But Corbyn is no social democrat. Socialism is what he wants to bring
this was exactly my reaction. Corbyn is not in any way a social Democrat. he is a democratic socialist.
He's a revolutionary socialist - the view that "revolution is a necessary precondition for a transition from capitalism to socialism. Revolution is not necessarily defined as a violent insurrection; it is defined as seizure of political power by mass movements (my emphasis) of the working class so that the state is directly controlled by the working class as opposed to the capitalist class and its interests."
I am curious as to why you think this true. When has Corbyn advocated revolution? He certainly is critical of contemporary capitalism, but believes in reform rather than abolition.
He isn't much of a political thinker. However, I think that he sees parliament and politics as a platform for the awakening of the people to the ills of the capitalist system. This will inherently involve some form of conflict. But like all socialists, he ultimately believes in the 'truth' of his cause, so the conflict is worth it.
What he definetely doesn't believe in is changing the system gradually.
Might be significant if his base is finally wavering, or it could just be a temporary dip due to the way he handled the passing of McCain.
Reading the rightwing pro Trump blogs like Free Republic they generally see today's Funeral being exploited as a 'bash Trump' exercise by the likes of Obama and George W Bush (who they now despise as a sellout) and Meghan McCain and are infuriated Sarah Palin was not invited.
Trump's base will still be with him even if the rest of America is not
Edit - fearsome level of historical illiteracy as well, of course. Anne Frank died in a concentration camp, not an extermination camp.
Sentio had a poll yesterday with the Swedish Democrats moving ahead 24% to 22% for the Social Democrats and 18% for the Moderates but most polls still have the Social Democrats in front and the Swedish Democrats batting for second
Isn't that in terms of proportion of replies rather than overall amount?
I'd imagine Boris does quite well for example on social media but generally Labour seem to get more contact online, a Corbyn tweet compared to a May tweet for example so proportion wouldn't identify more abuse, just possibly less positive or neutral messages between it.
Might be significant if his base is finally wavering, or it could just be a temporary dip due to the way he handled the passing of McCain.
Reading the rightwing pro Trump blogs like Free Republic they generally see today's Funeral being exploited as a 'bash Trump' exercise by the likes of Obama and George W Bush (who they now despise as a sellout) and Meghan McCain and are infuriated Sarah Palin was not invited.
Trump's base will still be with him even if the rest of America is not
Jon Lansman, 61, helped catapult Jeremy Corbyn to the leadership and is one of the most influential figures in British politics.
The Jewish activist said he is 'horrified' by anti-Semitic comments made by people he calls friends - but there will be a backlash if MPs continue to be 'hostile'.
Although Mr Lansman says Labour MPs should not feel their seats are under threat by Momentum, he suggested there would be a 'fight' if they push against Mr Corbyn.
He said: 'As long as there are perhaps between 12 or 25 or 30 people who are very hostile, who are just waiting for Jeremy to go so they can turn the clock back, then...we'll keep having that fight'.
Jon Lansman, 61, helped catapult Jeremy Corbyn to the leadership and is one of the most influential figures in British politics.
The Jewish activist said he is 'horrified' by anti-Semitic comments made by people he calls friends - but there will be a backlash if MPs continue to be 'hostile'.
Although Mr Lansman says Labour MPs should not feel their seats are under threat by Momentum, he suggested there would be a 'fight' if they push against Mr Corbyn.
He said: 'As long as there are perhaps between 12 or 25 or 30 people who are very hostile, who are just waiting for Jeremy to go so they can turn the clock back, then...we'll keep having that fight'.
Jon Lansman, 61, helped catapult Jeremy Corbyn to the leadership and is one of the most influential figures in British politics.
The Jewish activist said he is 'horrified' by anti-Semitic comments made by people he calls friends - but there will be a backlash if MPs continue to be 'hostile'.
Although Mr Lansman says Labour MPs should not feel their seats are under threat by Momentum, he suggested there would be a 'fight' if they push against Mr Corbyn.
He said: 'As long as there are perhaps between 12 or 25 or 30 people who are very hostile, who are just waiting for Jeremy to go so they can turn the clock back, then...we'll keep having that fight'.
Jon Lansman, 61, helped catapult Jeremy Corbyn to the leadership and is one of the most influential figures in British politics.
The Jewish activist said he is 'horrified' by anti-Semitic comments made by people he calls friends - but there will be a backlash if MPs continue to be 'hostile'.
Although Mr Lansman says Labour MPs should not feel their seats are under threat by Momentum, he suggested there would be a 'fight' if they push against Mr Corbyn.
He said: 'As long as there are perhaps between 12 or 25 or 30 people who are very hostile, who are just waiting for Jeremy to go so they can turn the clock back, then...we'll keep having that fight'.
If Lansman was sensible, he would just keep quiet and work in the background to achieve his ends. Doing interviews like this only make the situation worse for everyone. It reinforces the idea that Momentum are in the business of taking over Labour from within. It diminishes the legitimate issue of left-wing antisemitism which is now exposed as being at the heart of the Corbyn supporter network. Using language such as 'hostile' and 'fight' just gives further encouragement to those in that supporter network who thrive on the idea of conflict to achieve their ends.
But Corbyn is no social democrat. Socialism is what he wants to bring
this was exactly my reaction. Corbyn is not in any way a social Democrat. he is a democratic socialist.
He's a revolutionary socialist - the view that "revolution is a necessary precondition for a transition from capitalism to socialism. Revolution is not necessarily defined as a violent insurrection; it is defined as seizure of political power by mass movements (my emphasis) of the working class so that the state is directly controlled by the working class as opposed to the capitalist class and its interests."
I am curious as to why you think this true. When has Corbyn advocated revolution? He certainly is critical of contemporary capitalism, but believes in reform rather than abolition.
He isn't much of a political thinker. However, I think that he sees parliament and politics as a platform for the awakening of the people to the ills of the capitalist system. This will inherently involve some form of conflict. But like all socialists, he ultimately believes in the 'truth' of his cause, so the conflict is worth it.
What he definetely doesn't believe in is changing the system gradually.
He's another Thatcher. That's the revolutionary model.
Edit: There Is No Alternative. TINA "Is he one of us?" Etc
Isn't that in terms of proportion of replies rather than overall amount?
I'd imagine Boris does quite well for example on social media but generally Labour seem to get more contact online, a Corbyn tweet compared to a May tweet for example so proportion wouldn't identify more abuse, just possibly less positive or neutral messages between it.
I'd suggest you read the research before you 'imagine'.
"Male MPs and Conservatives were the target of more abuse in the data studied."
"The two exceptions are where the proportion of abusive replies has fallen for male Labour Party MPs, and where the volume of abusive replies has fallen for male Scottish National Party (SNP) MPs"
It's interesting that James Heappey gets a fair amount of abuse.
There's lots of interesting (and non party-political) stuff in it.
Isn't that in terms of proportion of replies rather than overall amount?
I'd imagine Boris does quite well for example on social media but generally Labour seem to get more contact online, a Corbyn tweet compared to a May tweet for example so proportion wouldn't identify more abuse, just possibly less positive or neutral messages between it.
I'd suggest you read the research before you 'imagine'.
"Male MPs and Conservatives were the target of more abuse in the data studied."
"The two exceptions are where the proportion of abusive replies has fallen for male Labour Party MPs, and where the volume of abusive replies has fallen for male Scottish National Party (SNP) MPs"
It's interesting that James Heappey gets a fair amount of abuse.
There's lots of interesting (and non party-political) stuff in it.
Correct me if I'm wrong but the paper isn't on whether Boris does quite well on social media which is what I said I imagine, checking twitter would probably be a better method of doing that.
But yes it isn't based on overall amount of abuse, which is why I didn't say imagine for that part.
This nightmare Cult is going to eat itself isn't it? Tony Benn is supposed to be the Godfather of all this, yet the nutters are attacking his granddaughter.
As Sacks said the other day, 'its starts with the jews, but never ends there.'
What momentum are up to at a local level is quite disturbing with deselecting councillors . It’s not even an ideological purity they are seeking. It’s settling scores. If you cross them or speak out of turn against Corbyn you end up on a list. They’ve become like that little boy in the episode of the twilight zone It’s a good life. The monster everyone has to keep happy at all times.
This nightmare Cult is going to eat itself isn't it? Tony Benn is supposed to be the Godfather of all this, yet the nutters are attacking his granddaughter.
As Sacks said the other day, 'its starts with the jews, but never ends there.'
What momentum are up to at a local level is quite disturbing with deselecting councillors . It’s not even an ideological purity they are seeking. It’s settling scores. If you cross them or speak out of turn against Corbyn you end up on a list. They’ve become like that little boy in the episode of the twilight zone It’s a good life. The monster everyone has to keep happy at all times.
It is not just active deselection, they are creating a hostile environment which is forcing people to self-deselect in order to avoid the battles to come. Speak to anyone in Brighton to see how it is working in action.
Mr McDonnell said: "My view is this. I want it resolved quickly.
"I think we can come out of it as the anti-racist party that we are tackling the real issues.
"I don't want to live in a society where synagogues are attacked, or where Jews graveyards daubed with swastikas or worse, Jewish children having to have security at their schools."
But he stopped short of calling for Labour to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance guidelines on anti-Semitism, the magazine said.
Tottenham forward Son Heung-min will avoid military service for South Korea after helping his country beat Japan 2-1 in the Asian Games football final.
Isn't that in terms of proportion of replies rather than overall amount?
I'd imagine Boris does quite well for example on social media but generally Labour seem to get more contact online, a Corbyn tweet compared to a May tweet for example so proportion wouldn't identify more abuse, just possibly less positive or neutral messages between it.
I'd suggest you read the research before you 'imagine'.
"Male MPs and Conservatives were the target of more abuse in the data studied."
"The two exceptions are where the proportion of abusive replies has fallen for male Labour Party MPs, and where the volume of abusive replies has fallen for male Scottish National Party (SNP) MPs"
It's interesting that James Heappey gets a fair amount of abuse.
There's lots of interesting (and non party-political) stuff in it.
Correct me if I'm wrong but the paper isn't on whether Boris does quite well on social media which is what I said I imagine, checking twitter would probably be a better method of doing that.
But yes it isn't based on overall amount of abuse, which is why I didn't say imagine for that part.
I believe this study is based on the overall amount (volume) of abuse. Figs 2 and 3 are of interest (see link below)
The thing is, this is unsurprising: I'd expect MPs from a party in power to get more abuse. Prominence also matters, which would be why the amount of abuse Cameron, Osborne and Miliband got reduced massively between 2015 and 2017, and Corbyn's increased.
The paper doesn't go into this (and it would be hard to measure), but it's probably also wrong to assume that abuse against Conservatives only comes from Conservatives, or Labour from Labour. There are enough splits in all the parties for a considerable amount of abuse to come from the other factions within the party.
Mr McDonnell said: "My view is this. I want it resolved quickly.
"I think we can come out of it as the anti-racist party that we are tackling the real issues.
"I don't want to live in a society where synagogues are attacked, or where Jews graveyards daubed with swastikas or worse, Jewish children having to have security at their schools."
But he stopped short of calling for Labour to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance guidelines on anti-Semitism, the magazine said.
Mr McDonnell said: "My view is this. I want it resolved quickly.
"I think we can come out of it as the anti-racist party that we are tackling the real issues.
"I don't want to live in a society where synagogues are attacked, or where Jews graveyards daubed with swastikas or worse, Jewish children having to have security at their schools."
But he stopped short of calling for Labour to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance guidelines on anti-Semitism, the magazine said.
Isn't that in terms of proportion of replies rather than overall amount?
I'd imagine Boris does quite well for example on social media but generally Labour seem to get more contact online, a Corbyn tweet compared to a May tweet for example so proportion wouldn't identify more abuse, just possibly less positive or neutral messages between it.
I'd suggest you read the research before you 'imagine'.
"Male MPs and Conservatives were the target of more abuse in the data studied."
"The two exceptions are where the proportion of abusive replies has fallen for male Labour Party MPs, and where the volume of abusive replies has fallen for male Scottish National Party (SNP) MPs"
It's interesting that James Heappey gets a fair amount of abuse.
There's lots of interesting (and non party-political) stuff in it.
Correct me if I'm wrong but the paper isn't on whether Boris does quite well on social media which is what I said I imagine, checking twitter would probably be a better method of doing that.
But yes it isn't based on overall amount of abuse, which is why I didn't say imagine for that part.
I believe this study is based on the overall amount (volume) of abuse. Figs 2 and 3 are of interest (see link below)
The thing is, this is unsurprising: I'd expect MPs from a party in power to get more abuse. Prominence also matters, which would be why the amount of abuse Cameron, Osborne and Miliband got reduced massively between 2015 and 2017, and Corbyn's increased.
The paper doesn't go into this (and it would be hard to measure), but it's probably also wrong to assume that abuse against Conservatives only comes from Conservatives, or Labour from Labour. There are enough splits in all the parties for a considerable amount of abuse to come from the other factions within the party.
Mr McDonnell said: "My view is this. I want it resolved quickly.
"I think we can come out of it as the anti-racist party that we are tackling the real issues.
"I don't want to live in a society where synagogues are attacked, or where Jews graveyards daubed with swastikas or worse, Jewish children having to have security at their schools."
But he stopped short of calling for Labour to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance guidelines on anti-Semitism, the magazine said.
Mr McDonnell said: "My view is this. I want it resolved quickly.
"I think we can come out of it as the anti-racist party that we are tackling the real issues.
"I don't want to live in a society where synagogues are attacked, or where Jews graveyards daubed with swastikas or worse, Jewish children having to have security at their schools."
But he stopped short of calling for Labour to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance guidelines on anti-Semitism, the magazine said.
McDonnell is very aware of the damage this is doing but he is caught up in a position that he cannot change anything otherwise he will be called a tory
Interesting, wonder how it would compare with other methods.
I look forward to other similar studies.
There was the well-known Amnesty study, but they looked at two different things. The Guardian headline: "Diane Abbott more abused than any other MPs during election" is rather let-down by the research behind it, which was only into female MPs, not all MPs.
But looking at the Amnesty study and the 2015 data for this latest study, there does seem to be a disparity in at least Abbott's case. That might signal methodological issues - in particular, timescales over which the data was received (Amnesty looked at just six weeks, this study four weeks). However this latest study does seem much more comprehensive in terms of scope and data.
also...fast-track the return of expelled members, and accept supporters of hard-left groups are to be unveiled at the party’s conference,
Looking at the detail, these are just proposals being put forward by a small number of CLPs rather than being centrally driven ideas. Of course, they could be being manipulated from the leadership - but at this stage, they seem unlikely to actually be implemented.
It is worth watching - but it is very early on in the process to believe this is the direction of travel for the party as a whole.
This nightmare Cult is going to eat itself isn't it? Tony Benn is supposed to be the Godfather of all this, yet the nutters are attacking his granddaughter.
As Sacks said the other day, 'its starts with the jews, but never ends there.'
What momentum are up to at a local level is quite disturbing with deselecting councillors . It’s not even an ideological purity they are seeking. It’s settling scores. If you cross them or speak out of turn against Corbyn you end up on a list. They’ve become like that little boy in the episode of the twilight zone It’s a good life. The monster everyone has to keep happy at all times.
It is not just active deselection, they are creating a hostile environment which is forcing people to self-deselect in order to avoid the battles to come. Speak to anyone in Brighton to see how it is working in action.
The basic fact is that in many constituencies, they have taken over the party. I don't see how it is any different to a hostile takeover of a company. They get rid of the people they don't want around.
If you don't like it, you just vote for the party that is opposing them.
also...fast-track the return of expelled members, and accept supporters of hard-left groups are to be unveiled at the party’s conference,
Looking at the detail, these are just proposals being put forward by a small number of CLPs rather than being centrally driven ideas. Of course, they could be being manipulated from the leadership - but at this stage, they seem unlikely to actually be implemented.
It is worth watching - but it is very early on in the process to believe this is the direction of travel for the party as a whole.
Wait until the boundaries go through next month, and every new constituency needs to select a candidate.
also...fast-track the return of expelled members, and accept supporters of hard-left groups are to be unveiled at the party’s conference,
Looking at the detail, these are just proposals being put forward by a small number of CLPs rather than being centrally driven ideas. Of course, they could be being manipulated from the leadership - but at this stage, they seem unlikely to actually be implemented.
It is worth watching - but it is very early on in the process to believe this is the direction of travel for the party as a whole.
Wait until the boundaries go through next month, and every new constituency needs to select a candidate.
There is certainly plenty of turmoil yet to come. The direction of travel will be confirmed with the NEC election results on Monday (I think...?) - they are the ones who can really control the agenda.
It does seem inevitable that things will move further to the left. But whether all of the proposed rule changes get adopted is still very much up in the air.
also...fast-track the return of expelled members, and accept supporters of hard-left groups are to be unveiled at the party’s conference,
Looking at the detail, these are just proposals being put forward by a small number of CLPs rather than being centrally driven ideas. Of course, they could be being manipulated from the leadership - but at this stage, they seem unlikely to actually be implemented.
It is worth watching - but it is very early on in the process to believe this is the direction of travel for the party as a whole.
Wait until the boundaries go through next month, and every new constituency needs to select a candidate.
Re-selection and deselection then affects all parties.
In practice, it is not being on right or left of either party that has led to deselection, but rather when MPs run out of friends and supporters through rebelling.
This nightmare Cult is going to eat itself isn't it? Tony Benn is supposed to be the Godfather of all this, yet the nutters are attacking his granddaughter.
As Sacks said the other day, 'its starts with the jews, but never ends there.'
What momentum are up to at a local level is quite disturbing with deselecting councillors . It’s not even an ideological purity they are seeking. It’s settling scores. If you cross them or speak out of turn against Corbyn you end up on a list. They’ve become like that little boy in the episode of the twilight zone It’s a good life. The monster everyone has to keep happy at all times.
It is not just active deselection, they are creating a hostile environment which is forcing people to self-deselect in order to avoid the battles to come. Speak to anyone in Brighton to see how it is working in action.
The basic fact is that in many constituencies, they have taken over the party. I don't see how it is any different to a hostile takeover of a company. They get rid of the people they don't want around.
If you don't like it, you just vote for the party that is opposing them.
Sadly most voters don't follow the ins and outs of their local parties, they just go for the party they have always chosen.
also...fast-track the return of expelled members, and accept supporters of hard-left groups are to be unveiled at the party’s conference,
Looking at the detail, these are just proposals being put forward by a small number of CLPs rather than being centrally driven ideas. Of course, they could be being manipulated from the leadership - but at this stage, they seem unlikely to actually be implemented.
It is worth watching - but it is very early on in the process to believe this is the direction of travel for the party as a whole.
Wait until the boundaries go through next month, and every new constituency needs to select a candidate.
Re-selection and deselection then affects all parties.
In practice, it is not being on right or left of either party that has led to deselection, but rather when MPs run out of friends and supporters through rebelling.
Come, now. If the churn rate of constituency members is as rumoured, then it's not a case of 'running out of friends', but of 'friends being run out'.
And as people have pointed out passim, if 'rebelling' is a reason for deselection, then Corbyn himself should have been deselected decade ago.
But that's different, because... well, just because.
So I'm in the process of buying a new build at the moment. As a result I'm having a look at the Building Standards and am being pleasantly surprised by how readable they are.
Jon Lansman, 61, helped catapult Jeremy Corbyn to the leadership and is one of the most influential figures in British politics.
The Jewish activist said he is 'horrified' by anti-Semitic comments made by people he calls friends - but there will be a backlash if MPs continue to be 'hostile'.
Although Mr Lansman says Labour MPs should not feel their seats are under threat by Momentum, he suggested there would be a 'fight' if they push against Mr Corbyn.
He said: 'As long as there are perhaps between 12 or 25 or 30 people who are very hostile, who are just waiting for Jeremy to go so they can turn the clock back, then...we'll keep having that fight'.
So I'm in the process of buying a new build at the moment. As a result I'm having a look at the Building Standards and am being pleasantly surprised by how readable they are.
If the new builds in my local area are anything to go by, don't expect the builders to have paid much attention to the standards. And if it is a new build, complain about *everything* you think is wrong - they're not very good at snagging, either.
If they're a big company they'll have set aside a fair few thousand for after-sales work (I once got told 10% of sale price), but they like to hold on to that if they can. Don't let them.
Good luck with the purchase.
(Examples: houses with missing insulation, ones that need re-rendering three times in the first five years, missing expansion joints, etc)
also...fast-track the return of expelled members, and accept supporters of hard-left groups are to be unveiled at the party’s conference,
Looking at the detail, these are just proposals being put forward by a small number of CLPs rather than being centrally driven ideas. Of course, they could be being manipulated from the leadership - but at this stage, they seem unlikely to actually be implemented.
It is worth watching - but it is very early on in the process to believe this is the direction of travel for the party as a whole.
Wait until the boundaries go through next month, and every new constituency needs to select a candidate.
Re-selection and deselection then affects all parties.
In practice, it is not being on right or left of either party that has led to deselection, but rather when MPs run out of friends and supporters through rebelling.
Come, now. If the churn rate of constituency members is as rumoured, then it's not a case of 'running out of friends', but of 'friends being run out'.
And as people have pointed out passim, if 'rebelling' is a reason for deselection, then Corbyn himself should have been deselected decade ago.
But that's different, because... well, just because.
It’s different because if you rebel against the leadership when it’s out of step with your constituency members they tend to support you, whereas rebelling against the leadership despite your constituency members supporting the leadership is rather courageous (in the Sir Humphrey Appleby sense of the word).
also...fast-track the return of expelled members, and accept supporters of hard-left groups are to be unveiled at the party’s conference,
Looking at the detail, these are just proposals being put forward by a small number of CLPs rather than being centrally driven ideas. Of course, they could be being manipulated from the leadership - but at this stage, they seem unlikely to actually be implemented.
It is worth watching - but it is very early on in the process to believe this is the direction of travel for the party as a whole.
Wait until the boundaries go through next month, and every new constituency needs to select a candidate.
Re-selection and deselection then affects all parties.
In practice, it is not being on right or left of either party that has led to deselection, but rather when MPs run out of friends and supporters through rebelling.
Come, now. If the churn rate of constituency members is as rumoured, then it's not a case of 'running out of friends', but of 'friends being run out'.
And as people have pointed out passim, if 'rebelling' is a reason for deselection, then Corbyn himself should have been deselected decade ago.
But that's different, because... well, just because.
It’s different because if you rebel against the leadership when it’s out of step with your constituency members they tend to support you, whereas rebelling against the leadership despite your constituency members supporting the leadership is rather courageous (in the Sir Humphrey Appleby sense of the word).
also...fast-track the return of expelled members, and accept supporters of hard-left groups are to be unveiled at the party’s conference,
Looking at the detail, these are just proposals being put forward by a small number of CLPs rather than being centrally driven ideas. Of course, they could be being manipulated from the leadership - but at this stage, they seem unlikely to actually be implemented.
It is worth watching - but it is very early on in the process to believe this is the direction of travel for the party as a whole.
Wait until the boundaries go through next month, and every new constituency needs to select a candidate.
Re-selection and deselection then affects all parties.
In practice, it is not being on right or left of either party that has led to deselection, but rather when MPs run out of friends and supporters through rebelling.
Come, now. If the churn rate of constituency members is as rumoured, then it's not a case of 'running out of friends', but of 'friends being run out'.
And as people have pointed out passim, if 'rebelling' is a reason for deselection, then Corbyn himself should have been deselected decade ago.
But that's different, because... well, just because.
It’s different because if you rebel against the leadership when it’s out of step with your constituency members they tend to support you, whereas rebelling against the leadership despite your constituency members supporting the leadership is rather courageous (in the Sir Humphrey Appleby sense of the word).
Exactly. It is possible to rebel and be popular with your Constituency Party (Ken Clarke or Corbyn) and possible to rebel and piss them off entirely (Hoey).
also...fast-track the return of expelled members, and accept supporters of hard-left groups are to be unveiled at the party’s conference,
Looking at the detail, these are just proposals being put forward by a small number of CLPs rather than being centrally driven ideas. Of course, they could be being manipulated from the leadership - but at this stage, they seem unlikely to actually be implemented.
It is worth watching - but it is very early on in the process to believe this is the direction of travel for the party as a whole.
Wait until the boundaries go through next month, and every new constituency needs to select a candidate.
Re-selection and deselection then affects all parties.
In practice, it is not being on right or left of either party that has led to deselection, but rather when MPs run out of friends and supporters through rebelling.
Come, now. If the churn rate of constituency members is as rumoured, then it's not a case of 'running out of friends', but of 'friends being run out'.
And as people have pointed out passim, if 'rebelling' is a reason for deselection, then Corbyn himself should have been deselected decade ago.
But that's different, because... well, just because.
It’s different because if you rebel against the leadership when it’s out of step with your constituency members they tend to support you, whereas rebelling against the leadership despite your constituency members supporting the leadership is rather courageous (in the Sir Humphrey Appleby sense of the word).
But the membership is changing.
I love all these excuses about how Corbyn is somehow principled but the likes of Field is not. It's bullshit.
Jon Lansman, 61, helped catapult Jeremy Corbyn to the leadership and is one of the most influential figures in British politics.
The Jewish activist said he is 'horrified' by anti-Semitic comments made by people he calls friends - but there will be a backlash if MPs continue to be 'hostile'.
Although Mr Lansman says Labour MPs should not feel their seats are under threat by Momentum, he suggested there would be a 'fight' if they push against Mr Corbyn.
He said: 'As long as there are perhaps between 12 or 25 or 30 people who are very hostile, who are just waiting for Jeremy to go so they can turn the clock back, then...we'll keep having that fight'.
So I'm in the process of buying a new build at the moment. As a result I'm having a look at the Building Standards and am being pleasantly surprised by how readable they are.
If the new builds in my local area are anything to go by, don't expect the builders to have paid much attention to the standards. And if it is a new build, complain about *everything* you think is wrong - they're not very good at snagging, either.
If they're a big company they'll have set aside a fair few thousand for after-sales work (I once got told 10% of sale price), but they like to hold on to that if they can. Don't let them.
Good luck with the purchase.
(Examples: houses with missing insulation, ones that need re-rendering three times in the first five years, missing expansion joints, etc)
This is phase 2 of the development with houses of the same design being built by a different set of builders from phase 1. The company that did the ground works this time went bust about 3 days after they had finished the last piece of work on the site.
The big difference between phase 1 and 2 is in phase 1 the houses all had a house-wide ventilation system that initially didn't work bringing a very literal meaning to the phrase air-tight. Phase 2 is going to have standard trickle vents and extractor fans so it will be 'interesting; to compare an contrast the airflow properties of the properties.
also...fast-track the return of expelled members, and accept supporters of hard-left groups are to be unveiled at the party’s conference,
Looking at the detail, these are just proposals being put forward by a small number of CLPs rather than being centrally driven ideas. Of course, they could be being manipulated from the leadership - but at this stage, they seem unlikely to actually be implemented.
It is worth watching - but it is very early on in the process to believe this is the direction of travel for the party as a whole.
Wait until the boundaries go through next month, and every new constituency needs to select a candidate.
Re-selection and deselection then affects all parties.
In practice, it is not being on right or left of either party that has led to deselection, but rather when MPs run out of friends and supporters through rebelling.
Come, now. If the churn rate of constituency members is as rumoured, then it's not a case of 'running out of friends', but of 'friends being run out'.
And as people have pointed out passim, if 'rebelling' is a reason for deselection, then Corbyn himself should have been deselected decade ago.
But that's different, because... well, just because.
It’s different because if you rebel against the leadership when it’s out of step with your constituency members they tend to support you, whereas rebelling against the leadership despite your constituency members supporting the leadership is rather courageous (in the Sir Humphrey Appleby sense of the word).
Exactly. It is possible to rebel and be popular with your Constituency Party (Ken Clarke or Corbyn) and possible to rebel and piss them off entirely (Hoey).
Different scales of rebellion there, surely? Corbyn was a very frequent rebel, Clarke and Hoey far from.
It's all excuses to purge the party of good people (even if I disagree with them politically) and to replace them with Corbynite shits. Any excuse will do.
also...fast-track the return of expelled members, and accept supporters of hard-left groups are to be unveiled at the party’s conference,
Looking at the detail, these are just proposals being put forward by a small number of CLPs rather than being centrally driven ideas. Of course, they could be being manipulated from the leadership - but at this stage, they seem unlikely to actually be implemented.
It is worth watching - but it is very early on in the process to believe this is the direction of travel for the party as a whole.
Wait until the boundaries go through next month, and every new constituency needs to select a candidate.
Re-selection and deselection then affects all parties.
In practice, it is not being on right or left of either party that has led to deselection, but rather when MPs run out of friends and supporters through rebelling.
Come, now. If the churn rate of constituency members is as rumoured, then it's not a case of 'running out of friends', but of 'friends being run out'.
And as people have pointed out passim, if 'rebelling' is a reason for deselection, then Corbyn himself should have been deselected decade ago.
But that's different, because... well, just because.
It’s different because if you rebel against the leadership when it’s out of step with your constituency members they tend to support you, whereas rebelling against the leadership despite your constituency members supporting the leadership is rather courageous (in the Sir Humphrey Appleby sense of the word).
But the membership is changing.
I love all these excuses about how Corbyn is somehow principled but the likes of Field is not. It's bullshit.
Both are principled, albeit rather inflexible, but one has the support of his constituency party.
also...fast-track the return of expelled members, and accept supporters of hard-left groups are to be unveiled at the party’s conference,
Looking at the detail, these are just proposals being put forward by a small number of CLPs rather than being centrally driven ideas. Of course, they could be being manipulated from the leadership - but at this stage, they seem unlikely to actually be implemented.
It is worth watching - but it is very early on in the process to believe this is the direction of travel for the party as a whole.
Wait until the boundaries go through next month, and every new constituency needs to select a candidate.
Re-selection and deselection then affects all parties.
In practice, it is not being on right or left of either party that has led to deselection, but rather when MPs run out of friends and supporters through rebelling.
Come, now. If the churn rate of constituency members is as rumoured, then it's not a case of 'running out of friends', but of 'friends being run out'.
And as people have pointed out passim, if 'rebelling' is a reason for deselection, then Corbyn himself should have been deselected decade ago.
But that's different, because... well, just because.
It’s different because if you rebel against the leadership when it’s out of step with your constituency members they tend to support you, whereas rebelling against the leadership despite your constituency members supporting the leadership is rather courageous (in the Sir Humphrey Appleby sense of the word).
Exactly. It is possible to rebel and be popular with your Constituency Party (Ken Clarke or Corbyn) and possible to rebel and piss them off entirely (Hoey).
Different scales of rebellion there, surely? Corbyn was a very frequent rebel, Clarke and Hoey far from.
It's all excuses to purge the party of good people (even if I disagree with them politically) and to replace them with Corbynite shits. Any excuse will do.
It is more whether the rebellion was on a critical vote.
also...fast-track the return of expelled members, and accept supporters of hard-left groups are to be unveiled at the party’s conference,
Looking at the detail, these are just proposals being put forward by a small number of CLPs rather than being centrally driven ideas. Of course, they could be being manipulated from the leadership - but at this stage, they seem unlikely to actually be implemented.
It is worth watching - but it is very early on in the process to believe this is the direction of travel for the party as a whole.
Wait until the boundaries go through next month, and every new constituency needs to select a candidate.
Re-selection and deselection then affects all parties.
In practice, it is not being on right or left of either party that has led to deselection, but rather when MPs run out of friends and supporters through rebelling.
Come, now. If the churn rate of constituency members is as rumoured, then it's not a case of 'running out of friends', but of 'friends being run out'.
And as people have pointed out passim, if 'rebelling' is a reason for deselection, then Corbyn himself should have been deselected decade ago.
But that's different, because... well, just because.
It’s different because if you rebel against the leadership when it’s out of step with your constituency members they tend to support you, whereas rebelling against the leadership despite your constituency members supporting the leadership is rather courageous (in the Sir Humphrey Appleby sense of the word).
But the membership is changing.
I love all these excuses about how Corbyn is somehow principled but the likes of Field is not. It's bullshit.
Both are principled, albeit rather inflexible, but one has the support of his constituency party.
Corbyn? Principled? Rubbish. He pretends to have principles (e.g. his 'I talk to both sides' nonsense) but does not stand by them in reality. Which is exactly why he'd crossed the line into anti-Semitism despite his 'anti-racism' principles.
also...fast-track the return of expelled members, and accept supporters of hard-left groups are to be unveiled at the party’s conference,
Looking at the detail, these are just proposals being put forward by a small number of CLPs rather than being centrally driven ideas. Of course, they could be being manipulated from the leadership - but at this stage, they seem unlikely to actually be implemented.
It is worth watching - but it is very early on in the process to believe this is the direction of travel for the party as a whole.
Wait until the boundaries go through next month, and every new constituency needs to select a candidate.
Re-selection and deselection then affects all parties.
In practice, it is not being on right or left of either party that has led to deselection, but rather when MPs run out of friends and supporters through rebelling.
Come, now. If the churn rate of constituency members is as rumoured, then it's not a case of 'running out of friends', but of 'friends being run out'.
And as people have pointed out passim, if 'rebelling' is a reason for deselection, then Corbyn himself should have been deselected decade ago.
But that's different, because... well, just because.
It’s different because if you rebel against the leadership when it’s out of step with your constituency members they tend to support you, whereas rebelling against the leadership despite your constituency members supporting the leadership is rather courageous (in the Sir Humphrey Appleby sense of the word).
But the membership is changing.
I love all these excuses about how Corbyn is somehow principled but the likes of Field is not. It's bullshit.
Which excuses would those be? I’m sure Frank Field is very principled, perhaps more than Corbyn, but your support and security is a function of how far your principles overlap with those of your leadership and your membership. That’s roughly the same in any party, it’s not a value judgement, just the basic workings of representative democracy coupled with constituency parties who see their candidate as a delegate.
also...fast-track the return of expelled members, and accept supporters of hard-left groups are to be unveiled at the party’s conference,
Looking at the detail, these are just proposals being put forward by a small number of CLPs rather than being centrally driven ideas. Of course, they could be being manipulated from the leadership - but at this stage, they seem unlikely to actually be implemented.
It is worth watching - but it is very early on in the process to believe this is the direction of travel for the party as a whole.
Wait until the boundaries go through next month, and every new constituency needs to select a candidate.
Re-selection and deselection then affects all parties.
In practice, it is not being on right or left of either party that has led to deselection, but rather when MPs run out of friends and supporters through rebelling.
Come, now. If the churn rate of constituency members is as rumoured, then it's not a case of 'running out of friends', but of 'friends being run out'.
And as people have pointed out passim, if 'rebelling' is a reason for deselection, then Corbyn himself should have been deselected decade ago.
But that's different, because... well, just because.
It’s different because if you rebel against the leadership when it’s out of step with your constituency members they tend to support you, whereas rebelling against the leadership despite your constituency members supporting the leadership is rather courageous (in the Sir Humphrey Appleby sense of the word).
But the membership is changing.
I love all these excuses about how Corbyn is somehow principled but the likes of Field is not. It's bullshit.
Both are principled, albeit rather inflexible, but one has the support of his constituency party.
Maybe but it is another thing to get the voters to agree. The reports coming out of Birkenhead and the huge publicity in the Echo does not make a Field defeat inevitable. In fact many think he would win
also...fast-track the return of expelled members, and accept supporters of hard-left groups are to be unveiled at the party’s conference,
Looking at the detail, these are just proposals being put forward by a small number of CLPs rather than being centrally driven ideas. Of course, they could be being manipulated from the leadership - but at this stage, they seem unlikely to actually be implemented.
It is worth watching - but it is very early on in the process to believe this is the direction of travel for the party as a whole.
Wait until the boundaries go through next month, and every new constituency needs to select a candidate.
Re-selection and deselection then affects all parties.
In practice, it is not being on right or left of either party that has led to deselection, but rather when MPs run out of friends and supporters through rebelling.
Come, now. If the churn rate of constituency members is as rumoured, then it's not a case of 'running out of friends', but of 'friends being run out'.
And as people have pointed out passim, if 'rebelling' is a reason for deselection, then Corbyn himself should have been deselected decade ago.
But that's different, because... well, just because.
It’s different because if you rebel against the leadership when it’s out of step with your constituency members they tend to support you, whereas rebelling against the leadership despite your constituency members supporting the leadership is rather courageous (in the Sir Humphrey Appleby sense of the word).
Exactly. It is possible to rebel and be popular with your Constituency Party (Ken Clarke or Corbyn) and possible to rebel and piss them off entirely (Hoey).
Different scales of rebellion there, surely? Corbyn was a very frequent rebel, Clarke and Hoey far from.
It's all excuses to purge the party of good people (even if I disagree with them politically) and to replace them with Corbynite shits. Any excuse will do.
It is more whether the rebellion was on a critical vote.
I’m not sure I would equate a consensual relationship between Kitty O’Shea and Parnell - legal, if controversial according to the standards of the time - with an alleged assault.
So I'm in the process of buying a new build at the moment. As a result I'm having a look at the Building Standards and am being pleasantly surprised by how readable they are.
If the new builds in my local area are anything to go by, don't expect the builders to have paid much attention to the standards. And if it is a new build, complain about *everything* you think is wrong - they're not very good at snagging, either.
If they're a big company they'll have set aside a fair few thousand for after-sales work (I once got told 10% of sale price), but they like to hold on to that if they can. Don't let them.
Good luck with the purchase.
(Examples: houses with missing insulation, ones that need re-rendering three times in the first five years, missing expansion joints, etc)
This is phase 2 of the development with houses of the same design being built by a different set of builders from phase 1. The company that did the ground works this time went bust about 3 days after they had finished the last piece of work on the site.
The big difference between phase 1 and 2 is in phase 1 the houses all had a house-wide ventilation system that initially didn't work bringing a very literal meaning to the phrase air-tight. Phase 2 is going to have standard trickle vents and extractor fans so it will be 'interesting; to compare an contrast the airflow properties of the properties.
Sounds interesting. I've got no idea what the current regulations are wrt things like insulation and energy efficiency, but I get the impression it's a bit of a mess in practice.
I believe you're north of the border? If so, does NHBC operate up there, and if not is there something similar?
Mr McDonnell said: "My view is this. I want it resolved quickly.
"I think we can come out of it as the anti-racist party that we are tackling the real issues.
"I don't want to live in a society where synagogues are attacked, or where Jews graveyards daubed with swastikas or worse, Jewish children having to have security at their schools."
But he stopped short of calling for Labour to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance guidelines on anti-Semitism, the magazine said.
McDonnell is very aware of the damage this is doing but he is caught up in a position that he cannot change anything otherwise he will be called a tory
What a mess
Am I the only one who sees this as McDonnell preparing to push Jezza aside?
So I'm in the process of buying a new build at the moment. As a result I'm having a look at the Building Standards and am being pleasantly surprised by how readable they are.
If the new builds in my local area are anything to go by, don't expect the builders to have paid much attention to the standards. And if it is a new build, complain about *everything* you think is wrong - they're not very good at snagging, either.
If they're a big company they'll have set aside a fair few thousand for after-sales work (I once got told 10% of sale price), but they like to hold on to that if they can. Don't let them.
Good luck with the purchase.
(Examples: houses with missing insulation, ones that need re-rendering three times in the first five years, missing expansion joints, etc)
This is phase 2 of the development with houses of the same design being built by a different set of builders from phase 1. The company that did the ground works this time went bust about 3 days after they had finished the last piece of work on the site.
The big difference between phase 1 and 2 is in phase 1 the houses all had a house-wide ventilation system that initially didn't work bringing a very literal meaning to the phrase air-tight. Phase 2 is going to have standard trickle vents and extractor fans so it will be 'interesting; to compare an contrast the airflow properties of the properties.
Interesting that the whole-house ventilation system didn't work in phase 1. We fitted one to our house 9 years ago during an extensive refurbishment of a delapidated house and we have been extremely pleased with the results. Very low heating costs and yet the house never feels stuffy (or draughty).
Jon Lansman, 61, helped catapult Jeremy Corbyn to the leadership and is one of the most influential figures in British politics.
The Jewish activist said he is 'horrified' by anti-Semitic comments made by people he calls friends - but there will be a backlash if MPs continue to be 'hostile'.
Although Mr Lansman says Labour MPs should not feel their seats are under threat by Momentum, he suggested there would be a 'fight' if they push against Mr Corbyn.
He said: 'As long as there are perhaps between 12 or 25 or 30 people who are very hostile, who are just waiting for Jeremy to go so they can turn the clock back, then...we'll keep having that fight'.
Mr McDonnell said: "My view is this. I want it resolved quickly.
"I think we can come out of it as the anti-racist party that we are tackling the real issues.
"I don't want to live in a society where synagogues are attacked, or where Jews graveyards daubed with swastikas or worse, Jewish children having to have security at their schools."
But he stopped short of calling for Labour to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance guidelines on anti-Semitism, the magazine said.
McDonnell is very aware of the damage this is doing but he is caught up in a position that he cannot change anything otherwise he will be called a tory
What a mess
Am I the only one who sees this as McDonnell preparing to push Jezza aside?
No - I think he sees it as a very real danger to the project and may well try to get Corbyn to stand aside but I just do not see it happening.
Furthermore, he is not a saint himself and in my opinion is much more of a danger to the UK
Believe Emily Benn is considering resigning from labour. Is she another tory then
also...fast-track the return of expelled members, and accept supporters of hard-left groups are to be unveiled at the party’s conference,
Looking at the detail, these are just proposals being put forward by a small number of CLPs rather than being centrally driven ideas. Of course, they could be being manipulated from the leadership - but at this stage, they seem unlikely to actually be implemented.
It is worth watching - but it is very early on in the process to believe this is the direction of travel for the party as a whole.
Wait until the boundaries go through next month, and every new constituency needs to select a candidate.
Re-selection and deselection then affects all parties.
In practice, it is not being on right or left of either party that has led to deselection, but rather when MPs run out of friends and supporters through rebelling.
Come, now. If the churn rate of constituency members is as rumoured, then it's not a case of 'running out of friends', but of 'friends being run out'.
And as people have pointed out passim, if 'rebelling' is a reason for deselection, then Corbyn himself should have been deselected decade ago.
But that's different, because... well, just because.
It’s different because if you rebel against the leadership when it’s out of step with your constituency members they tend to support you, whereas rebelling against the leadership despite your constituency members supporting the leadership is rather courageous (in the Sir Humphrey Appleby sense of the word).
But the membership is changing.
I love all these excuses about how Corbyn is somehow principled but the likes of Field is not. It's bullshit.
Both are principled, albeit rather inflexible, but one has the support of his constituency party.
Maybe but it is another thing to get the voters to agree. The reports coming out of Birkenhead and the huge publicity in the Echo does not make a Field defeat inevitable. In fact many think he would win
I think Field would be well placed to win a by election - reminiscent of Dick Taverne at Lincoln in March 1973. I would certainly support him.
So I'm in the process of buying a new build at the moment. As a result I'm having a look at the Building Standards and am being pleasantly surprised by how readable they are.
If the new builds in my local area are anything to go by, don't expect the builders to have paid much attention to the standards. And if it is a new build, complain about *everything* you think is wrong - they're not very good at snagging, either.
If they're a big company they'll have set aside a fair few thousand for after-sales work (I once got told 10% of sale price), but they like to hold on to that if they can. Don't let them.
Good luck with the purchase.
(Examples: houses with missing insulation, ones that need re-rendering three times in the first five years, missing expansion joints, etc)
This is phase 2 of the development with houses of the same design being built by a different set of builders from phase 1. The company that did the ground works this time went bust about 3 days after they had finished the last piece of work on the site.
The big difference between phase 1 and 2 is in phase 1 the houses all had a house-wide ventilation system that initially didn't work bringing a very literal meaning to the phrase air-tight. Phase 2 is going to have standard trickle vents and extractor fans so it will be 'interesting; to compare an contrast the airflow properties of the properties.
Interesting that the whole-house ventilation system didn't work in phase 1. We fitted one to our house 9 years ago during an extensive refurbishment of a delapidated house and we have been extremely pleased with the results. Very low heating costs and yet the house never feels stuffy (or draughty).
It’s quite hard to make an MVHR not work - it’s basically 2 fans and some tubes. We put one in 3 years back and it’s fantastic, possibly have the only house in west Cornwall without soggy books.
So I'm in the process of buying a new build at the moment. As a result I'm having a look at the Building Standards and am being pleasantly surprised by how readable they are.
If the new builds in my local area are anything to go by, don't expect the builders to have paid much attention to the standards. And if it is a new build, complain about *everything* you think is wrong - they're not very good at snagging, either.
If they're a big company they'll have set aside a fair few thousand for after-sales work (I once got told 10% of sale price), but they like to hold on to that if they can. Don't let them.
Good luck with the purchase.
(Examples: houses with missing insulation, ones that need re-rendering three times in the first five years, missing expansion joints, etc)
This is phase 2 of the development with houses of the same design being built by a different set of builders from phase 1. The company that did the ground works this time went bust about 3 days after they had finished the last piece of work on the site.
The big difference between phase 1 and 2 is in phase 1 the houses all had a house-wide ventilation system that initially didn't work bringing a very literal meaning to the phrase air-tight. Phase 2 is going to have standard trickle vents and extractor fans so it will be 'interesting; to compare an contrast the airflow properties of the properties.
Interesting that the whole-house ventilation system didn't work in phase 1. We fitted one to our house 9 years ago during an extensive refurbishment of a delapidated house and we have been extremely pleased with the results. Very low heating costs and yet the house never feels stuffy (or draughty).
They did work in the end, just delayed everyone's move in dates by two weeks as they worked out what they had fucked up. I have friends who moved into a phase 1 property which was completed a couple of years ago so I've had lots of info to work with before deciding to buy.
Mr McDonnell said: "My view is this. I want it resolved quickly.
"I think we can come out of it as the anti-racist party that we are tackling the real issues.
"I don't want to live in a society where synagogues are attacked, or where Jews graveyards daubed with swastikas or worse, Jewish children having to have security at their schools."
But he stopped short of calling for Labour to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance guidelines on anti-Semitism, the magazine said.
McDonnell is very aware of the damage this is doing but he is caught up in a position that he cannot change anything otherwise he will be called a tory
What a mess
Am I the only one who sees this as McDonnell preparing to push Jezza aside?
So I'm in the process of buying a new build at the moment. As a result I'm having a look at the Building Standards and am being pleasantly surprised by how readable they are.
If the new builds in my local area are anything to go by, don't expect the builders to have paid much attention to the standards. And if it is a new build, complain about *everything* you think is wrong - they're not very good at snagging, either.
If they're a big company they'll have set aside a fair few thousand for after-sales work (I once got told 10% of sale price), but they like to hold on to that if they can. Don't let them.
Good luck with the purchase.
(Examples: houses with missing insulation, ones that need re-rendering three times in the first five years, missing expansion joints, etc)
This is phase 2 of the development with houses of the same design being built by a different set of builders from phase 1. The company that did the ground works this time went bust about 3 days after they had finished the last piece of work on the site.
The big difference between phase 1 and 2 is in phase 1 the houses all had a house-wide ventilation system that initially didn't work bringing a very literal meaning to the phrase air-tight. Phase 2 is going to have standard trickle vents and extractor fans so it will be 'interesting; to compare an contrast the airflow properties of the properties.
Sounds interesting. I've got no idea what the current regulations are wrt things like insulation and energy efficiency, but I get the impression it's a bit of a mess in practice.
I believe you're north of the border? If so, does NHBC operate up there, and if not is there something similar?
NHBC does operate but our guarantee will be through Premier Guarantee.
also...fast-track the return of expelled members, and accept supporters of hard-left groups are to be unveiled at the party’s conference,
Looking at the detail, these are just proposals being put forward by a small number of CLPs rather than being centrally driven ideas. Of course, they could be being manipulated from the leadership - but at this stage, they seem unlikely to actually be implemented.
It is worth watching - but it is very early on in the process to believe this is the direction of travel for the party as a whole.
Wait until the boundaries go through next month, and every new constituency needs to select a candidate.
Re-selection and deselection then affects all parties.
In practice, it is not being on right or left of either party that has led to deselection, but rather when MPs run out of friends and supporters through rebelling.
Come, now. If the churn rate of constituency members is as rumoured, then it's not a case of 'running out of friends', but of 'friends being run out'.
And as people have pointed out passim, if 'rebelling' is a reason for deselection, then Corbyn himself should have been deselected decade ago.
But that's different, because... well, just because.
It’s different because if you rebel against the leadership when it’s out of step with your constituency members they tend to support you, whereas rebelling against the leadership despite your constituency members supporting the leadership is rather courageous (in the Sir Humphrey Appleby sense of the word).
But the membership is changing.
I love all these excuses about how Corbyn is somehow principled but the likes of Field is not. It's bullshit.
Both are principled, albeit rather inflexible, but one has the support of his constituency party.
Maybe but it is another thing to get the voters to agree. The reports coming out of Birkenhead and the huge publicity in the Echo does not make a Field defeat inevitable. In fact many think he would win
I think Field would be well placed to win a by election - reminiscent of Dick Taverne at Lincoln in March 1973. I would certainly support him.
It’s an interesting conception of democracy to suggest that a referendum asking the electorate to clarify which real-world version of leaving the EU they wanted is a betrayal, but it’s fine to attempt to curtail the options Parliament can vote on if the executive fails to secure a good outcome (here you go, you can choose disaster A or big disaster B, but not sensible outcome C).
It’s an interesting conception of democracy to suggest that a referendum asking the electorate to clarify which real-world version of leaving the EU they wanted is a betrayal, but it’s fine to attempt to curtail the options Parliament can vote on if the executive fails to secure a good outcome (here you go, you can choose disaster A or big disaster B, but not sensible outcome C).
Maybe a remain position. Anyway it is too late for a second referendum
Nick Boles is now backing EFTA/EEA instead of Chequers.
Actually he is backing EFTA/EEA only as a bridge to CETA. Which would be a reasonable idea except that we can’t trust our politicians not to make this temporary status permanent. If only they had accepted the referendum result this might have been an option, but not now.
"Michael Kretschmer, prime minister of the German state of Saxony, knew he was entering the lion’s den. But even he looked unprepared for the boos, whistles and catcalls that greeted him in Chemnitz, a city boiling over with rage and hurt." https://www.ft.com/content/314af0cc-ad02-11e8-94bd-cba20d67390c
It’s an interesting conception of democracy to suggest that a referendum asking the electorate to clarify which real-world version of leaving the EU they wanted is a betrayal, but it’s fine to attempt to curtail the options Parliament can vote on if the executive fails to secure a good outcome (here you go, you can choose disaster A or big disaster B, but not sensible outcome C).
The British people voted Leave and May's Government was elected with a manifesto commitment to respect the referendum result and deliver Brexit.
If voters want a second EU referendum they can vote LD
It’s an interesting conception of democracy to suggest that a referendum asking the electorate to clarify which real-world version of leaving the EU they wanted is a betrayal, but it’s fine to attempt to curtail the options Parliament can vote on if the executive fails to secure a good outcome (here you go, you can choose disaster A or big disaster B, but not sensible outcome C).
The British people voted Leave and May's Government was elected with a manifesto commitment to respect the referendum result and deliver Brexit.
If voters want a second EU referendum they can vote LD
Funny how Leavers are scared of a second referendum... don't you have confidence in the likely outcome?
Given recent history, TMay's robust dismissal of a 2nd referendum probably makes it quite likely now.
Nick Boles is now backing EFTA/EEA instead of Chequers.
Actually he is backing EFTA/EEA only as a bridge to CETA. Which would be a reasonable idea except that we can’t trust our politicians not to make this temporary status permanent. If only they had accepted the referendum result this might have been an option, but not now.
If you believed in your plan, you would be confident of winning people over as a result of its successful implementation. The fact that you want people to sign up in blood in advance just broadcasts your doubts.
It’s an interesting conception of democracy to suggest that a referendum asking the electorate to clarify which real-world version of leaving the EU they wanted is a betrayal, but it’s fine to attempt to curtail the options Parliament can vote on if the executive fails to secure a good outcome (here you go, you can choose disaster A or big disaster B, but not sensible outcome C).
The British people voted Leave and May's Government was elected with a manifesto commitment to respect the referendum result and deliver Brexit.
If voters want a second EU referendum they can vote LD
Funny how Leavers are scared of a second referendum...
Funnier still is how Remainers are scared of the democratic will expressed in the first.
It’s an interesting conception of democracy to suggest that a referendum asking the electorate to clarify which real-world version of leaving the EU they wanted is a betrayal, but it’s fine to attempt to curtail the options Parliament can vote on if the executive fails to secure a good outcome (here you go, you can choose disaster A or big disaster B, but not sensible outcome C).
The British people voted Leave and May's Government was elected with a manifesto commitment to respect the referendum result and deliver Brexit.
If voters want a second EU referendum they can vote LD
Funny how Leavers are scared of a second referendum...
Funnier still is how Remainers are scared of the democratic will expressed in the first.
What was the decision on the location of customs borders again?
It’s an interesting conception of democracy to suggest that a referendum asking the electorate to clarify which real-world version of leaving the EU they wanted is a betrayal, but it’s fine to attempt to curtail the options Parliament can vote on if the executive fails to secure a good outcome (here you go, you can choose disaster A or big disaster B, but not sensible outcome C).
The British people voted Leave and May's Government was elected with a manifesto commitment to respect the referendum result and deliver Brexit.
If voters want a second EU referendum they can vote LD
Funny how Leavers are scared of a second referendum... don't you have confidence in the likely outcome?
Given recent history, TMay's robust dismissal of a 2nd referendum probably makes it quite likely now.
My concern with a second referendum (lets all be honest and call it that) is the complexity of the questions, the margin of the decision, the time needed to get it through the HOC and HOL, the period for a campaign and the disaster of a similar result but to remain.
Furthermore how are the EU going to confirm the details of us remaining for the campaign even to be valid
I assume TM does control this as it would need to go to Parliament so she would have to lose not only a VNOC but also a leadership campaign would be needed to elect her successor that would go on for a long time.
Therefore I think it is not practical or even possible and do not ask me how I would vote, I have no idea
It’s an interesting conception of democracy to suggest that a referendum asking the electorate to clarify which real-world version of leaving the EU they wanted is a betrayal, but it’s fine to attempt to curtail the options Parliament can vote on if the executive fails to secure a good outcome (here you go, you can choose disaster A or big disaster B, but not sensible outcome C).
The British people voted Leave and May's Government was elected with a manifesto commitment to respect the referendum result and deliver Brexit.
If voters want a second EU referendum they can vote LD
Funny how Leavers are scared of a second referendum...
Funnier still is how Remainers are scared of the democratic will expressed in the first.
What was the decision on the location of customs borders again?
The decision was that the Govt. would negotiate it. And if the EU behaved like twats, then we would walk away with no deal.
"Michael Kretschmer, prime minister of the German state of Saxony, knew he was entering the lion’s den. But even he looked unprepared for the boos, whistles and catcalls that greeted him in Chemnitz, a city boiling over with rage and hurt." https://www.ft.com/content/314af0cc-ad02-11e8-94bd-cba20d67390c
Chemnitz was officially named "Karl-Marx-Stadt" during the Cold War.
"Michael Kretschmer, prime minister of the German state of Saxony, knew he was entering the lion’s den. But even he looked unprepared for the boos, whistles and catcalls that greeted him in Chemnitz, a city boiling over with rage and hurt." https://www.ft.com/content/314af0cc-ad02-11e8-94bd-cba20d67390c
Astonishing. This link will possibly bring up a search result which gets through the paywall
Edit: didn't work, but googling "Michael Kretschmer, prime minister of the German state of Saxony" may do the trick.
Edit2: doesn't work. I give up.
Edit3: googling "Michael Kretschmer, prime minister of the German state of Saxony, knew he was entering the lion’s den" does the trick.
It’s an interesting conception of democracy to suggest that a referendum asking the electorate to clarify which real-world version of leaving the EU they wanted is a betrayal, but it’s fine to attempt to curtail the options Parliament can vote on if the executive fails to secure a good outcome (here you go, you can choose disaster A or big disaster B, but not sensible outcome C).
The British people voted Leave and May's Government was elected with a manifesto commitment to respect the referendum result and deliver Brexit.
If voters want a second EU referendum they can vote LD
Funny how Leavers are scared of a second referendum...
Funnier still is how Remainers are scared of the democratic will expressed in the first.
What was the decision on the location of customs borders again?
The decision was the Tories won most seats in GB to deliver Brexit at the last general election and the DUP won most seats in NI on a platform that NI follows the same Brexit as the rest of the UK
It’s an interesting conception of democracy to suggest that a referendum asking the electorate to clarify which real-world version of leaving the EU they wanted is a betrayal, but it’s fine to attempt to curtail the options Parliament can vote on if the executive fails to secure a good outcome (here you go, you can choose disaster A or big disaster B, but not sensible outcome C).
The British people voted Leave and May's Government was elected with a manifesto commitment to respect the referendum result and deliver Brexit.
If voters want a second EU referendum they can vote LD
Funny how Leavers are scared of a second referendum... don't you have confidence in the likely outcome?
Given recent history, TMay's robust dismissal of a 2nd referendum probably makes it quite likely now.
Leavers had to wait FORTY YEARs to get one of the main parties to have a manifesto commitment to have a referendum on leaving the EU and then to see that party win that general election and then win the subsequent EU referendum.
If diehard Remainers want a second EU referendum they can try and get the LDs elected, the Tories certainly will not be giving them one and May knows it
Sky paper review full of conspiracies with Boris to challenge TM, Corbyn to face his own VNOC, McDonnell plotting, a large scale labour revolt post the conference if Corbyn not only deals with the anti semitism and bullying but also agrees to the second referendum, and that does not include the woes of the Lib Dems and SNP.
We all better charge up our batteries or get a second tablet as September to November is going to be some journey for politicos.
I suggested to my good wife that I am thinkng of giving up politics until the new year but she sharply reminded me that I was terrible when bored and will get me a second tablet if I need one, bless her
It’s an interesting conception of democracy to suggest that a referendum asking the electorate to clarify which real-world version of leaving the EU they wanted is a betrayal, but it’s fine to attempt to curtail the options Parliament can vote on if the executive fails to secure a good outcome (here you go, you can choose disaster A or big disaster B, but not sensible outcome C).
The British people voted Leave and May's Government was elected with a manifesto commitment to respect the referendum result and deliver Brexit.
If voters want a second EU referendum they can vote LD
Funny how Leavers are scared of a second referendum...
Funnier still is how Remainers are scared of the democratic will expressed in the first.
What was the decision on the location of customs borders again?
The decision was the Tories won most seats in GB to deliver Brexit at the last general election and the DUP won most seats in NI on a platform that NI follows the same Brexit as the rest of the UK
The DUP manifesto contained the following points on Brexit:
- Frictionless border with Irish Republic - Northern Ireland-specific solutions - Northern Ireland established as a hub for trade from Irish Republic into the broader UK market - Comprehensive free trade *and customs* agreement with the EU
I suggested to my good wife that I am thinkng of giving up politics until the new year but she sharply reminded me that I was terrible when bored and will get me a second tablet if I need one, bless her
There's not much chance of politics being boring over the next 6 months!
It’s an interesting conception of democracy to suggest that a referendum asking the electorate to clarify which real-world version of leaving the EU they wanted is a betrayal, but it’s fine to attempt to curtail the options Parliament can vote on if the executive fails to secure a good outcome (here you go, you can choose disaster A or big disaster B, but not sensible outcome C).
The British people voted Leave and May's Government was elected with a manifesto commitment to respect the referendum result and deliver Brexit.
If voters want a second EU referendum they can vote LD
Funny how Leavers are scared of a second referendum...
Funnier still is how Remainers are scared of the democratic will expressed in the first.
What was the decision on the location of customs borders again?
The decision was the Tories won most seats in GB to deliver Brexit at the last general election and the DUP won most seats in NI on a platform that NI follows the same Brexit as the rest of the UK
The DUP manifesto contained the following points on Brexit:
- Frictionless border with Irish Republic - Northern Ireland-specific solutions - Northern Ireland established as a hub for trade from Irish Republic into the broader UK market - Comprehensive free trade *and customs* agreement with the EU
So largely Chequers Deal then and a comfortable majority of DUP voters voted Leave
"Michael Kretschmer, prime minister of the German state of Saxony, knew he was entering the lion’s den. But even he looked unprepared for the boos, whistles and catcalls that greeted him in Chemnitz, a city boiling over with rage and hurt." https://www.ft.com/content/314af0cc-ad02-11e8-94bd-cba20d67390c
Astonishing. This link will possibly bring up a search result which gets through the paywall
Edit: didn't work, but googling "Michael Kretschmer, prime minister of the German state of Saxony" may do the trick.
Edit2: doesn't work. I give up.
Edit3: googling "Michael Kretschmer, prime minister of the German state of Saxony, knew he was entering the lion’s den" does the trick.
You can usually read FT articles by putting the title of the article into Google. (It seems like a bit of a useless paywall to me, considering that Google is the most used search engine).
It’s an interesting conception of democracy to suggest that a referendum asking the electorate to clarify which real-world version of leaving the EU they wanted is a betrayal, but it’s fine to attempt to curtail the options Parliament can vote on if the executive fails to secure a good outcome (here you go, you can choose disaster A or big disaster B, but not sensible outcome C).
The British people voted Leave and May's Government was elected with a manifesto commitment to respect the referendum result and deliver Brexit.
If voters want a second EU referendum they can vote LD
Funny how Leavers are scared of a second referendum...
Funnier still is how Remainers are scared of the democratic will expressed in the first.
What was the decision on the location of customs borders again?
The decision was the Tories won most seats in GB to deliver Brexit at the last general election and the DUP won most seats in NI on a platform that NI follows the same Brexit as the rest of the UK
The decision was that the majority of seats and votes went to parties opposed to a hard Brexit. But despite the obvious lack of public support for such a policy the Tories decided to pursue it anyway. This was the only way they could maintain a semblance of party unity, so naturally the national interest and the clear decision of the voters at the general election had to take second place.
I suggested to my good wife that I am thinkng of giving up politics until the new year but she sharply reminded me that I was terrible when bored and will get me a second tablet if I need one, bless her
There's not much chance of politics being boring over the next 6 months!
It’s an interesting conception of democracy to suggest that a referendum asking the electorate to clarify which real-world version of leaving the EU they wanted is a betrayal, but it’s fine to attempt to curtail the options Parliament can vote on if the executive fails to secure a good outcome (here you go, you can choose disaster A or big disaster B, but not sensible outcome C).
The British people voted Leave and May's Government was elected with a manifesto commitment to respect the referendum result and deliver Brexit.
If voters want a second EU referendum they can vote LD
Funny how Leavers are scared of a second referendum...
Funnier still is how Remainers are scared of the democratic will expressed in the first.
What was the decision on the location of customs borders again?
The decision was the Tories won most seats in GB to deliver Brexit at the last general election and the DUP won most seats in NI on a platform that NI follows the same Brexit as the rest of the UK
The decision was that the majority of seats and votes went to parties opposed to a hard Brexit. But despite the obvious lack of public support for such a policy the Tories decided to pursue it anyway. This was the only way they could maintain a semblance of party unity, so naturally the national interest and the clear decision of the voters at the general election had to take second place.
Wrong, the Tories won a majority of seats in GB and their highest voteshare since 1983 on a commitment to end free movement and leave the Single Market and the DUP won most seats in NI on a commitment to ensure NI's Brexit followed the UK's.
Labour also had no commitment to stay in the single market either
- *Northern Ireland-specific solutions* achieved through active Executive engagement - *Particular circumstances of Northern Ireland* with a land border with the EU fully reflected - Northern Ireland established as a *hub for trade from Irish Republic into the broader UK market*
Comments
What he definetely doesn't believe in is changing the system gradually.
https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2018/09/which-mps-get-the-most-abuse-on-twitter-conservatives.html
Trump's base will still be with him even if the rest of America is not
https://nyheteridag.se/plus/makalosa-tokrusningen-sd-okar-rejalt-i-sentio-med-bara-dagar-kvar-till-valet/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_Swedish_general_election,_2018
I'd imagine Boris does quite well for example on social media but generally Labour seem to get more contact online, a Corbyn tweet compared to a May tweet for example so proportion wouldn't identify more abuse, just possibly less positive or neutral messages between it.
The Jewish activist said he is 'horrified' by anti-Semitic comments made by people he calls friends - but there will be a backlash if MPs continue to be 'hostile'.
Although Mr Lansman says Labour MPs should not feel their seats are under threat by Momentum, he suggested there would be a 'fight' if they push against Mr Corbyn.
He said: 'As long as there are perhaps between 12 or 25 or 30 people who are very hostile, who are just waiting for Jeremy to go so they can turn the clock back, then...we'll keep having that fight'.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6121881/Momentum-founder-hints-30-hostile-Labour-MPs-ousted.html
Dissent will not be tolerated.
An Afghan man accused of injuring two people in a stabbing at Amsterdam's central railway station on Friday had a terrorist motive, officials say.
The man, who has been named in Dutch media as Jawed S, was shot and wounded by police during the incident.
Earlier the US ambassador said the two victims were American tourists.
German police have conducted a search of the suspect's home in Germany.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45382557
It does nothing to bring people together.
Edit: There Is No Alternative. TINA
"Is he one of us?" Etc
"Male MPs and Conservatives were the target of more abuse in the data studied."
"The two exceptions are where the proportion of abusive replies has fallen for male Labour Party MPs, and where the volume of abusive replies has fallen for male Scottish National Party (SNP) MPs"
It's interesting that James Heappey gets a fair amount of abuse.
There's lots of interesting (and non party-political) stuff in it.
But yes it isn't based on overall amount of abuse, which is why I didn't say imagine for that part.
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5ck0ef
"I think we can come out of it as the anti-racist party that we are tackling the real issues.
"I don't want to live in a society where synagogues are attacked, or where Jews graveyards daubed with swastikas or worse, Jewish children having to have security at their schools."
But he stopped short of calling for Labour to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance guidelines on anti-Semitism, the magazine said.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-45382486
https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/45383556
The thing is, this is unsurprising: I'd expect MPs from a party in power to get more abuse. Prominence also matters, which would be why the amount of abuse Cameron, Osborne and Miliband got reduced massively between 2015 and 2017, and Corbyn's increased.
The paper doesn't go into this (and it would be hard to measure), but it's probably also wrong to assume that abuse against Conservatives only comes from Conservatives, or Labour from Labour. There are enough splits in all the parties for a considerable amount of abuse to come from the other factions within the party.
The following shows some of the data:
http://greenwoodma.servehttp.com/data/buzzfeed/sunburst.html
As an example, in 2017 Boris got 4893 abusive replies, or 9.3%. Diane Abbott got 609, or 3.4%.
https://www.bbc.com/sport/cricket/45359234
Not exactly excited about any of those options.
https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/1035877236732243968
What a mess
There was the well-known Amnesty study, but they looked at two different things. The Guardian headline: "Diane Abbott more abused than any other MPs during election" is rather let-down by the research behind it, which was only into female MPs, not all MPs.
But looking at the Amnesty study and the 2015 data for this latest study, there does seem to be a disparity in at least Abbott's case. That might signal methodological issues - in particular, timescales over which the data was received (Amnesty looked at just six weeks, this study four weeks). However this latest study does seem much more comprehensive in terms of scope and data.
It is worth watching - but it is very early on in the process to believe this is the direction of travel for the party as a whole.
If you don't like it, you just vote for the party that is opposing them.
It does seem inevitable that things will move further to the left. But whether all of the proposed rule changes get adopted is still very much up in the air.
In practice, it is not being on right or left of either party that has led to deselection, but rather when MPs run out of friends and supporters through rebelling.
And as people have pointed out passim, if 'rebelling' is a reason for deselection, then Corbyn himself should have been deselected decade ago.
But that's different, because... well, just because.
If they're a big company they'll have set aside a fair few thousand for after-sales work (I once got told 10% of sale price), but they like to hold on to that if they can. Don't let them.
Good luck with the purchase.
(Examples: houses with missing insulation, ones that need re-rendering three times in the first five years, missing expansion joints, etc)
JRM rebellion good Soubry not so much
I love all these excuses about how Corbyn is somehow principled but the likes of Field is not. It's bullshit.
The big difference between phase 1 and 2 is in phase 1 the houses all had a house-wide ventilation system that initially didn't work bringing a very literal meaning to the phrase air-tight. Phase 2 is going to have standard trickle vents and extractor fans so it will be 'interesting; to compare an contrast the airflow properties of the properties.
It's all excuses to purge the party of good people (even if I disagree with them politically) and to replace them with Corbynite shits. Any excuse will do.
They are very different things
I believe you're north of the border? If so, does NHBC operate up there, and if not is there something similar?
Some have gone but maybe 60% of those in column 5, 40% column 4 and a few like Streeting from column 2 are "on the list"
https://labourlist.org/2016/03/leaked-list-ranks-labour-mps-by-hostility-to-corbyn/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/09/01/will-no-second-referendum-brexit-would-gross-betrayal-democracy/?li_source=LI&li_medium=li-recommendation-widget
Furthermore, he is not a saint himself and in my opinion is much more of a danger to the UK
Believe Emily Benn is considering resigning from labour. Is she another tory then
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2017/jun/12/oh-jeremy-corbyn-how-people-started-chanting-the-labour-leaders-name-video
https://www.ft.com/content/314af0cc-ad02-11e8-94bd-cba20d67390c
If voters want a second EU referendum they can vote LD
Given recent history, TMay's robust dismissal of a 2nd referendum probably makes it quite likely now.
Furthermore how are the EU going to confirm the details of us remaining for the campaign even to be valid
I assume TM does control this as it would need to go to Parliament so she would have to lose not only a VNOC but also a leadership campaign would be needed to elect her successor that would go on for a long time.
Therefore I think it is not practical or even possible and do not ask me how I would vote, I have no idea
It's not complicated.
Edit: didn't work, but googling "Michael Kretschmer, prime minister of the German state of Saxony" may do the trick.
Edit2: doesn't work. I give up.
Edit3: googling "Michael Kretschmer, prime minister of the German state of Saxony, knew he was entering the lion’s den" does the trick.
If diehard Remainers want a second EU referendum they can try and get the LDs elected, the Tories certainly will not be giving them one and May knows it
We all better charge up our batteries or get a second tablet as September to November is going to be some journey for politicos.
I suggested to my good wife that I am thinkng of giving up politics until the new year but she sharply reminded me that I was terrible when bored and will get me a second tablet if I need one, bless her
- Frictionless border with Irish Republic
- Northern Ireland-specific solutions
- Northern Ireland established as a hub for trade from Irish Republic into the broader UK market
- Comprehensive free trade *and customs* agreement with the EU
I wish everyone a restful night
Good night folks
Labour also had no commitment to stay in the single market either
https://www.nytimes.com/1997/05/25/magazine/the-subversive.html
- *Northern Ireland-specific solutions* achieved through active Executive engagement
- *Particular circumstances of Northern Ireland* with a land border with the EU fully reflected
- Northern Ireland established as a *hub for trade from Irish Republic into the broader UK market*