On that basis the Tories had an even bigger split when Mark Reckless and Douglas Carswell quit for UKIP. It's just 1 MP!
There is bigger drama going on in Australia - their PM might not even last the day as Liberal leader. The Aussie Liberals are more right wing than UK and Canadian conservatives.
Anecdata: Just had dinner with my father, who is Jewish and probably just a tad right-of-centre, who thinks Corbyn's economics would be very harmful to both the country and him personally. He doesn't believe that Corbyn is anti-Semitic and thinks that there's a concerted smear campaign against him.
Do we have any evidence at all that this narriative of anti-Semitism is cutting through with the public, beyond people who are strongly pro-Israel or already strongly anti-Corbyn?
The latest quote might change his mind.....
Why would it? He doesn't identify as a Zionist.
He’s being naive in thinking that “Zionist” in this nasty sneering speech doesn’t actually mean “Jews”.
Anti-semitism may well be weaponised by some on the right but that is in part because it has so often been ignored by those on the left.
On that basis the Tories had an even bigger split when Mark Reckless and Douglas Carswell quit for UKIP. It's just 1 MP!
There is bigger drama going on in Australia - their PM might not even last the day as Liberal leader. The Aussie Liberals are more right wing than UK and Canadian conservatives.
Not under Turnbull they are not and maybe not Julie Bishop either
Forgive me if I have got the wrong person, but weren't you casting doubt on the veracity of DeltaPoll a couple of days ago? If so, what changed your attitude?
I think I said I didn't believe a poll that showed 50/50 on a Leave/Remain second referendum, but it turned out the poll that had been posted was old.
However there is a big discrepancy between them and YouGov on how strong the correlation between Leave/Remain is and current party VI and I'd tend to trust YouGov to have better sampling given their longer track record.
The 50 50 poll was taken post Chequers Deal, Yougov had Remain ahead in its final pre EU referendum poll
Anecdata: Just had dinner with my father, who is Jewish and probably just a tad right-of-centre, who thinks Corbyn's economics would be very harmful to both the country and him personally. He doesn't believe that Corbyn is anti-Semitic and thinks that there's a concerted smear campaign against him.
Do we have any evidence at all that this narriative of anti-Semitism is cutting through with the public, beyond people who are strongly pro-Israel or already strongly anti-Corbyn?
The latest quote might change his mind.....
Why would it? He doesn't identify as a Zionist.
He’s being naive in thinking that “Zionist” in this nasty sneering speech doesn’t actually mean “Jews”.
Anti-semitism may well be weaponised by some on the right but that is in part because it has so often been ignored by those on the left.
There seem to be three problems around whether Zionist is a synonym for Jew. First, what does Corbyn mean? Second, how do most British Jews see it? Third, has the zeitgeist changed with IHRA and Middle East politics so that even if they did not used to be, now the words are more-or-less interchangeable, at least in the weak sense that practically all Jews would agree Israel has a right to exist.
Seems about right. The question, instead, is it that likely? Until such time as the SNP stop being the most popular party by far in Scotland the pressure will be on for one.
The SNP pushed indyref2 in 2017 and lost over a third of their MPs as a result. May will therefore not allow one before the next Holyrood election which could well see a Unionist majority anyway
Telegraph: Hammond under fire for no-deal warning. The i: New Cabinet rift on UK's plan for no-deal Brexit. Express: What does Hammond think he's playing at? Mail: Eeyore Hammond launches project fear (pt2). Times: Brexit splits in cabinet laid bare by Hammond. Metro: It's a big deal if it's no deal. The Sun: Hamm 'doom' blast at No Deal.
Telegraph: Hammond under fire for no-deal warning. The i: New Cabinet rift on UK's plan for no-deal Brexit. Express: What does Hammond think he's playing at? Mail: Eeyore Hammond launches project fear (pt2). Times: Brexit splits in cabinet laid bare by Hammond. Metro: It's a big deal if it's no deal. The Sun: Hamm 'doom' blast at No Deal.
The Mail is not a fan. I still think Hammond has a fighting chance to succeed Theresa May.
Hammond has no chance of succeeding May, he polls poorly with the public and is barely an asterisk with members. If Hammond is the alternative May stays leader until the next general election
Telegraph: Hammond under fire for no-deal warning. The i: New Cabinet rift on UK's plan for no-deal Brexit. Express: What does Hammond think he's playing at? Mail: Eeyore Hammond launches project fear (pt2). Times: Brexit splits in cabinet laid bare by Hammond. Metro: It's a big deal if it's no deal. The Sun: Hamm 'doom' blast at No Deal.
The Mail is not a fan. I still think Hammond has a fighting chance to succeed Theresa May.
That is one of the crappiest headlines in British news history.
Honestly. If you need to add a bracket and part 2 to a headline, you are probably a graduate trainee left in charge whilst the sub-eds are away in France mid August.
Telegraph: Hammond under fire for no-deal warning. The i: New Cabinet rift on UK's plan for no-deal Brexit. Express: What does Hammond think he's playing at? Mail: Eeyore Hammond launches project fear (pt2). Times: Brexit splits in cabinet laid bare by Hammond. Metro: It's a big deal if it's no deal. The Sun: Hamm 'doom' blast at No Deal.
The Mail is not a fan. I still think Hammond has a fighting chance to succeed Theresa May.
That is one of the crappiest headlines in British news history.
Honestly. If you need to add a bracket and part 2 to a headline, you are probably a graduate trainee left in charge whilst the sub-eds are away in France mid August.
That headline is abuse without even the merit of wit. It will be interesting to see if it is replaced on later editions.
He's going to resign as PM, and also resign from Parliament, according to the latest reports. His constituency is Wentworth, which includes Bondi Beach and the surrounding area, a very safe Liberal seat.
Peter Dutton is not a sure vote winner even on his own home turf. The assumption that he’s a potent adversary of his party’s enemies in Queensland looks very shaky in the light of focus groups of undecided voters held in the last few days in his seat of Dickson.
He’s no hero to them. They haven’t forgotten – as Canberra strangely has in the turmoil of the last few days – that Dutton made his reputation imprisoning women and children out in the islands. These voters want the boats stopped but they reckon their MP is heartless, cruel and not very bright.......
....Fighting the ultras to keep the party electable consumes the energies of the Liberal machine.
Peter Dutton is apparently the closest thing to a Donald Trump style candidate that there is in the Australian Liberal Party. He would be very unpopular with liberals and a lot of moderates.
Legal advice prepared by the Government's most senior lawyer should clear the path for Peter Dutton's tilt at the prime ministership — but it is not clear cut.
It states an "agreement" between childcare centres linked to Mr Dutton and the Commonwealth — which would be required to trigger a breach of the Constitution — does not exist.
However, the Solicitor-General also issued the warning that Mr Dutton's case was different to any case the High Court has heard before, that there may be further facts he has not been briefed on, and that the bench has differed on its interpretation of the constitution before.
"I consider there to be some risk ... that the High Court might conclude that there is a conflict between Mr Dutton's duty as a parliamentarian and his personal interests," the advice states.
Peter Dutton only has a 51.6%/48.4% margin in his own constituency. Seems a bit risky to elect him as prime minister given those figures.
And the High Court could rule him ineligible......notable Arthur Sinodinos (absent since October 17 with cancer, described as 'unrecognisable' by a TV anchor) walking in with Turnbull.....
Peter Dutton only has a 51.6%/48.4% margin in his own constituency. Seems a bit risky to elect him as prime minister given those figures.
And the High Court could rule him ineligible......notable Arthur Sinodinos (absent since October 17 with cancer, described as 'unrecognisable' by a TV anchor) walking in with Turnbull.....
Interesting. Although I think their rules are far too stringent on who can and can't be an Australian member of Parliament. It seems like it's very easy to be disqualified.
Turnbull almost survives. Spill motion carried by 45 to 40.
I wonder if Turnbull will stand down? If Dutton replaces him I suspect he will, and IIRC one government supporter has said they'll move to the cross benches robbing Dutton of his majority and in the General Election that follows the Lib Dems will go down big time to Labor.
Julie Bishop out - down to Scott Morrison or Peter Dutton. Commentators saying she'll stand down at GE.
ABC citing 3 sources saying Scott Morrison 45 to Peter Dutton 40 - so the rightwing coup attempt by Dutton & his supporters has failed. As one commentator observes 'the winner is Bill Shorten' (Labor leader).....
Rightwingers over-estimating their support and failing in a coup attempt.....
ABC citing 3 sources saying Scott Morrison 45 to Peter Dutton 40 - so the rightwing coup attempt by Dutton & his supporters has failed. As one commentator observes 'the winner is Bill Shorten' (Labor leader).....
Rightwingers over-estimating their support and failing in a coup attempt.....
The problem is not so much right vs left, but that neither side has a candidate who is any good. Dutton reminds everyone of Voldemort. Morrison is a nasty piece of work who will lead the Liberals to a fairly comprehensive defeat. Because, like most Australian politicians, he simply doesn't believe in anything except his own ambition. No vision to sell.
Nationals MP says he will still go to crossbench, despite Morrison win
Nationals MP Kevin Hogan just told me he still plans to go to the crossbench as a result of the leadership spill in the Liberal Party - his warning shot before the partyroom was that any spill would trigger that move, it wasn’t about who emerged as Liberal leader. However, Hogan has written a letter guaranteeing confidence and supply to the Coalition government.
It’s likely there will be no issue of confidence and supply for prime minister Scott Morrison - once the Coalition agreement is put back into place, Hogan’s confirmation of confidence and supply means it won’t fall on the floor of the lower house.
We can have technical arguments about whether having 75 MPs with one in the speaker’s chair makes it a minority government, though.
It's a bit puzzling that they haven't given the figures for the first round result in which Julie Bishop was eliminated. It would be interesting to know how close she was to the other two candidates.
Anecdata: Just had dinner with my father, who is Jewish and probably just a tad right-of-centre, who thinks Corbyn's economics would be very harmful to both the country and him personally. He doesn't believe that Corbyn is anti-Semitic and thinks that there's a concerted smear campaign against him.
Do we have any evidence at all that this narriative of anti-Semitism is cutting through with the public, beyond people who are strongly pro-Israel or already strongly anti-Corbyn?
If its cutting through with the public, I'd expect Labour to be plummeting in the polls. But instead they are holding steady. I think that's because Labour supporters (and indeed others too) simply don't believe he is antisemitic.
For the anecdata: At a recent family bbq, very few over 30 planning to vote for him, but no one thought antisemitic. They just thought him a bit weak and lacking in charisma.
Anecdata: Just had dinner with my father, who is Jewish and probably just a tad right-of-centre, who thinks Corbyn's economics would be very harmful to both the country and him personally. He doesn't believe that Corbyn is anti-Semitic and thinks that there's a concerted smear campaign against him.
Do we have any evidence at all that this narriative of anti-Semitism is cutting through with the public, beyond people who are strongly pro-Israel or already strongly anti-Corbyn?
If its cutting through with the public, I'd expect Labour to be plummeting in the polls. But instead they are holding steady. I think that's because Labour supporters (and indeed others too) simply don't believe he is antisemitic.
For the anecdata: At a recent family bbq, very few over 30 planning to vote for him, but no one thought antisemitic. They just thought him a bit weak and lacking in charisma.
And hence the curse of anti-Semitism slowly becomes accepted and mainstream.
Anecdata: Just had dinner with my father, who is Jewish and probably just a tad right-of-centre, who thinks Corbyn's economics would be very harmful to both the country and him personally. He doesn't believe that Corbyn is anti-Semitic and thinks that there's a concerted smear campaign against him.
Do we have any evidence at all that this narriative of anti-Semitism is cutting through with the public, beyond people who are strongly pro-Israel or already strongly anti-Corbyn?
If its cutting through with the public, I'd expect Labour to be plummeting in the polls. But instead they are holding steady. I think that's because Labour supporters (and indeed others too) simply don't believe he is antisemitic.
For the anecdata: At a recent family bbq, very few over 30 planning to vote for him, but no one thought antisemitic. They just thought him a bit weak and lacking in charisma.
One reason is that it cuts against expectations - Labour is supposed to be many things, a lot of them negative, but not racist, especially a self-styled anti-racist. Another is that the tropes around anti-Semitism, especially in its left-wing form, are not as familiar as say the ones around black people, and Jews generally aren't seen as an out group. There's also the thing anti-Semites have done on the left for ages, which is to attach their nastier animus to the more reasonable objections to Israel. Finally, there's the same reason as Trump - as long as 'normal' Labour MPs and commentators are prepared to go in to bat for him, people will treat it as a he said she said issue exaggerated by opponents.
It's shameful what's going on, but it won't truly crack until a lot of people on his own side admit he's beyond the pale.
Anecdata: Just had dinner with my father, who is Jewish and probably just a tad right-of-centre, who thinks Corbyn's economics would be very harmful to both the country and him personally. He doesn't believe that Corbyn is anti-Semitic and thinks that there's a concerted smear campaign against him.
Do we have any evidence at all that this narriative of anti-Semitism is cutting through with the public, beyond people who are strongly pro-Israel or already strongly anti-Corbyn?
If its cutting through with the public, I'd expect Labour to be plummeting in the polls. But instead they are holding steady. I think that's because Labour supporters (and indeed others too) simply don't believe he is antisemitic.
For the anecdata: At a recent family bbq, very few over 30 planning to vote for him, but no one thought antisemitic. They just thought him a bit weak and lacking in charisma.
And hence the curse of anti-Semitism slowly becomes accepted and mainstream.
That'll end well, won't it?
That doesn't follow from what I wrote at all. Either you think 40% of the country are happy to support an antisemite, or the case is not accepted by the 40%. I think its the latter. If Labour supporters do come round to the view that he is antisemitic, then i think his support will evaporate.
Anecdata: Just had dinner with my father, who is Jewish and probably just a tad right-of-centre, who thinks Corbyn's economics would be very harmful to both the country and him personally. He doesn't believe that Corbyn is anti-Semitic and thinks that there's a concerted smear campaign against him.
Do we have any evidence at all that this narriative of anti-Semitism is cutting through with the public, beyond people who are strongly pro-Israel or already strongly anti-Corbyn?
If its cutting through with the public, I'd expect Labour to be plummeting in the polls. But instead they are holding steady. I think that's because Labour supporters (and indeed others too) simply don't believe he is antisemitic.
For the anecdata: At a recent family bbq, very few over 30 planning to vote for him, but no one thought antisemitic. They just thought him a bit weak and lacking in charisma.
One reason is that it cuts against expectations - Labour is supposed to be many things, a lot of them negative, but not racist, especially a self-styled anti-racist. Another is that the tropes around anti-Semitism, especially in its left-wing form, are not as familiar as say the ones around black people, and Jews generally aren't seen as an out group. There's also the thing anti-Semites have done on the left for ages, which is to attach their nastier animus to the more reasonable objections to Israel. Finally, there's the same reason as Trump - as long as 'normal' Labour MPs and commentators are prepared to go in to bat for him, people will treat it as a he said she said issue exaggerated by opponents.
It's shameful what's going on, but it won't truly crack until a lot of people on his own side admit he's beyond the pale.
Corbyn is merely taking a principled stand against a state that exhibits racist and brutal behaviour, and occupies foreign territory outwith the sanction of the UN. He does not discriminate against Jews just because they are Jews. He doesn't single out Israel alone, but also criticises other states that behave in a similar way, such as Burma and Saudi Arabia, and even his own with respect its past behaviour in the 6 counties.
However, foreign polity is not a major concern of many voters. Of much greater concern is his seeming lack of intellectual ability and general competence, given that he is a potential future PM. However, he is doing an excellent job with respect to the EU issue, as he is keeping Labour-voting Brexiteers aboard by standing on the fence.
Anecdata: Just had dinner with my father, who is Jewish and probably just a tad right-of-centre, who thinks Corbyn's economics would be very harmful to both the country and him personally. He doesn't believe that Corbyn is anti-Semitic and thinks that there's a concerted smear campaign against him.
Do we have any evidence at all that this narriative of anti-Semitism is cutting through with the public, beyond people who are strongly pro-Israel or already strongly anti-Corbyn?
If its cutting through with the public, I'd expect Labour to be plummeting in the polls. But instead they are holding steady. I think that's because Labour supporters (and indeed others too) simply don't believe he is antisemitic.
For the anecdata: At a recent family bbq, very few over 30 planning to vote for him, but no one thought antisemitic. They just thought him a bit weak and lacking in charisma.
O to go in to bat for him, people will treat it as a he said she said issue exaggerated by opponents.
It's shameful what's going on, but it won't truly crack until a lot of people on his own side admit he's beyond the pale.
Corbyn is merely taking a principled stand against a state that exhibits racist and brutal behaviour, and occupies foreign territory outwith the sanction of the UN. He does not discriminate against Jews just because they are Jews. He doesn't single out Israel alone, but also criticises other states that behave in a similar way, such as Burma and Saudi Arabia, and even his own with respect its past behaviour in the 6 counties.
However, foreign polity is not a major concern of many voters. Of much greater concern is his seeming lack of intellectual ability and general competence, given that he is a potential future PM. However, he is doing an excellent job with respect to the EU issue, as he is keeping Labour-voting Brexiteers aboard by standing on the fence.
I wonder if he has any interest at all in:
Indian policy in Kashmir Moroccan policy in Western Sahara Burmese policy in Rakhine Chinese policy in Tibet and Xinjiang Russian policy in Crimea Armenian policy in Nagorno Karabakh
Anecdata: Just had dinner with my father, who is Jewish and probably just a tad right-of-centre, who thinks Corbyn's economics would be very harmful to both the country and him personally. He doesn't believe that Corbyn is anti-Semitic and thinks that there's a concerted smear campaign against him.
Do we have any evidence at all that this narriative of anti-Semitism is cutting through with the public, beyond people who are strongly pro-Israel or already strongly anti-Corbyn?
If its cutting through with the public, I'd expect Labour to be plummeting in the polls. But instead they are holding steady. I think that's because Labour supporters (and indeed others too) simply don't believe he is antisemitic.
For the anecdata: At a recent family bbq, very few over 30 planning to vote for him, but no one thought antisemitic. They just thought him a bit weak and lacking in charisma.
One reason is that it cuts against expectations - Labour is supposed to be many things, a lot of them negative, but not racist, especially a self-styled anti-racist. Another is that the tropes around anti-Semitism, especially in its left-wing form, are not as familiar as say the ones around black people, and Jews generally aren't seen as an out group. There's also the thing anti-Semites have done on the left for ages, which is to attach their nastier animus to the more reasonable objections to Israel. Finally, there's the same reason as Trump - as long as 'normal' Labour MPs and commentators are prepared to go in to bat for him, people will treat it as a he said she said issue exaggerated by opponents.
It's shameful what's going on, but it won't truly crack until a lot of people on his own side admit he's beyond the pale.
Alan Dersowitz is the liberal's liberal. He was described by Newsweek as America's "most peripatetic civil liberties lawyer and one of its most distinguished defenders of individual rights". He has a wall full of honorary doctorates. He's campaigned for Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama and gun control - and against Donald Trump.
You'd imagine the Left here would love him.
He also said that Jeremy Corbyn is "a virulent anti-Semite, a virulent hater of Jews and the nation state of the Jewish people" and "you have Jeremy Corbyn who may potentially become the next Prime Minister of England. Shame on Great Britain for allowing that to come to pass."
Anecdata: Just had dinner with my father, who is Jewish and probably just a tad right-of-centre, who thinks Corbyn's economics would be very harmful to both the country and him personally. He doesn't believe that Corbyn is anti-Semitic and thinks that there's a concerted smear campaign against him.
Do we have any evidence at all that this narriative of anti-Semitism is cutting through with the public, beyond people who are strongly pro-Israel or already strongly anti-Corbyn?
If its cutting through with the public, I'd expect Labour to be plummeting in the polls. But instead they are holding steady. I think that's because Labour supporters (and indeed others too) simply don't believe he is antisemitic.
For the anecdata: At a recent family bbq, very few over 30 planning to vote for him, but no one thought antisemitic. They just thought him a bit weak and lacking in charisma.
And hence the curse of anti-Semitism slowly becomes accepted and mainstream.
That'll end well, won't it?
That doesn't follow from what I wrote at all. Either you think 40% of the country are happy to support an antisemite, or the case is not accepted by the 40%. I think its the latter. If Labour supporters do come round to the view that he is antisemitic, then i think his support will evaporate.
It's not that simple. 40% of the country (at least) will hardly have heard of the story, and many of the ones that have hardly heard of it, yet alone studied it in detail, and these will probably fall back on their preconceptions. If they quite like Corbyn or Labour, it's a smear, or he's correct. If they dislike him: well, what do you expect?
You make it sound as though the population have studied the 'case' in detail, reading the different sides and weighing up the evidence for a verdict. That's rubbish.
The other day, someone on here snarkily said that posters were suddenly against anti-Semitism, insinuating that they were doing so for political reasons. Whilst there may be some of that, in other cases it will be because for most of us, there has been no reason to voice opposition to anti-Semitism because there was so little of it about, and it was mostly 'hidden'.
And that's what has changed. On the left, borderline or even hard anti-Semitism is becoming mainstream. Just look at what some of Labour's own MPs are saying.
Anecdata: Just had dinner with my father, who is Jewish and probably just a tad right-of-centre, who thinks Corbyn's economics would be very harmful to both the country and him personally. He doesn't believe that Corbyn is anti-Semitic and thinks that there's a concerted smear campaign against him.
Do we have any evidence at all that this narriative of anti-Semitism is cutting through with the public, beyond people who are strongly pro-Israel or already strongly anti-Corbyn?
If its cutting through with the public, I'd expect Labour to be plummeting in the polls. But instead they are holding steady. I think that's because Labour supporters (and indeed others too) simply don't believe he is antisemitic.
For the anecdata: At a recent family bbq, very few over 30 planning to vote for him, but no one thought antisemitic. They just thought him a bit weak and lacking in charisma.
And hence the curse of anti-Semitism slowly becomes accepted and mainstream.
That'll end well, won't it?
That doesn't follow from what I wrote at all. Either you think 40% of the country are happy to support an antisemite, or the case is not accepted by the 40%. I think its the latter. If Labour supporters do come round to the view that he is antisemitic, then i think his support will evaporate.
It's not that simple. 40% of the country (at least) will hardly have heard of the story, and many of the ones that have hardly heard of it, yet alone studied it in detail, and these will probably fall back on their preconceptions. If they quite like Corbyn or Labour, it's a smear, or he's correct. If they dislike him: well, what do you expect?
You make it sound as though the population have studied the 'case' in detail, reading the different sides and weighing up the evidence for a verdict. That's rubbish.
The other day, someone on here snarkily said that posters were suddenly against anti-Semitism, insinuating that they were doing so for political reasons. Whilst there may be some of that, in other cases it will be because for most of us, there has been no reason to voice opposition to anti-Semitism because there was so little of it about, and it was mostly 'hidden'.
And that's what has changed. On the left, borderline or even hard anti-Semitism is becoming mainstream. Just look at what some of Labour's own MPs are saying.
To have a British political party left of the BNP giving anti-semitism a pass has until very, very recently been inconceivable.
Anecdata: Just had dinner with my father, wh have any evidence at all that this narriative-Corbyn?
If its cutting through with the public, I'd expect Labour to be plummeting in the polls. But instead they are holding steady. I think that's because Labour supporters (and indeed others too) simply don't believe he is antisemitic.
For the anecdata: At a recent family bbq, very few over 30 planning to vote for him, but no one thought antisemitic. They just thought him a bit weak and lacking in charisma.
And hence the curse of anti-Semitism slowly becomes accepted and mainstream.
That'll end well, won't it?
That doesn't follow from what I wrote at all. Either you think 40% of the country are happy to support an antisemite, or the case is not accepted by the 40%. I think its the latter. If Labour supporters do come round to the view that he is antisemitic, then i think his support will evaporate.
It's not that simple. 40% of the country (at least) will hardly have heard of the story, and many of the ones that have hardly heard of it, yet alone studied it in detail, and these will probably fall back on their preconceptions. If they quite like Corbyn or Labour, it's a smear, or he's correct. If they dislike him: well, what do you expect?
You make it sound as though the population have studied the 'case' in detail, reading the different sides and weighing up the evidence for a verdict. That's rubbish.
The other day, someone on here snarkily said that posters were suddenly against anti-Semitism, insinuating that they were doing so for political reasons. Whilst there may be some of that, in other cases it will be because for most of us, there has been no reason to voice opposition to anti-Semitism because there was so little of it about, and it was mostly 'hidden'.
And that's what has changed. On the left, borderline or even hard anti-Semitism is becoming mainstream. Just look at what some of Labour's own MPs are saying.
YouGov looked at this in some detail. Only about 25% of the population are following the story, even a little. Of those, there is a significand chunk that don't believe it. Of those that believe it, there is a (small) slice that think better of Corbyn for it. Of the remainder (already a small proportion) very few of them are current Labour supporters. Hence it is hardly surprising that it hasn't shifted the polls, not least because the lack of appeal of any party nowadays means that most people are voting against something, rather than for it, and nothing in this story makes the alternatives any less unappealing.
Saw a snippet of an article on Twitter yesterday. Apparently Labour are worried one MP going could start an avalanche of desertions. But that just reminds me of the Brown coup-that-wasn't, when Purnell resigned and then nobody else did. Nobody wants to be first.
At what point does the excuse of 'fighting for their party' ring hollow? If they go into the next election lined up behind Corbyn, all their complaints and criticisms now are worthless.
Indian policy in Kashmir Moroccan policy in Western Sahara Burmese policy in Rakhine Chinese policy in Tibet and Xinjiang Russian policy in Crimea Armenian policy in Nagorno Karabakh
So why this tunnel vision regarding Israel?
He's talked about most of those. Google is your friend
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
Anecdata: Just had dinner with my father, who is Jewish and probably just a tad right-of-centre, who thinks Corbyn's economics would be very harmful to both the country and him personally. He doesn't believe that Corbyn is anti-Semitic and thinks that there's a concerted smear campaign against him.
Do we have any evidence at all that this narriative of anti-Semitism is cutting through with the public, beyond people who are strongly pro-Israel or already strongly anti-Corbyn?
If its cutting through with the public, I'd expect Labour to be plummeting in the polls. But instead they are holding steady. I think that's because Labour supporters (and indeed others too) simply don't believe he is antisemitic.
For the anecdata: At a recent family bbq, very few over 30 planning to vote for him, but no one thought antisemitic. They just thought him a bit weak and lacking in charisma.
O to go in to bat for him, people will treat it as a he said she said issue exaggerated by opponents.
It's shameful what's going on, but it won't truly crack until a lot of people on his own side admit he's beyond the pale.
Corbyn is merely taking a principled stand against a state that exhibits racist and brutal behaviour, and occupies foreign territory outwith the sanction of the UN. He does not discriminate against Jews just because they are Jews. He doesn't single out Israel alone, but also criticises other states that behave in a similar way, such as Burma and Saudi Arabia, and even his own with respect its past behaviour in the 6 counties.
However, foreign polity is not a major concern of many voters. Of much greater concern is his seeming lack of intellectual ability and general competence, given that he is a potential future PM. However, he is doing an excellent job with respect to the EU issue, as he is keeping Labour-voting Brexiteers aboard by standing on the fence.
I wonder if he has any interest at all in:
Indian policy in Kashmir Moroccan policy in Western Sahara Burmese policy in Rakhine Chinese policy in Tibet and Xinjiang Russian policy in Crimea Armenian policy in Nagorno Karabakh
So why this tunnel vision regarding Israel?
The difference is the perception that, unlike the others, oppression in Israel has western backing.
It's not that simple. 40% of the country (at least) will hardly have heard of the story, and many of the ones that have hardly heard of it, yet alone studied it in detail, and these will probably fall back on their preconceptions. If they quite like Corbyn or Labour, it's a smear, or he's correct. If they dislike him: well, what do you expect?
You make it sound as though the population have studied the 'case' in detail, reading the different sides and weighing up the evidence for a verdict. That's rubbish.
The other day, someone on here snarkily said that posters were suddenly against anti-Semitism, insinuating that they were doing so for political reasons. Whilst there may be some of that, in other cases it will be because for most of us, there has been no reason to voice opposition to anti-Semitism because there was so little of it about, and it was mostly 'hidden'.
And that's what has changed. On the left, borderline or even hard anti-Semitism is becoming mainstream. Just look at what some of Labour's own MPs are saying.
I think the vast majority of the UK will have heard of the story. It's been a prominent news item for most of the Summer. Studied in detail - of course not, no one normal studies anything in detail except perhaps Wayne Rooney's metatarsal.
It's not that simple. 40% of the country (at least) will hardly have heard of the story, and many of the ones that have hardly heard of it, yet alone studied it in detail, and these will probably fall back on their preconceptions. If they quite like Corbyn or Labour, it's a smear, or he's correct. If they dislike him: well, what do you expect?
You make it sound as though the population have studied the 'case' in detail, reading the different sides and weighing up the evidence for a verdict. That's rubbish.
The other day, someone on here snarkily said that posters were suddenly against anti-Semitism, insinuating that they were doing so for political reasons. Whilst there may be some of that, in other cases it will be because for most of us, there has been no reason to voice opposition to anti-Semitism because there was so little of it about, and it was mostly 'hidden'.
And that's what has changed. On the left, borderline or even hard anti-Semitism is becoming mainstream. Just look at what some of Labour's own MPs are saying.
I think the vast majority of the UK will have heard of the story. It's been a prominent news item for most of the Summer. Studied in detail - of course not, no one normal studies anything in detail except perhaps Wayne Rooney's metatarsal.
Anecdata: Just had dinner with my father, who is Jewish and probably just a tad right-of-centre, who thinks Corbyn's economics would be very harmful to both the country and him personally. He doesn't believe that Corbyn is anti-Semitic and thinks that there's a concerted smear campaign against him.
Do we have any evidence at all that this narriative of anti-Semitism is cutting through with the public, beyond people who are strongly pro-Israel or already strongly anti-Corbyn?
If its cutting through with the public, I'd expect Labour to be plummeting in the polls. But instead they are holding steady. I think that's because Labour supporters (and indeed others too) simply don't believe he is antisemitic.
For the anecdata: At a recent family bbq, very few over 30 planning to vote for him, but no one thought antisemitic. They just thought him a bit weak and lacking in charisma.
One reason is that it cuts against s own side admit he's beyond the pale.
Corbyn standing on the fence.
He doesn't though does he? He doesn't stand up for human rights in Iran, he takes the regime's money to appear on their propaganda channel. He doesn't in Syria. He doesn't in Russia. Or Venezuela for that matter. Nor are his interventions proportionate. It's Israel that gets him going.
And what bit of supporting Palestinian rights requires you to say British Zionists (most British Jews, fyi) lack British values "Despite living here all their lives". What bit of it requires you to honour the terrorists responsible for the most notorious attack on Jews since WW2? What bit of it requires you to go on Iranian TV to spout an anti-Semitic conspiracy theories about terrorist attacks on Egypt and Israel? How does writing a letter in defence of a vicar who claimed the Jews are behind 9/11 help the Palestinian cause, or giving money to a Holocaust denier? Or defending a mural that depicted hook nosed bankers subjugating the masses? I'm all ears. Because whatever other noble campaigning things he has done, these don't seem helpful - rather offensive and racist.
And yes. He doesn't discriminate all Jews. Like the hard left throughout history, Stalin being a notable example, he thinks they're ok so long as they agree with him on politics. He does discriminate against the vast majority who don't though, as like any classic anti-Semite he sees ulterior motives - the hand of Israel to repeat a phrase.
His self-image of himself maybe as a tireless campaigner for human rights and peace, but if you look at his actions he's not that is he? He's a nasty anti-Semitic crank who shows his true racist colours whenever Jewish people have the temerity to disagree with him.
Saw a snippet of an article on Twitter yesterday. Apparently Labour are worried one MP going could start an avalanche of desertions. But that just reminds me of the Brown coup-that-wasn't, when Purnell resigned and then nobody else did. Nobody wants to be first.
At what point does the excuse of 'fighting for their party' ring hollow? If they go into the next election lined up behind Corbyn, all their complaints and criticisms now are worthless.
Off-topic:
Mr Dancer,
Its only tangentially related to F1 (he is a Haas development driver), but you might be amused to hear about the stupidity of the F2 driver Ferrucci.
http s://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBJ8D1pxXx8
How not to run a motorsport career. It makes Dan Ticktum's antics of three years ago seem sane.
ABC citing 3 sources saying Scott Morrison 45 to Peter Dutton 40 - so the rightwing coup attempt by Dutton & his supporters has failed. As one commentator observes 'the winner is Bill Shorten' (Labor leader).....
Rightwingers over-estimating their support and failing in a coup attempt.....
Yes, Turnbull has resigned and Scott Morrison the Treasurer is Australia's new PM.
In the end the hard right Dutton did succeed in forcing Turnbull out but failed to get the leadership himself with Morrison beating Dutton 45 to 40. Shorten has also paid tribute to Turnbull.
In his final press conference Turnbull congratulated Morrison and New deputy Josh Fryberg, thanked his Foreign Minister Julie Bishop and attached Dutton for what he called a coup to try and being down the government. He them departed saying he loved Australia
It's not that simple. 40% of the country (at least) will hardly have heard of the story, and many of the ones that have hardly heard of it, yet alone studied it in detail, and these will probably fall back on their preconceptions. If they quite like Corbyn or Labour, it's a smear, or he's correct. If they dislike him: well, what do you expect?
You make it sound as though the population have studied the 'case' in detail, reading the different sides and weighing up the evidence for a verdict. That's rubbish.
[SNIP]
YouGov looked at this in some detail. Only about 25% of the population are following the story, even a little. Of those, there is a significand chunk that don't believe it. Of those that believe it, there is a (small) slice that think better of Corbyn for it. Of the remainder (already a small proportion) very few of them are current Labour supporters. Hence it is hardly surprising that it hasn't shifted the polls, not least because the lack of appeal of any party nowadays means that most people are voting against something, rather than for it, and nothing in this story makes the alternatives any less unappealing.
Which asked about that particular wreath-laying incident. This actually supports my point since only 26% said they weren't aware of that particular story.
If 74% have heard of the wreath-laying thing, then I think we can infer that a larger proportion have heard about JC + anti-semitism row. I would estimate at least 85% know there is a row, it's been headline news on the BBC and all of the newspapers.
So the suggestion that people simply haven't heard about JC + anti-semitism I think is simply wrong. I think it's clear that the reason Labour haven't plummeted and the Tories haven't shot up, is that non-Tories don't believe that he is anti-semitic.
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
I'd generally agree with this - but at the moment it's a bit unhelpful. Those most animated are, like myself, Labour people ashamed of what our party has become. And the xenophobia that taints Brexit is a separate type of issue to the leader of one of the main political parties who has been caught being actively racist, having had a history of behaviour that leaves the minority he's been being racist to terrified of him becoming PM.
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
I'd generally agree with this - but at the moment it's a bit unhelpful. Those most animated are, like myself, Labour people ashamed of what our party has become. And the xenophobia that taints Brexit is a separate type of issue to the leader of one of the main political parties who has been caught being actively racist, having had a history of behaviour that leaves the minority he's been being racist to terrified of him becoming PM.
On here the most animated posters are those who were very fond of using Islamophobia to further their political goals in the referendum campaign.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
I'd generally agree with this - but at the moment it's a bit unhelpful. Those most animated are, like myself, Labour people ashamed of what our party has become. And the xenophobia that taints Brexit is a separate type of issue to the leader of one of the main political parties who has been caught being actively racist, having had a history of behaviour that leaves the minority he's been being racist to terrified of him becoming PM.
On here the most animated posters are those who were very fond of using Islamophobia to further their political goals in the referendum campaign.
(Snip)
Really? I'm fairly animated on this topic, and I'm unsure the description fits me.
Just looking at that Yougov result again this morning is the number for "don't know" not remarkably low? We saw a poll recently when 25% of the population didn't even know if they had changed their mind on Brexit.
Of all the recent posts about Corbyn being present but not involved the funniest was the Remain campaign, not least because it was true. Labour went into the last election committed to implementing the referendum result, a position which made complete nonsense of May's idiotic decision to call the election in the first place. As a result Brexit, which was supposed to be the centre piece barely featured in the campaign giving May the opportunity to mess up a range of other policies. Nevertheless, this is the basis upon which Labour MPs were elected and got 40% of the vote.
Of course people are entitled to change their mind. What we are seeing in Labour, however, is people who never agreed with the party line trying to change it despite the views of the anti-Semite who leads them. The impression I was getting is that the Labour Party Conference is going to make the rallies of a former German leader look like a Lib Dem tea morning with the slate of his supporters storming the NEC. It isn't easy to reconcile that with the rejection of his position on this. But we shall see.
Although Liberal moderates preferred Morrison to Dutton Morrison will still be more conservative than the liberal centrist Turnbull was and Shorten knows this. Morrison opposed gay marriage when it passed in the recent referendum in Australia and Morrison also played a key role in implementing the hard line 'Stop the boats' anti immigration policy of the Abbott government.
Unlike Turnbull Morrison is also a monarchist and on Brexit he urged the EU not to punish the UK
The more Labour supporters have got to see the Tory faces behind Brexit the more the flakey have hardened in their opposition to it. If Corbyn's ambivalence doesn't cause an almighty split at Conference I'll be surprised. His best hope is that the antisemitism noise drowns it out.
Although Liberal moderates preferred Morrison to Dutton Morrison will still be more conservative than the liberal centrist Turnbull was and Shorten knows this. Morrison opposed gay marriage when it passed in the recent referendum in Australia and Morrison also played a key role in implementing the hard line 'Stop the boats' anti immigration policy of the Abbott government.
Unlike Turnbull Morrison is also a monarchist and on Brexit he urged the EU not to punish the UK
On that basis the Tories had an even bigger split when Mark Reckless and Douglas Carswell quit for UKIP. It's just 1 MP!
There is bigger drama going on in Australia - their PM might not even last the day as Liberal leader. The Aussie Liberals are more right wing than UK and Canadian conservatives.
I know, but was fun to see somewhere a party is prepared to act on divisions and constant talk of new partird, even if it is only one. Hey, may be more will follow.
As for Aus, that's just what both sides do down there.
Just looking at that Yougov result again this morning is the number for "don't know" not remarkably low? We saw a poll recently when 25% of the population didn't even know if they had changed their mind on Brexit.
Of all the recent posts about Corbyn being present but not involved the funniest was the Remain campaign, not least because it was true. Labour went into the last election committed to implementing the referendum result, a position which made complete nonsense of May's idiotic decision to call the election in the first place. As a result Brexit, which was supposed to be the centre piece barely featured in the campaign giving May the opportunity to mess up a range of other policies. Nevertheless, this is the basis upon which Labour MPs were elected and got 40% of the vote.
Of course people are entitled to change their mind. What we are seeing in Labour, however, is people who never agreed with the party line trying to change it despite the views of the anti-Semite who leads them. The impression I was getting is that the Labour Party Conference is going to make the rallies of a former German leader look like a Lib Dem tea morning with the slate of his supporters storming the NEC. It isn't easy to reconcile that with the rejection of his position on this. But we shall see.
It's been obvious for quite a while that Labour's tactics are to be slightly less Brexit than the Tories, to attract remainers whilst keeping most of their leave voters on board. It's also obvious that almost all Labour MPs and a majority of their supporters are opposed to Brexit. Being pushed away from a tactical fence toward their own convictions was always only a matter of time.
Saw a snippet of an article on Twitter yesterday. Apparently Labour are worried one MP going could start an avalanche of desertions. But that just reminds me of the Brown coup-that-wasn't, when Purnell resigned and then nobody else did. Nobody wants to be first.
At what point does the excuse of 'fighting for their party' ring hollow? If they go into the next election lined up behind Corbyn, all their complaints and criticisms now are worthless.
Frankly I wish they stop leaking how sad they are all the time. Either they don't really believe what they are saying, or they think despite it Corbyn should be PM and they will just oppose the bits of him they don't like within the party and/or they think the Labour party is more important than how bad Corbyn is.
Either way constant talk if how cross they are just irritates. If like some posters they are deeply concerned about Corbyn for a variety of reasons but the movement is more important and needs them still, they should just say that, not fantasize about splitting.
It's not that simple. 40% of the country (at least) will hardly have heard of the story, and many of the ones that have hardly heard of it, yet alone studied it in detail, and these will probably fall back on their preconceptions. If they quite like Corbyn or Labour, it's a smear, or he's correct. If they dislike him: well, what do you expect?
You make it sound as though the population have studied the 'case' in detail, reading the different sides and weighing up the evidence for a verdict. That's rubbish.
[SNIP]
YouGov looked at this in some detail. Only about 25% of the population are following the story, even a little. Of those, there is a significand chunk that don't believe it. Of those that believe it, there is a (small) slice that think better of Corbyn for it. Of the remainder (already a small proportion) very few of them are current Labour supporters. Hence it is hardly surprising that it hasn't shifted the polls, not least because the lack of appeal of any party nowadays means that most people are voting against something, rather than for it, and nothing in this story makes the alternatives any less unappealing.
Which asked about that particular wreath-laying incident. This actually supports my point since only 26% said they weren't aware of that particular story.
If 74% have heard of the wreath-laying thing, then I think we can infer that a larger proportion have heard about JC + anti-semitism row. I would estimate at least 85% know there is a row, it's been headline news on the BBC and all of the newspapers.
So the suggestion that people simply haven't heard about JC + anti-semitism I think is simply wrong. I think it's clear that the reason Labour haven't plummeted and the Tories haven't shot up, is that non-Tories don't believe that he is anti-semitic.
Anyway I need to go to work now.
Yes, you're right that the poll found both that only a quarter of people were following the story and that only a quarter hadn't heard of it at all. Sloppy wording in my earlier post, for which apologies.
Nevertheless it does underline the fact that the detail of this passes many people by - and for those that see it, it's easily dismissed as part of the usual political knock-about (and general media condemnation of Corbyn). The Tories in particular do need to concentrate on their own positive agenda; people have had enough of politics that consists entirely of slagging off the other side.
For all the vitriol in Australian politics that is a remarkably gracious tribute.
I may be being unfair, but I wonder if he has an eye to the sort of Leftish liberal vote in an election that has to be held within a year and may be held very quickly.
Anecdata: Just had dinner with my father, who is Jewish and probably just a tad right-of-centre, who thinks Corbyn's economics would be very harmful to both the country and him personally. He doesn't believe that Corbyn is anti-Semitic and thinks that there's a concerted smear campaign against him.
Do we have any evidence at all that this narriative of anti-Semitism is cutting through with the public, beyond people who are strongly pro-Israel or already strongly anti-Corbyn?
If its cutting through with the public, I'd expect Labour to be plummeting in the polls. But instead they are holding steady. I think that's because Labour supporters (and indeed others too) simply don't believe he is antisemitic.
For the anecdata: At a recent family bbq, very few over 30 planning to vote for him, but no one thought antisemitic. They just thought him a bit weak and lacking in charisma.
One reason is that it cuts against expectations - Labour is supposed to be many things, a lot of them negative, but not racist, especially a self-styled anti-racist. Another is that the tropes around anti-Semitism, especially in its left-wing form, are not as familiar as say the ones around black people, and Jews generally aren't seen as an out group. There's also the thing anti-Semites have done on the left for ages, which is to attach their nastier animus to the more reasonable objections to Israel. Finally, there's the same reason as Trump - as long as 'normal' Labour MPs and commentators are prepared to go in to bat for him, people will treat it as a he said she said issue exaggerated by opponents.
It's shameful what's going on, but it won't truly crack until a lot of people on his own side admit he's beyond the pale.
However, foreign polity is not a major concern of many voters. Of much greater concern is his seeming lack of intellectual ability and general competence, given that he is a potential future PM. However, he is doing an excellent job with respect to the EU issue, as he is keeping Labour-voting Brexiteers aboard by standing on the fence.
That's true, to a degree. I find his 'masterly inactivity' approach deeply cynical and sitting out this major issue, by sitting on the fence, is not very useful should he come to power in this chaos, but as a political tactic it seems to be working well.
Saw a snippet of an article on Twitter yesterday. Apparently Labour are worried one MP going could start an avalanche of desertions. But that just reminds me of the Brown coup-that-wasn't, when Purnell resigned and then nobody else did. Nobody wants to be first.
At what point does the excuse of 'fighting for their party' ring hollow? If they go into the next election lined up behind Corbyn, all their complaints and criticisms now are worthless.
Frankly I wish they stop leaking how sad they are all the time. Either they don't really believe what they are saying, or they think despite it Corbyn should be PM and they will just oppose the bits of him they don't like within the party and/or they think the Labour party is more important than how bad Corbyn is.
Either way constant talk if how cross they are just irritates. If like some posters they are deeply concerned about Corbyn for a variety of reasons but the movement is more important and needs them still, they should just say that, not fantasize about splitting.
Just looking at that Yougov result again this morning is the number for "don't know" not remarkably low? We saw a poll recently when 25% of the population didn't even know if they had changed their mind on Brexit.
Of all the recent posts about Corbyn being present but not involved the funniest was the Remain campaign, not least because it was true. Labour went into the last election committed to implementing the referendum result, a position which made complete nonsense of May's idiotic decision to call the election in the first place. As a result Brexit, which was supposed to be the centre piece barely featured in the campaign giving May the opportunity to mess up a range of other policies. Nevertheless, this is the basis upon which Labour MPs were elected and got 40% of the vote.
Of course people are entitled to change their mind. What we are seeing in Labour, however, is people who never agreed with the party line trying to change it despite the views of the anti-Semite who leads them. The impression I was getting is that the Labour Party Conference is going to make the rallies of a former German leader look like a Lib Dem tea morning with the slate of his supporters storming the NEC. It isn't easy to reconcile that with the rejection of his position on this. But we shall see.
It's been obvious for quite a while that Labour's tactics are to be slightly less Brexit than the Tories, to attract remainers whilst keeping most of their leave voters on board. It's also obvious that almost all Labour MPs and a majority of their supporters are opposed to Brexit. Being pushed away from a tactical fence toward their own convictions was always only a matter of time.
It's been obvious for some time that Labour has more faces than Janus on Brexit and seeks to be all things to all men. Changing that to a fixed position will be more of a challenge than you seem to think.
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
I'd generally agree with this - but at the moment it's a bit unhelpful. Those most animated are, like myself, Labour people ashamed of what our party has become. And the xenophobia that taints Brexit is a separate type of issue to the leader of one of the main political parties who has been caught being actively racist, having had a history of behaviour that leaves the minority he's been being racist to terrified of him becoming PM.
On here the most animated posters are those who were very fond of using Islamophobia to further their political goals in the referendum campaign.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
Excuse me but that does not apply to me or to @Southam Observer or many others who have been boring on about Corbyn’s judgment and history since the moment he became a candidate for the Labour leadership, long before the referendum.
And I also disagree that anti-semitism is incidental to the particular strand of the Far Left which now controls Labour. On the contrary, it is central to Corbyn’s world view and rather more significant to the Far Left’s analysis of capitalism than you allow. Read Paul Berman on this aspect.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
Telegraph: Hammond under fire for no-deal warning. The i: New Cabinet rift on UK's plan for no-deal Brexit. Express: What does Hammond think he's playing at? Mail: Eeyore Hammond launches project fear (pt2). Times: Brexit splits in cabinet laid bare by Hammond. Metro: It's a big deal if it's no deal. The Sun: Hamm 'doom' blast at No Deal.
For all the vitriol in Australian politics that is a remarkably gracious tribute.
I may be being unfair, but I wonder if he has an eye to the sort of Leftish liberal vote in an election that has to be held within a year and may be held very quickly.
Maybe, he is a politician after all and his opposition have just moved rightward leaving a potential weakness. But it seems quite personal, especially the love bit. Maybe I am just being naive.
Indian policy in Kashmir Moroccan policy in Western Sahara Burmese policy in Rakhine Chinese policy in Tibet and Xinjiang Russian policy in Crimea Armenian policy in Nagorno Karabakh
So why this tunnel vision regarding Israel?
He's talked about most of those. Google is your friend
That's the reason why Corbynites (and politicians generally) complain of biased media - it's not that they make stuff up, but that they will take a theme and run with it, and simply ignore everything else.
So far as I know, Corbyn hasn't many speeches about Israel or Middle East politics since he became leader, except in response to questions, which have all been of the type "Why did you appear with X N years ago?". Quite rightly, he feels there are other priorities for the LOTO to address. But well-informed PBers, let alone the general public, get the impression that he constantly talks about Israel and ignores all other foreign policy concerns, because that's "the story". And yes, it does get whipped up by people who dislike him for other reasons.
Seems about right. The question, instead, is it that likely? Until such time as the SNP stop being the most popular party by far in Scotland the pressure will be on for one.
The SNP pushed indyref2 in 2017 and lost over a third of their MPs as a result. May will therefore not allow one before the next Holyrood election which could well see a Unionist majority anyway
I hope it does, but nothing is certain and the issue won't go away so long as the SNP are in the lead.
The majority of the top marginal seats though voted Leave.
The bulk of Labour Remain voters are concentrated in safe Labour inner city seats
The majority of Labour gains from the Conservatives at the last election were in seats where leave had won.
As Corbyn accepted Brexit
It is indeed sad that so many of my fellow party members now wish to renege on a manifesto pledge to fulfill the democratic wishes of the British people.
(I apologise in advance if I come across extra grumpy this morning. Next to no sleep and jet lag).
He's going to resign as PM, and also resign from Parliament, according to the latest reports. His constituency is Wentworth, which includes Bondi Beach and the surrounding area, a very safe Liberal seat.
So at least we'll be spared him taking down the new leader at some point a la Rudd and Gillard.
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
I'd generally agree with this - but at the moment it's a bit unhelpful. Those most animated are, like myself, Labour people ashamed of what our party has become. And the xenophobia that taints Brexit is a separate type of issue to the leader of one of the main political parties who has been caught being actively racist, having had a history of behaviour that leaves the minority he's been being racist to terrified of him becoming PM.
On here the most animated posters are those who were very fond of using Islamophobia to further their political goals in the referendum campaign.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
Excuse me but that does not apply to me or to @Southam Observer or many others who have been boring on about Corbyn’s judgment and history since the moment he became a candidate for the Labour leadership, long before the referendum.
And I also disagree that anti-semitism is incidental to the particular strand of the Far Left which now controls Labour. On the contrary, it is central to Corbyn’s world view and rather more significant to the Far Left’s analysis of capitalism than you allow. Read Paul Berman on this aspect.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
Telegraph: Hammond under fire for no-deal warning. The i: New Cabinet rift on UK's plan for no-deal Brexit. Express: What does Hammond think he's playing at? Mail: Eeyore Hammond launches project fear (pt2). Times: Brexit splits in cabinet laid bare by Hammond. Metro: It's a big deal if it's no deal. The Sun: Hamm 'doom' blast at No Deal.
Indian policy in Kashmir Moroccan policy in Western Sahara Burmese policy in Rakhine Chinese policy in Tibet and Xinjiang Russian policy in Crimea Armenian policy in Nagorno Karabakh
So why this tunnel vision regarding Israel?
He's talked about most of those. Google is your friend
That's the reason why Corbynites (and politicians generally) complain of biased media - it's not that they make stuff up, but that they will take a theme and run with it, and simply ignore everything else.
So far as I know, Corbyn hasn't many speeches about Israel or Middle East politics since he became leader, except in response to questions, which have all been of the type "Why did you appear with X N years ago?". Quite rightly, he feels there are other priorities for the LOTO to address. But well-informed PBers, let alone the general public, get the impression that he constantly talks about Israel and ignores all other foreign policy concerns, because that's "the story". And yes, it does get whipped up by people who dislike him for other reasons.
It's not all he talks about Nick but when he does talk about it he damns himself with his own words.
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
I'd generally agree with this - but at the moment it's a bit unhelpful. Those most animated are, like myself, Labour people ashamed of what our party has become. And the xenophobia that taints Brexit is a separate type of issue to the leader of one of the main political parties who has been caught being actively racist, having had a history of behaviour that leaves the minority he's been being racist to terrified of him becoming PM.
On here the most animated posters are those who were very fond of using Islamophobia to further their political goals in the referendum campaign.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
Excuse me but that does not apply to me or to @Southam Observer or many others who have been boring on about Corbyn’s judgment and history since the moment he became a candidate for the Labour leadership, long before the referendum.
And I also disagree that anti-semitism is incidental to the particular strand of the Far Left which now controls Labour. On the contrary, it is central to Corbyn’s world view and rather more significant to the Far Left’s analysis of capitalism than you allow. Read Paul Berman on this aspect.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
+1 Mr Meeks blinkered monomania on the reasons for the Brexit result cloud otherwise well observed contributions.
Telegraph: Hammond under fire for no-deal warning. The i: New Cabinet rift on UK's plan for no-deal Brexit. Express: What does Hammond think he's playing at? Mail: Eeyore Hammond launches project fear (pt2). Times: Brexit splits in cabinet laid bare by Hammond. Metro: It's a big deal if it's no deal. The Sun: Hamm 'doom' blast at No Deal.
Anecdata: Just had dinner with my father, who is Jewish and probably just a tad right-of-centre, who thinks Corbyn's economics would be very harmful to both the country and him personally. He doesn't believe that Corbyn is anti-Semitic and thinks that there's a concerted smear campaign against him.
Do we have any evidence at all that this narriative of anti-Semitism is cutting through with the public, beyond people who are strongly pro-Israel or already strongly anti-Corbyn?
If its cutting through with the public, I'd expect Labour to be plummeting in the polls. But instead they are holding steady. I think that's because Labour supporters (and indeed others too) simply don't believe he is antisemitic.
For the anecdata: At a recent family bbq, very few over 30 planning to vote for him, but no one thought antisemitic. They just thought him a bit weak and lacking in charisma.
I don't think Corbyn will have said anything that will persuade more than a small minority that he is personally anti semitic. Careless and clumsy in wording, yes. But it's clear most don't buy it. Mps aren't splitting over it as very few would come with them.
Even though, in fairness, some who are not upset would be if a political opponent said what he said (And vice versa).
Telegraph: Hammond under fire for no-deal warning. The i: New Cabinet rift on UK's plan for no-deal Brexit. Express: What does Hammond think he's playing at? Mail: Eeyore Hammond launches project fear (pt2). Times: Brexit splits in cabinet laid bare by Hammond. Metro: It's a big deal if it's no deal. The Sun: Hamm 'doom' blast at No Deal.
Comments
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45290823
*In Canada.
There is bigger drama going on in Australia - their PM might not even last the day as Liberal leader. The Aussie Liberals are more right wing than UK and Canadian conservatives.
Anti-semitism may well be weaponised by some on the right but that is in part because it has so often been ignored by those on the left.
The bulk of Labour Remain voters are concentrated in safe Labour inner city seats
Telegraph: Hammond under fire for no-deal warning.
The i: New Cabinet rift on UK's plan for no-deal Brexit.
Express: What does Hammond think he's playing at?
Mail: Eeyore Hammond launches project fear (pt2).
Times: Brexit splits in cabinet laid bare by Hammond.
Metro: It's a big deal if it's no deal.
The Sun: Hamm 'doom' blast at No Deal.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-45292008
The Mail is not a fan. I still think Hammond has a fighting chance to succeed Theresa May.
Honestly. If you need to add a bracket and part 2 to a headline, you are probably a graduate trainee left in charge whilst the sub-eds are away in France mid August.
"Supermarkets shelves empty of fresh food: Why weren't we told?"
Turnbull says he will call meeting after verifying petition with 43 signatures – politics live
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2018/aug/24/liberal-spill-malcolm-turnbull-peter-dutton-scott-morrison-liberal-spill-politics-parliament-live
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newschannel/
Peter Dutton is not a sure vote winner even on his own home turf. The assumption that he’s a potent adversary of his party’s enemies in Queensland looks very shaky in the light of focus groups of undecided voters held in the last few days in his seat of Dickson.
He’s no hero to them. They haven’t forgotten – as Canberra strangely has in the turmoil of the last few days – that Dutton made his reputation imprisoning women and children out in the islands. These voters want the boats stopped but they reckon their MP is heartless, cruel and not very bright.......
....Fighting the ultras to keep the party electable consumes the energies of the Liberal machine.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/aug/24/myth-liberal-base-peter-dutton-liberal-party-glorious-defeat?CMP=share_btn_tw
Legal advice prepared by the Government's most senior lawyer should clear the path for Peter Dutton's tilt at the prime ministership — but it is not clear cut.
It states an "agreement" between childcare centres linked to Mr Dutton and the Commonwealth — which would be required to trigger a breach of the Constitution — does not exist.
However, the Solicitor-General also issued the warning that Mr Dutton's case was different to any case the High Court has heard before, that there may be further facts he has not been briefed on, and that the bench has differed on its interpretation of the constitution before.
"I consider there to be some risk ... that the High Court might conclude that there is a conflict between Mr Dutton's duty as a parliamentarian and his personal interests," the advice states.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-24/dutton-legal-advice-clears-path-for-pm-bid/10159702
https://twitter.com/MattDoran91/status/1032815395093147648
Julie Bishop out - down to Scott Morrison or Peter Dutton. Commentators saying she'll stand down at GE.
Rightwingers over-estimating their support and failing in a coup attempt.....
Nationals MP says he will still go to crossbench, despite Morrison win
Nationals MP Kevin Hogan just told me he still plans to go to the crossbench as a result of the leadership spill in the Liberal Party - his warning shot before the partyroom was that any spill would trigger that move, it wasn’t about who emerged as Liberal leader.
However, Hogan has written a letter guaranteeing confidence and supply to the Coalition government.
It’s likely there will be no issue of confidence and supply for prime minister Scott Morrison - once the Coalition agreement is put back into place, Hogan’s confirmation of confidence and supply means it won’t fall on the floor of the lower house.
We can have technical arguments about whether having 75 MPs with one in the speaker’s chair makes it a minority government, though.
For the anecdata: At a recent family bbq, very few over 30 planning to vote for him, but no one thought antisemitic. They just thought him a bit weak and lacking in charisma.
https://twitter.com/AdamWagner1/status/1032709426921267201
That'll end well, won't it?
It's shameful what's going on, but it won't truly crack until a lot of people on his own side admit he's beyond the pale.
If Labour supporters do come round to the view that he is antisemitic, then i think his support will evaporate.
However, foreign polity is not a major concern of many voters. Of much greater concern is his seeming lack of intellectual ability and general competence, given that he is a potential future PM. However, he is doing an excellent job with respect to the EU issue, as he is keeping Labour-voting Brexiteers aboard by standing on the fence.
Indian policy in Kashmir
Moroccan policy in Western Sahara
Burmese policy in Rakhine
Chinese policy in Tibet and Xinjiang
Russian policy in Crimea
Armenian policy in Nagorno Karabakh
So why this tunnel vision regarding Israel?
You'd imagine the Left here would love him.
He also said that Jeremy Corbyn is "a virulent anti-Semite, a virulent hater of Jews and the nation state of the Jewish people" and "you have Jeremy Corbyn who may potentially become the next Prime Minister of England. Shame on Great Britain for allowing that to come to pass."
You make it sound as though the population have studied the 'case' in detail, reading the different sides and weighing up the evidence for a verdict. That's rubbish.
The other day, someone on here snarkily said that posters were suddenly against anti-Semitism, insinuating that they were doing so for political reasons. Whilst there may be some of that, in other cases it will be because for most of us, there has been no reason to voice opposition to anti-Semitism because there was so little of it about, and it was mostly 'hidden'.
And that's what has changed. On the left, borderline or even hard anti-Semitism is becoming mainstream. Just look at what some of Labour's own MPs are saying.
It still should be.
Saw a snippet of an article on Twitter yesterday. Apparently Labour are worried one MP going could start an avalanche of desertions. But that just reminds me of the Brown coup-that-wasn't, when Purnell resigned and then nobody else did. Nobody wants to be first.
At what point does the excuse of 'fighting for their party' ring hollow? If they go into the next election lined up behind Corbyn, all their complaints and criticisms now are worthless.
https://www.parliament.uk/edm/2003-04/1575
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/a-41da-why-western-sahara-matters
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-asia-41184855/jeremy-corbyn-s-plea-for-rohingyas-to-aung-san-suu-kyi
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/corbyn-rohingya-muslims-aung-san-suu-kyi-burma-labour-leader-call-end-violence-a7968916.html
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/16/xi-jinping-in-uk-human-rights-china
https://www.parliament.uk/edm/2003-04/1104
And what bit of supporting Palestinian rights requires you to say British Zionists (most British Jews, fyi) lack British values "Despite living here all their lives". What bit of it requires you to honour the terrorists responsible for the most notorious attack on Jews since WW2? What bit of it requires you to go on Iranian TV to spout an anti-Semitic conspiracy theories about terrorist attacks on Egypt and Israel? How does writing a letter in defence of a vicar who claimed the Jews are behind 9/11 help the Palestinian cause, or giving money to a Holocaust denier? Or defending a mural that depicted hook nosed bankers subjugating the masses? I'm all ears. Because whatever other noble campaigning things he has done, these don't seem helpful - rather offensive and racist.
And yes. He doesn't discriminate all Jews. Like the hard left throughout history, Stalin being a notable example, he thinks they're ok so long as they agree with him on politics. He does discriminate against the vast majority who don't though, as like any classic anti-Semite he sees ulterior motives - the hand of Israel to repeat a phrase.
His self-image of himself maybe as a tireless campaigner for human rights and peace, but if you look at his actions he's not that is he? He's a nasty anti-Semitic crank who shows his true racist colours whenever Jewish people have the temerity to disagree with him.
Mr Dancer,
Its only tangentially related to F1 (he is a Haas development driver), but you might be amused to hear about the stupidity of the F2 driver Ferrucci.
http s://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBJ8D1pxXx8
How not to run a motorsport career. It makes Dan Ticktum's antics of three years ago seem sane.
In the end the hard right Dutton did succeed in forcing Turnbull out but failed to get the leadership himself with Morrison beating Dutton 45 to 40. Shorten has also paid tribute to Turnbull.
In his final press conference Turnbull congratulated Morrison and New deputy Josh Fryberg, thanked his Foreign Minister Julie Bishop and attached Dutton for what he called a coup to try and being down the government. He them departed saying he loved Australia
http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-24/live-scott-morrison-replaces-malcolm-turnbull-as-pm-after-spill/10159462
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2018/08/16/has-jeremy-corbyn-wreath-laying-controversy-change/
Which asked about that particular wreath-laying incident.
This actually supports my point since only 26% said they weren't aware of that particular story.
If 74% have heard of the wreath-laying thing, then I think we can infer that a larger proportion have heard about JC + anti-semitism row. I would estimate at least 85% know there is a row, it's been headline news on the BBC and all of the newspapers.
So the suggestion that people simply haven't heard about JC + anti-semitism I think is simply wrong. I think it's clear that the reason Labour haven't plummeted and the Tories haven't shot up, is that non-Tories don't believe that he is anti-semitic.
Anyway I need to go to work now.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
https://twitter.com/billshortenmp/status/1032867449446617090
Of all the recent posts about Corbyn being present but not involved the funniest was the Remain campaign, not least because it was true. Labour went into the last election committed to implementing the referendum result, a position which made complete nonsense of May's idiotic decision to call the election in the first place. As a result Brexit, which was supposed to be the centre piece barely featured in the campaign giving May the opportunity to mess up a range of other policies. Nevertheless, this is the basis upon which Labour MPs were elected and got 40% of the vote.
Of course people are entitled to change their mind. What we are seeing in Labour, however, is people who never agreed with the party line trying to change it despite the views of the anti-Semite who leads them. The impression I was getting is that the Labour Party Conference is going to make the rallies of a former German leader look like a Lib Dem tea morning with the slate of his supporters storming the NEC. It isn't easy to reconcile that with the rejection of his position on this. But we shall see.
Unlike Turnbull Morrison is also a monarchist and on Brexit he urged the EU not to punish the UK
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/jan/26/australian-treasurer-scott-morrison-urges-eu-not-to-punish-uk-over-brexit
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/757610/Brexit-Australia-trade-talks-improved-immigration-rules-agreement-UK-London-Canberra
As for Aus, that's just what both sides do down there.
Either way constant talk if how cross they are just irritates. If like some posters they are deeply concerned about Corbyn for a variety of reasons but the movement is more important and needs them still, they should just say that, not fantasize about splitting.
Nevertheless it does underline the fact that the detail of this passes many people by - and for those that see it, it's easily dismissed as part of the usual political knock-about (and general media condemnation of Corbyn). The Tories in particular do need to concentrate on their own positive agenda; people have had enough of politics that consists entirely of slagging off the other side.
She doesn't need any lessons in history or irony, she says.
And I also disagree that anti-semitism is incidental to the particular strand of the Far Left which now controls Labour. On the contrary, it is central to Corbyn’s world view and rather more significant to the Far Left’s analysis of capitalism than you allow. Read Paul Berman on this aspect.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
So far as I know, Corbyn hasn't many speeches about Israel or Middle East politics since he became leader, except in response to questions, which have all been of the type "Why did you appear with X N years ago?". Quite rightly, he feels there are other priorities for the LOTO to address. But well-informed PBers, let alone the general public, get the impression that he constantly talks about Israel and ignores all other foreign policy concerns, because that's "the story". And yes, it does get whipped up by people who dislike him for other reasons.
(I apologise in advance if I come across extra grumpy this morning. Next to no sleep and jet lag).
Even though, in fairness, some who are not upset would be if a political opponent said what he said (And vice versa).
Edit - sod autocorrect.