in the country to make reopening old wounds superfluous.
Time for me to buzz off for a bit.
Corbyn believes in a United Ireland, which is not quite the same thing as wanting the IRA to win.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/801276/Jeremy-Corbyn-Len-McCluskey-MP-union-election
If Corbyn does lose Unite's support, that will be it for him.