Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Team Corbyn’s aim is not to win the election but to keep contr
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Team Corbyn’s aim is not to win the election but to keep control of the LAB party
I broadly agree with the above analysis of what Team Corbyn’s basic objective is not to win the election but to do enough to keep their man leader. If LAB achieves a GB vote share of 31.2%, which is what the party did in 2015, then they hope the blame for the defeat can be put on the collapse of UKIP not their man.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
What the f8ck does 'in the meantime' mean in this context? If they transform Labour into a Marxit Party, the meantime is until the end of days.
I am first in the parallel universe of this thread in Vanilla Forums
By the way, reading back through the weekend's threads, were some excellent comments from your good self about risk management. As someone who spent the whole weekend dealing with this latest computer virus, add me to the list of those very interested in reading your paper when it's published.
I hope they aren't correct in that.
Good evening, everyone
Their calculation is that if the Labour party sticks to being a hard left party, sooner or later their number will come up and they'll sweep to power.
If Labour disappears down the plughole then it will be replaced. The Corbynites can't just sit on 120, or 90, or 60 seats and wait for an opportunity to take over that won't come. Either a new progressive party will be formed by refugees from Labour, or the Conservatives will split into two factions and become both Government and Opposition at the same time.
I've been banging my head against a brick wall in trying to get companies in a variety of sectors thinking about preventative information security. They understand that commercial aviation or nuclear power stations operate in a safety-first environment and culture, but don't see why they should. Hell, far too many say they'd just pay the ransom if they got caught by the latest malware, was only a few hundred dollars...
Just write down any old sh*t and then it'll start rolling.
Bath 2nd June
http://www.bath.ac.uk/about/organisation/semester-dates/
Bath Spa 23rd June
http://www.bath.ac.uk/about/organisation/semester-dates/
Bristol 2nd June
http://www.bris.ac.uk/university/dates/
UWE 19th May
http://www1.uwe.ac.uk/about/termdates/2016-17termdates.aspx
Exeter 16th June
http://www.exeter.ac.uk/staff/policies/calendar/part2/calendar/
Swansea 16th June
http://www.swansea.ac.uk/the-university/world-class/semesterandtermdates/
Cardiff 9th June
https://www.cardiff.ac.uk/public-information/corporate-information/semester-dates
Gloucestershire 16th June
http://www.glos.ac.uk/governance/pages/term-dates.aspx
Wolverhampton - year round programme
https://www.wlv.ac.uk/about-us/academic-calendar/
Birmingham City - 9th June
Birmingham - 16th June
http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/undergraduate/courses/termdates.aspx
Aston - 10th June
http://www.aston.ac.uk/about/termdates/
Coventry- 9th June
http://www.coventry.ac.uk/life-on-campus/the-university/key-information/term-dates/
I guess that's how the Labour manifesto came about...
A blank sheet of paper is simply terrifying.
https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/864564863439208449
It's just not thought through
https://twitter.com/keiranpedley/status/864566796535377920
Ps top right what's the objection to Shrewsbury other than it being a dull county town with a school for turd polishing and a reasonable flower show?
Outside critical and regulated industries (aviation, healthcare, infrastructure) the biggest risk is that an attack specifically targeted at their business leads to a theft of databases, confidential information etc. Think along the lines of what has happened to political parties in the US and France. The fact is that for an SME this sort of data theft is almost always fatal to the business, yet in most cases the directors either think it won't happen to them or think that if it does it will be a minor rather than major incident.
She also shines at PMQs regularly, I believe.
Whatever, this information is [ presumably, a new kind of explosive that can be triggered ], only a few people in ISIS will have had access to it.
So, now the ISIS bigwigs can narrow down the suspects.
Foreword – I know forwards are supposed to be pablum, and am sure the others will be too, but I find something amusing by opening about the wide range of views and ideas you head as leader, then essentially detail how they all say the same thing about pressures in the work place, job security, rigged systems etc. Wide range of views, but always in the same direction apparently.
CREATING AN ECONOMY THAT WORKS FOR ALL
What does ‘ripped apart by globilisation mean’?
What does ‘tear down the barriers that have held too many people back’ mean in the context of a national transformation fund re infrastructure? Was that phrase meant to be somewhere else in the manifesto?
Ambitious HS2 plans – is £250 billion enough for all this ambition?
Promising to eliminate deficit?
Why is 60% zero carbon energy the very first priority listed in a section on a strategy to deliver prosperity ‘to every corner of our country’ through getting local economies going? Seems like the focus on innovation and r and d in the next bit is more directly in keeping with that intention.
Overhaul regulation in our financial system, eh? Nice if you can manage it, but doesn’t it usually just end up with different regulation than is no improvement?
Labour is the party of small businesses – bold pitch
“Britain is a long-established democracy”. Phew, that’s a relief.
“any basic goods and services have been taken out of democratic control through privatisation. This has often led to higher prices and poorerquality, as prices are raised to payout dividends.” ‘Often’, not always or usually, is the wording significant? I’m open to public ownership if it is cost effective, but a curious statement.
‘Across the world, countries are taking public utilities back into public ownership’ – Where? You’ve named other countries and their models of governance elsewhere. Is it working?
Energy stuff seems to be focusing on lefty and green vote, unsurprisingly.
Coverntry Northwest should be 4-11 Tories and Coventry South 2-1 Labour. The odds are the wrong way round.
Unilateral declaration on EU national rights. Simplistic message about bargaining chips, as well as placing blame entirely on PM, but it’s a line which works to some degree.
Committing to leaving but also to a transitional deal if needed, rather than no deal, seems like an attractive idea at first glance for many. I’m still not clear what would happen if parliament voted against the final Brexit deal, as they suggest could happen as it commits to a ‘truly meaningful vote’ on it.
Heavy on protecting workers rights
Like the Tories they have a self loathing about Westminster, and a devolution fetish.
Refugee bit felt disingenuous. Refugees are not migrants is correct, but the reverse is also true.
‘Will set out prioirities in white paper to lead a national debate’ – cannot we do that with the manifesto to get the ball rolling?
TOWARDS A NATIONAL EDUCATION SERVICE
cradle-to-grave learning that is free at the point of use Sounds…way more than is possible under one government. I guess the nHS was set up quick, but even so.
Extend the 30 free hours to all twoyear-olds, and move towards making some childcare available for oneyear-olds and extending maternity pay to 12 months – more free stuff?! Perhaps it’s because I’m not a parent, but my god this seems a lot. If people believe it can be paid for it should be popular though – wouldn’t be surprised to see it in a tory pledge too.
We and trust in teachers and support staff professionalism to refocus their workload on what happens in the
classroom. I don’t think this sentence quite works, are there words missing?
Joined up admisssions policies across local schools? It’s been several years since I was involved, but doesn’t this happen to some degree already?
Abolishing tuition fees an incredibly bold pledge. Short, simple, but no detail? Is it even remotely viable?
A FAIR DEAL AT WORK
Why mention the conservative boast about recovery of employment? Just say the labour market is failing, as it is it makes me think you acknowledge the recovery but are pissy about it.
Are new Ministries are good idea? (yes that includes the Tories creating new ones). And aren’t none but the MOD called Ministries now? I prefer ministry to department though, so good.
Much more detailed section than the others, with a full 20 point list on rights at work – feels like this is where the focus of the manifesto work went in.
How not to undercut workers at home when guaranteeing everything to support foreign workers previously?
I certainly would like an end to the public sector pay cap. Do I believe it?
What is blacklisting? I mean, I know, but the document doesn’t say unless I missed it. And if you are promising to ensure it becomes a thing of the past, why do you need to hold a public inquiry into it? You’ve already revealed your conclusion.
What are the ILO conventions?
Basically, Labour MPs are searching desperately for some hope of salvation, and of a way forward - any way forward - after what they suspect is coming in less than a months' time. They are just thrashing around desperately and gasping for breath, like so many stranded fish dying upon a lonely shore.
How about having ended her drug addiction, shown remorse, had psychiatric treatment, undertaken only to use plastic cutlery? Nope. She's a student medic who went to private school, a member of one of Oxford's nobbiest colleges, and she is so "extraordinary".
Don't medics usually leave it until after they start working before they get on the smack?
After seven years of rising poverty and inequality – is that right? I’d feel better seeing a chart on it.
Triple lock – I don’t support this policy, but if Labour can claim back even a small percentage of the older vote, it will save many seats, so very sensible commitment politically.
Aren’t the tories also against hidden fees and charges in the pensions industry, enabling large pensions funds? Isn’t that already happening?
Immediately end ‘worst’ excesses of the government’s welfare changes? Very clever wording, means they are not saying changing them all, at least not right away.
Commission a report into expanding the Access to Work programme – so you want to do it but don’t know if it is a good idea?
SECURE HOMES FOR ALL
Home is at the heart of all of our lives – oh come on, what does that mean?
Priortise brownfield sites and protect the green belt – everyone always says this! It’s code for ‘building homes is important, just not near me’.
New towns is a good idea though.
I personally support the bedroom tax in principle.
HEALTHCARE FOR ALL
Basically we will end all problems in the NHS – I feel like I’ve heard this before.
Is the LGBT smokers but not in this version?
What are ‘excess’ private profits vs mere private profits?
National care service, national education service – very ambitious sounding stuff, can it be paid for?
SAFER COMMUNITIES
Rather short section on security and counter terrorism
What’s wrong with requiring people to tell the authorities if someone is breaking the law? Is there more to this they just aren’ getting into because they assume I know?
‘will consider the reinstatement of other legal aid entitlements’? Why wait for recommendations here, when promising to restore other stuff without waiting?
More police, more fire officers, more prison officers – naturally.
More and more open inquiries? Sometimes we still have lessons to learn, but sometimes we need to move on.
LEADING RICHER LIVES
You cannot empower local government If you impoverish it is a good line.
I’ve seen a lot of planning, and how people will ignore any policy considerations or wider needs purely for their own selfish desires – I’m not hugely sympathetic to nimbys.
‘end the cuts to youth services’ is not the same as reversing them is it? If they are to reverse it, why so coy here and not other areas, they are right youth services have been slashed.
Guido will like the policy on Fixed Odds betting terminals.
I constantly hear about how tourism is important to the UK, why do all politicians tell me it is forgotten.
A new clean air act to deal with legacy of illegal air quality? If it is already illegal, no need for a new act is there?
Is it necessary to promise to mark the ongoing centenary of WW1? I guess they were worried people thought they wouldn't.
Labour will always support the BBC? Tell that to your own supporters, mr corbyn.
A constitutional convention was a good idea of Ed M’s, and is a good one now.
Reduce voting age if you must, but reduce drinking age and the like, and much more, too, to be consistent.
So lobbying act gags charities, but the replacement will be tougher? I guess tougher on others.
Not committing to more mayors? Good.
Info on a Scottish investment bank and welsh investment is not part of extending democracy
NI section almost comically brief – I look forward to see what the Tories have to say
A MORE EQUAL SOCIETY
Mostly just saying how great Labour is at equality issues and that’s it.
A GLOBAL BRITAIN
Rather self righteous stuff. Exhausting diplomatic solutions is meaningless – everyone agrees on that, they disagree on when they are exhausted.
Labour would remove the us bace on diego Garcia so the chaagos islanders can return home? What else does support their right to return home mean, when it is a BOT?
Labour remains committed to an independent inquiry into Britain’s
military role in the 1984 raid on the Golden Temple in Amritsar – an oddly specific thing to mention, particularly as a concluding point.
Tories only just met 2%, this is bad as they’ve cut a lot. Labour will commit to spend ‘at least’ 2%, so doing about same as Tories?
The manifesto was a bit wordy, 150% the size of the last one, and without enough easy bullet pointed summaries and the like to make it easier to read (could the paragraphs be numbered at least), and there was little rhythm to the topics brought up in individual sections. It has a much better opening design at least! (The last was a lengthy, twisted statement on flat white background). ‘working with trade unions’ was the biggest theme I took away, other than that spending would increase massively, there was much more detail on workers conditions than most bits. I also feel like ‘seven years of failure’, while an obvious line, may come back to haunt them if the Tories win a majority – even after that failure they will win. Also, infrastructure spending was explained how it would be funded, but most of the rest was not, why is the detail there on some not others
PHEW, GOT THAT OFF MY CHEST.
Don't forget, one of the core aims of any Labour Government (regardless of whether it's centre, soft or hard Left) is to get as large a share of the population dependent on the largesse of the state - either through benefits or employment - as possible. Expanding the client base naturally increases the pool of reliable (and reliably dependent) voters upon which it can call.
Newsweek: U.S. Officials ‘Warned Israel’ Not to Share Sensitive Intel With Trump
Labour remains committed to an independent inquiry into Britain’s
military role in the 1984 raid on the Golden Temple in Amritsar
Phew, that'll swing a few marginals.
In contrast, telecoms privatisation has been a boon. For one thing, it has allowed massive amount of innovation even though, for fixed lines at least, the infrastructure remains with one company. I just can't say the same for water.
Can someone tell me what's been gained by the consumer (both residential and business) from water privatisation? Is the service 'better' now than it was in (say) the 1980s?
https://twitter.com/georgeeaton/status/864566148490252290
More water now gets where it's going, rather than being lost out of holes in the pipes.
Huzzah!
If Corbyn intends to spend £66bn buying it I expect champagne to flow out of the drinking taps.
200 actually would be a good number. I am quite optimistic. I think 190 is max.
If, by some chance, the moderates manage to wrest back control of Labour then the first thing we should look out for is the expulsion of Corbyn and his acolytes. If they are allowed to return to the backbenches in peace then this will be a signal to the voters that Labour has failed to learn its lesson.
The railways were also bloody dreadful as BR.
Corbyn is just trying the whole damn thing into something that unions can bugger about with.
I look back to (say) the Kielder and Rutland reservoir schemes in the 1970s, and the Thames Water Ring Main in the late 1980s, amongst others, and look at what's happening today. Off the top of my head the biggie's the Thames Tideway Scheme, and there have been smaller ones such as the Abberton Reservoir extension.
Are we really getting more investment than there used to be?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17340844
You can make a case for rail re-nationalisation. I don't agree with it for reasons I shan't bore on about right now, but you can make a case for it. But why water? Who, apart from the Far Left, is asking for water supply to be re-nationalised? What is so wrong with the current arrangements that the best solution to them would be re-nationalisation? And how many voters actually care - let alone want to see billions in public money spent on such a thing?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Fortitude
200 seats is the lowest value - for psychological reasons, as you identify - that I think McCluskey could've got away with. If he wanted to be reasonably sure of setting the bar low enough to guarantee success then he could've picked 150, but then he would've looked totally cuckoo rather than, merely, faintly ridiculous.
And we should also remember that 200 seats would still be Labour's worst result since the Thirties.