I've been an active member of a party for 25 years, and I'd defend our campaigns, leaflet contents and so on. But I'm not going to pretend for one second that they are educative.
You might as well say washing powder ads are designed to inform rather than sell - they do have to be technically accurate, but they aren't meant to be a public information campaign.
A slight tangent to this conversation.
On the issue of political education: voters choosing to remain ignorant is arguably entirely rational! From the Concise Encylopedia of Economics entry on public choice :
One of the chief underpinnings of public choice theory is the lack of incentives for voters to monitor government effectively. Anthony Downs, in one of the earliest public choice books, An Economic Theory of Democracy, pointed out that the voter is largely ignorant of political issues and that this ignorance is rational. Even though the result of an election may be very important, an individual's vote rarely decides an election. Thus, the direct impact of casting a well-informed vote is almost nil; the voter has virtually no chance to determine the outcome of the election. So spending time following the issues is not personally worthwhile for the voter. Evidence for this claim is found in the fact that public opinion polls consistently find that less than half of all voting-age Americans can name their own congressional representative.
Public choice economists point out that this incentive to be ignorant is rare in the private sector. Someone who buys a car typically wants to be well informed about the car he or she selects. That is because the car buyer's choice is decisive—he or she pays only for the one chosen. If the choice is wise, the buyer will benefit; if it is unwise, the buyer will suffer directly. Voting lacks that kind of direct result. Therefore, most voters are largely ignorant about the positions of the people for whom they vote. Except for a few highly publicized issues, they do not pay a lot of attention to what legislative bodies do, and even when they do pay attention, they have little incentive to gain the background knowledge and analytic skill needed to understand the issues.
If Corbyn goes and is succeeded by Williamson it is difficult to see how the Labour Party does not split as Williamson has been pushing the deselection of Labour moderates. A Williamson leadership would likely see Umunna and other moderates defect en masse to a new centrist party formed with the LDs and maybe a few pro EU Tories
And history and fptp shows not represent the Labour Party membership or broader Labour movement one iota. Why are they even hanging around in politics, the country will never allow New Labour to form a government again, quite rightly.
Fact. What is actually wrong with Democlomatic and insulting as Chuck your spokesman has been today?
You will also see a numbemove to it the Tories will be more united as well
Labour didn’t lose to Thatcher in 79 and 83 because it was too left wing and divided, it lost then because it had been in power majority of the previous twenty years. If you can’t see the Tories are about to hand keys to no10 to Labour for a generation then you are blind.
Labour lost in 1979 as we had high inflation, one of the lowest GDP per capitas in western Europe and frequent strikes. Labour lost in 1983 because it was too leftwing and a new centrist party took many of its votes.
If Labour loses the next ge7
When Labour left office in 1979 inflation was significantly lower than the level inherited from the Tories in March 1974. Throughout 1978 RPI inflation had hovered around 8% - though it had ticked up to 10% in May 1979 .
Thatcher and Major reversed both the economic failures of Heathism as well as Labour that is true
The economy was in better shape in May 1979 when compared with March 1974. Likewise when Labour left office in June 1970 it bequeathed a Budget Surplus and a Balance of Payments Surplus to the incoming Tory Government. No Tory Government has managed to do either - and Heath frittered away his inheritance.
GDP per capita was one of the lowest in western Europe in 1979 and 17% (compared to 1.7% when the Tories finally left office in 1997). Healey also had to request the IMF for a bailout.
The fact Heath's government was equally economically inept does not change that
If Corbyn goes and is succeeded by Williamson it is difficult to see how the Labour Party does not split as Williamson has been pushing the deselection of Labour moderates. A Williamson leadership would likely see Umunna and other moderates defect en masse to a new centrist party formed with the LDs and maybe a few pro EU Tories
You will also see a numbemove to it the Tories will be more united as well
Labour lost in 1979 as we had high inflation, one of the lowest GDP per capitas in western Europe and frequent strikes. Labour lost in 1983 because it was too leftwing and a new centrist party took many of its votes.
If Labour loses the next general election it will be because Corbynism led to a repeat of the latter, if Labour win the ne
Wow. You can see four years ahead into the future?
Tell us, how have you managed to acquire this amazing skill?
Well it isn't by the application of reason - his postings make that perfectly clear
It’s actually really easy for me. Just read and understand history.
Let’s start with 83. When it came to 83 election result, voters, polling and byelections had shown alliance had taken from Tories, votrvative government too soon to dump it and go back to what had dominated previous twenty years.
Let me put it another way so hopefully the penny drop for you.
Labour lost in 79 for the same reason Churchill lost in 45.
45, 79, 97 and the next one are part of a set.
After 1945 the Tories were back in power after 6 years under Churchill again who beat the leftwing Attlee, after 1979 Labour were out of power for 18 years and only got back with a centrist leader in 1997, after 1997 the Tories were out of power for 13 years and only got back in when Labour replaced their centrist PM with the more leftwing Brown
Churchill did not win the popular vote in 1951 and only returned to office courtesy of the Ulster Unionists who then took the Tory Whip.
There were only 9 UUP seats, so the Tories on 312 would still have beaten Labour on seats. And don't forget the National Liberals on 17.
Indeed so - but it would have been a Hung Parliament.
He is quite simply the dumbest f*cker ever to hold the office of President*.
Though his policy of demanding plants and jobs be brought back to the USA is popular with his base
Most of what goes into an iPhone is not made by Apple, even the Apple badged bits are mostly manufactured by other companies. Almost all of those companies are not US companies. Apple manufactures their phones where labour costs are low, and where they are close to their suppliers. If Apple manufactured all of their phones in the US, 1. labour costs would be way higher, 2. they'd still pay a lot of tariffs on the components, and 3. they would be far away from their main suppliers.
Trump's understanding of the issues, which I am no way claming to be an expert on, is childish. Trump is really, really f*cking stupid.
I agree with all you say from a business perspective. But Trump is playing politics. I remember The Apple CEO saying "We will never manufacture in the US." Trump points are that the Globalist Democrats and their friends in business do not care about American Jobs (even though they create a lot of them). Trump - I do care about American jobs and I am fighting for you and your children's jobs.
Intel can have factories in USA. Samsung have announced a semi conductor factory in the USA. Trump will keep asking the questions to Apple why do you not?
Intel has chip fabrication plants around the world.
Why?
Because Intel chips depreciate every day. Minimising supply chain lengths is essential when you are in such a low margin business (making PCs).
If you go to Dublin, there's an Intel fab (which used to be the most productive one in the world), and within a couple of miles there are Apple, Dell and HP assembly shops.
But there's one final point: the labour content of an Intel chip is de minimis. Go visit the Intel fab in Dublin. They no longer have the people in space suits because they bring dust in. Everything is hermetically sealed and automated. It's absolutely extraordinary.
If Corbyn goes and is succeeded by Williamson it is difficult to see how the Labour Party does not split as Williamson has been pushing the deselection of Labour moderates. A Williamson leadership would likely see Umunna and other moderates defect en masse to a new centrist party formed with the LDs and maybe a few pro EU Tories
And history and fptp shows not represent the Labour Party membership or broader Labour movement one iota. Why are they even hanging around in politics, the country will never allow New Labour to form a government again, quite rightly.
Fact. What is actually wrong with Democlomatic and insulting as Chuck your spokesman has been today?
You will also see a numbemove to it the Tories will be more united as well
Labour didn’t lose to Thatcher in 79 and 83 because it was too left wing and divided, it lost then because it had been in power majority of the previous twenty years. If you can’t see the Tories are about to hand keys to no10 to Labour for a generation then you are blind.
Labour lost in 1979 as we had high inflation, one of the lowest GDP per capitas in western Europe and frequent strikes. Labour lost in 1983 because it was too leftwing and a new centrist party took many of its votes.
If Labour loses the next ge7
When Labour left office in 1979 inflation was significantly lower than the level inherited from the Tories in March 1974. Throughout 1978 RPI inflation had hovered around 8% - though it had ticked up to 10% in May 1979 .
Thatcher and Major reversed both the economic failures of Heathism as well as Labour that is true
The economy was in better shape in May 1979 when compared with March 1974. Likewise when Labour left office in June 1970 it bequeathed a Budget Surplus and a Balance of Payments Surplus to the incoming Tory Government. No Tory Government has managed to do either - and Heath frittered away his inheritance.
GDP per capita was one of the lowest in western Europe in 1979 and 17% (compared to 1.7% when the Tories finally left office in 1997). Healey also had to request the IMF for a bailout.
The fact Heath's government was equally economically inept does not change that
If Corbyn goes and is succeeded by Williamson it is difficult to see how the Labour Party does not split as Williamson has been pushing the deselection of Labour moderates. A Williamson leadership would likely see Umunna and other moderates defect en masse to a new centrist party formed with the LDs and maybe a few pro EU Tories
You will also see a numbemove to it the Tories will be more united as well
Labour lost in 1979 as we had high inflation, one of the lowest GDP per capitas in western Europe and frequent strikes. Labour lost in 1983 because it was too leftwing and a new centrist party took many of its votes.
If Labour loses the next general election it will be because Corbynism led to a repeat of the latter, if Labour win the ne
Wow. You can see four years ahead into the future?
Tell us, how have you managed to acquire this amazing skill?
Well it isn't by the application of reason - his postings make that perfectly clear
It’s actually really easy for me. Just read and understand history.
Let’s start with 83. When it came to 83 election result, voters, polling and byelections had shown alliance had taken from Tories, votrvative government too soon to dump it and go back to what had dominated previous twenty years.
Let me put it another way so hopefully the penny drop for you.
Labour lost in 79 for the same reason Churchill lost in 45.
45, 79, 97 and the next one are part of a set.
After 1945 the Tories were back in power after 6 years under Churchill again who beat the leftwing Attlee, after 1979 Labour were out of power for 18 years and only got back with a centrist leader in 1997, after 1997 thetrist PM with the more leftwing Brown
Churchill did not win the popular vote in 1951 and only returned to office courtesy of the Ulster Unionists who then took the Tory Whip.
There were only 9 UUP seats, so the Tories on 312 would still have beaten Labour on seats. And don't forget the National Liberals on 17.
Indeed so - but it would have been a Hung Parliament.
The UUP were officially Tory back in '51, but the National Liberals were in a pact with the Tories. So Churchill only returned to office courtesy of them.
"There’s a feeling that as regards the Troubles and the conflict, Northern Ireland is sorted and we don’t need to worry about it, when actually we’re working flat out 24/7 to keep a lid on it."
Betfair exchange has a few safe-looking Swedish bets at non-trivial odds - 1.25 for the Greens to get seats, 1.1 for the Christian Democrats to do so (the polls show both virtually always above the 4% level required), and you can make £17 laying the Alternative for Sweden getting in at 8 - they are a Sweden Democrat splinter group who don't turn up in the polls at all. Do you own research, of course. (I'm not bothering to top up my Betfair account for these)
If Corbyn goes and is succeeded by Williamson it is difficult to see how the Labour Party does not split as Williamson has been pushing the deselection of Labour moderates. A Williamson leadership would likely see Umunna and other moderates defect en masse to a new centrist party formed with the LDs and maybe a few pro EU Tories
You will also see a numbemove to it the Tories will be more united as well
Labour lost in 1979 as we had high inflation, one of the lowest GDP per capitas in western Europe and frequent strikes. Labour lost in 1983 because it was too leftwing and a new centrist party took many of its votes.
If Labour loses the next general election it will be because Corbynism led to a repeat of the latter, if Labour win the ne
It’s actually really easy for me. Just read and understand history.
Let’s start with 83. When it came to 83 election result, voters, polling and byelections had shown alliance had taken from Tories, votrvative government too soon to dump it and go back to what had dominated previous twenty years.
Let me put it another way so hopefully the penny drop for you.
Labour lost in 79 for the same reason Churchill lost in 45.
45, 79, 97 and the next one are part of a set.
After 1945 the Tories were back in power after 6 years under Churchill again who beat the leftwing Attlee, after 1979 Labour were out of power for 18 years and only got back with a centrist leader in 1997, after 1997 thetrist PM with the more leftwing Brown
Churchill did not win the popular vote in 1951 and only returned to office courtesy of the Ulster Unionists who then took the Tory Whip.
There were only 9 UUP seats, so the Tories on 312 would still have beaten Labour on seats. And don't forget the National Liberals on 17.
Indeed so - but it would have been a Hung Parliament.
The UUP were officially Tory back in '51, but the National Liberals were in a pact with the Tories. So Churchill only returned to office courtesy of them.
The National Liberals were de facto Tories post 1945 - indeed many would suggest from as far back as 1935. They had their own Whips but the distinction had become a facade.
The number one reason to have political parties is to educate the voters on issues. You are crazy to even consider circumventing that.
Influence, yes. Educate, no.
No. You are wrong. If there’s enough difference between them, it creates a dialectic we learn from.
The main purpose of political parties is they help educate us on the issues. They have their particular view. They argue it out. That is important to democracy here in Britain. Healthy political party democracy means healthy British democracy. But When policy gets samey between the parties, you elect a Labour government and it’s actually just as in favour of privatisation and outsourcing for example, that’s not healthy for British democracy. That is bad.
What’s currently very bad for British democracy is two thirds of PLP is New Labour, whilst the Labour movement isn’t New Labour at all now. The New Labour dominance of PLP is illegitimate and undemocratic. and democratic efforts to put right whats wrong now under attack by New Labour, who are defending a PLP majority that when it sides with Tory government in HOC is something bad for British democracy. They show their colours with their calculated use of “dogs” to demonise and bully their opponents.
I can’t put it any more simply. This is cornerstones of British democracy, right here, this weekend.
The number one reason to have political parties is to educate the voters on issues. You are crazy to even consider circumventing that.
Influence, yes. Educate, no.
No. You are wrong. If there’s enough difference between them, it creates a dialectic we learn from.
The main purpose of political parties is they help educate us on the issues. They have their particular view. They argue it out. That is important to democracy here in Britain. Healthy political party democracy means healthy British democracy. But When policy gets samey between the parties, you elect a Labour government and it’s actually just as in favour of privatisation and outsourcing for example, that’s not healthy for British democracy. That is bad.
What’s currently very bad for British democracy is two thirds of PLP is New Labour, whilst the Labour movement isn’t New Labour at all now. The New Labour dominance of PLP is illegitimate and undemocratic. and democratic efforts to put right whats wrong now under attack by New Labour, who are defending a PLP majority that when it sides with Tory government in HOC is something bad for British democracy. They show their colours with their calculated use of “dogs” to demonise and bully their opponents.
I can’t put it any more simply. This is cornerstones of British democracy, right here, this weekend.
And allowing Iranian press tv into the Enfield meeting is the cornerstone of democracy
And with respect I do not need educating by you or anyone else, thank you
"Word has reached me from the Commons' tea room that Boris Johnson is about to go public with a full-frontal leadership bid to topple Theresa May and install himself in Downing Street.
Johnson, enabled by Tory election mastermind and new sidekick Lynton Crosby, has mapped out a timeline to power which will torpedo the PM's Chequers plan for Brexit.
Having scanned the Trump playbook for inspiration (see letterbox attack on Muslim women), Johnson cleared the decks on his personal life after his marriage break-up story appeared in The Sun on Friday.
I am told that Johnson's MP backers are now compiling the requisite 48 names required to send to the backbench 1922 Committee to trigger a no confidence vote in Mrs May. One source even says this will happen on Monday.
Look out for Johnson's Monday column in the Telegraph (invoice £5,000 a time) in which many of his colleagues expect him to fire the gun."
May will win any no confidence vote at the moment, the question will only be her margin of victory
I agree. I'd go further: I think that a challenge by Boris would increase May's margin of victory, compared to 48 letters going in without a "plot".
Might well be true. Doesn’t change the fact she’s crap.
To appropriate old Punch cartoon
"I'm afraid you've seeded a crap PM, vicar" "Oh, no, I assure you parts of her government are quite excellent!"
If Corbyn goes and is succeeded by Williamson it is difficult to see how the Labour Party does not split as Williamson has been pushing the deselection of Labour moderates. A Williamson leadership would likely see Umunna and other moderates defect en masse to a new centrist party formed with the LDs and maybe a few pro EU Tories
And history and fptp shows not represent the Labour Party membership or broader Labour movement one iota. Why are they even hanging around in politics, the country will never allow New Labour to form a government again, quite rightly.
Fact. What is actually wrong with Democlomatic and insulting as Chuck your spokesman has been today?
You will also see a numbemove to it the Tories will be more united as well
Labour didn’t lose to Thatcher in 79 and 83 because it was too left wing and divided, it lost then because it had been in power majority of the previous twenty years. If you can’t see the Tories are about to hand keys to no10 to Labour for a generation then you are blind.
Labour lost in 1979 as we had high inflation, one of the lowest GDP per capitas in western Europe and frequent strikes. Labour lost in 1983 because it was too leftwing and a new centrist party took many of its votes.
If Labour loses the next ge7
When Labour left office in 1979 inflation was significantly lower than the level inherited from the Tories in March 1974. Throughout 1978 RPI inflation had hovered around 8% - though it had ticked up to 10% in May 1979 .
Thatcher and Major reversed both the economic failures of Heathism as well as Labour that is true
The economy was in better shape in May 1979 when compared with March 1974. Likewise when Labour left office in June 1970 it bequeathed a Budget Surplus and a Balance of Payments Surplus to the incoming Tory Government. No Tory Government has managed to do either - and Heath frittered away his inheritance.
GDP per capita was one of the lowest in western Europe in 1979 and inflation was 17% (compared to 1.7% when the Tories finally left office in 1997). Healey also had to request the IMF for a bailout.
The fact Heath's government was equally economically inept does not change that
"Word has reached me from the Commons' tea room that Boris Johnson is about to go public with a full-frontal leadership bid to topple Theresa May and install himself in Downing Street.
Johnson, enabled by Tory election mastermind and new sidekick Lynton Crosby, has mapped out a timeline to power which will torpedo the PM's Chequers plan for Brexit.
Having scanned the Trump playbook for inspiration (see letterbox attack on Muslim women), Johnson cleared the decks on his personal life after his marriage break-up story appeared in The Sun on Friday.
I am told that Johnson's MP backers are now compiling the requisite 48 names required to send to the backbench 1922 Committee to trigger a no confidence vote in Mrs May. One source even says this will happen on Monday.
Look out for Johnson's Monday column in the Telegraph (invoice £5,000 a time) in which many of his colleagues expect him to fire the gun."
May will win any no confidence vote at the moment, the question will only be her margin of victory
I agree. I'd go further: I think that a challenge by Boris would increase May's margin of victory, compared to 48 letters going in without a "plot".
Might well be true. Doesn’t change the fact she’s crap.
To appropriate old Punch cartoon
"I'm afraid you've seeded a crap PM, vicar" "Oh, no, I assure you parts of her government are quite excellent!"
The number one reason to have political parties is to educate the voters on issues. You are crazy to even consider circumventing that.
Influence, yes. Educate, no.
No. You are wrong. If there’s enough difference between them, it creates a dialectic we learn from.
The main purpose of political parties is they help educate us on the issues. They have their particular view. They argue it out. That is important to democracy here in Britain. Healthy political party democracy means healthy British democracy. But When policy gets samey between the parties, you elect a Labour government and it’s actually just as in favour of privatisation and outsourcing for example, that’s not healthy for British democracy. That is bad.
What’s currently very bad for British democracy is two thirds of PLP is New Labour, whilst the Labour movement isn’t New Labour at all now. The New Labour dominance of PLP is illegitimate and undemocratic. and democratic efforts to put right whats wrong now under attack by New Labour, who are defending a PLP majority that when it sides with Tory government in HOC is something bad for British democracy. They show their colours with their calculated use of “dogs” to demonise and bully their opponents.
I can’t put it any more simply. This is cornerstones of British democracy, right here, this weekend.
And allowing Iranian press tv into the Enfield meeting is the cornerstone of democracy
And with respect I do not need educating by you or anyone else, thank you
There is no point in trying to reason with an obvious troll who is spouting McDonnell's lines
The number one reason to have political parties is to educate the voters on issues. You are crazy to even consider circumventing that.
Influence, yes. Educate, no.
No. You are wrong. If there’s enough difference between them, it creates a dialectic we learn from.
The main purpose of political parties is they help educate us on the issues. They have their particular view. They argue it out. That is important to democracy here in Britain. Healthy political party democracy means healthy British democracy. But When policy gets samey between the parties, you elect a Labour government and it’s actually just as in favour of privatisation and outsourcing for example, that’s not healthy for British democracy. That is bad.
What’s currently very bad for British democracy is two thirds of PLP is New Labour, whilst the Labour movement isn’t New Labour at all now. The New Labour dominance of PLP is illegitimate and undemocratic. and democratic efforts to put right whats wrong now under attack by New Labour, who are defending a PLP majority that when it sides with Tory government in HOC is something bad for British democracy. They show their colours with their calculated use of “dogs” to demonise and bully their opponents.
I can’t put it any more simply. This is cornerstones of British democracy, right here, this weekend.
And allowing Iranian press tv into the Enfield meeting is the cornerstone of democracy
And with respect I do not need educating by you or anyone else, thank you
And if the Iranian press wasn’t in there, you and New Labour wouldn’t have a problem with the process then?
The Iranian tv seems like a bad idea as it’s allowed opponents, and people like yourself, an angle of attack. I didn’t invite them. I’m smarter than that.
The number one reason to have political parties is to educate the voters on issues. You are crazy to even consider circumventing that.
Influence, yes. Educate, no.
No. You are wrong. If there’s enough difference between them, it creates a dialectic we learn from.
The main purpose of political parties is they help educate us on the issues. They have their particular view. They argue it out. That is important to democracy here in Britain. Healthy political party democracy means healthy British democracy. But When policy gets samey between the parties, you elect a Labour government and it’s actually just as in favour of privatisation and outsourcing for example, that’s not healthy for British democracy. That is bad.
What’s currently very bad for British democracy is two thirds of PLP is New Labour, whilst the Labour movement isn’t New Labour at all now. The New Labour dominance of PLP is illegitimate and undemocratic. and democratic efforts to put right whats wrong now under attack by New Labour, who are defending a PLP majority that when it sides with Tory government in HOC is something bad for British democracy. They show their colours with their calculated use of “dogs” to demonise and bully their opponents.
I can’t put it any more simply. This is cornerstones of British democracy, right here, this weekend.
And allowing Iranian press tv into the Enfield meeting is the cornerstone of democracy
And with respect I do not need educating by you or anyone else, thank you
There is no point in trying to reason with an obvious troll who is spouting McDonnell's lines
The number one reason to have political parties is to educate the voters on issues. You are crazy to even consider circumventing that.
Influence, yes. Educate, no.
No. You are wrong. If there’s enough difference between them, it creates a dialectic we learn from.
The main purpose of political parties is they help educate us on the issues. They have their particular view. They argue it out. That is important to democracy here in Britain. Healthy political party democracy means healthy British democracy. But When policy gets samey between the parties, you elect a Labour government and it’s actually just as in favour of privatisation and outsourcing for example, that’s not healthy for British democracy. That is bad.
What’s currently very bad for British democracy is two thirds of PLP is New Labour, whilst the Labour movement isn’t New Labour at all now. The New Labour dominance of PLP is illegitimate and undemocratic. and democratic efforts to put right whats wrong now under attack by New Labour, who are defending a PLP majority that when it sides with Tory government in HOC is something bad for British democracy. They show their colours with their calculated use of “dogs” to demonise and bully their opponents.
I can’t put it any more simply. This is cornerstones of British democracy, right here, this weekend.
And allowing Iranian press tv into the Enfield meeting is the cornerstone of democracy
And with respect I do not need educating by you or anyone else, thank you
And with respect, both you and I are contributing to one of the most educational political blogs in the universe.
Sadly only one of us understands that. Unless I’ve just educated you.
The number one reason to have political parties is to educate the voters on issues. You are crazy to even consider circumventing that.
Influence, yes. Educate, no.
No. You are wrong. If there’s enough difference between them, it creates a dialectic we learn from.
The main purpose of political parties is they help educate us on the issues. They have their particular view. They argue it out. That is important to democracy here in Britain. Healthy political party democracy means healthy British democracy. But When policy gets samey between the parties, you elect a Labour government and it’s actually just as in favour of privatisation and outsourcing for example, that’s not healthy for British democracy. That is bad.
What’s currently very bad for British democracy is two thirds of PLP is New Labour, whilst the Labour movement isn’t New Labour at all now. The New Labour dominance of PLP is illegitimate and undemocratic. and democratic efforts to put right whats wrong now under attack by New Labour, who are defending a PLP majority that when it sides with Tory government in HOC is something bad for British democracy. They show their colours with their calculated use of “dogs” to demonise and bully their opponents.
I can’t put it any more simply. This is cornerstones of British democracy, right here, this weekend.
And allowing Iranian press tv into the Enfield meeting is the cornerstone of democracy
And with respect I do not need educating by you or anyone else, thank you
And if the Iranian press wasn’t in there, you and New Labour wouldn’t have a problem with the process then?
The Iranian tv seems like a bad idea as it’s allowed opponents, and people like yourself, an angle of attack. I didn’t invite them. I’m smarter than that.
For the record, Apple does not manufacture iPhones. That is done by HonHai/Foxconn.
If you are Apple, and President Trump is threatening tariffs on everything, and to rip up the US-South Korea FTA, then why would you want to manufacture in the US? Given the level of imported components, it would be incredibly risky to pick anywhere that didn't have (long term, stable) free trade agreements with China, Singapore Taiwan and South Korea.
If Corbyn goes and is succeeded by Williamson it is difficult to see how the Labour Party does not split as Williamson has been pushing the deselection of Labour moderates. A Williamson leadership would likely see Umunna and other moderates defect en masse to a new centrist party formed with the LDs and maybe a few pro EU Tories
And history and fptp shows not represent the Labour Party membership or broader Labour movement one iota. Why are they even hanging around in politics, the country will never allow New Labour to form a government again, quite rightly.
Fact. What is actually wrong with Democlomatic and insulting as Chuck your spokesman has been today?
You will also see a numbemove to it the Tories will be more united as well
If Labour loses the next ge7
When Labour left office in 1979 inflation was significantly lower than the level inherited from the Tories in March 1974. Throughout 1978 RPI inflation had hovered around 8% - though it had ticked up to 10% in May 1979 .
Thatcher and Major reversed both the economic failures of Heathism as well as Labour that is true
The economy was in better shape in May 1979 when compared with March 1974. Likewise when Labour left office in June 1970 it bequeathed a Budget Surplus and a Balance of Payments Surplus to the incoming Tory Government. No Tory Government has managed to do either - and Heath frittered away his inheritance.
GDP per capita was one of the lowest in western Europe in 1979 and inflation was 17% (compared to 1.7% when the Tories finally left office in 1997). Healey also had to request the IMF for a bailout.
The fact Heath's government was equally economically inept does not change that
Not in May 1979. When Callaghan left office inflation was 10.2% . From the middle of the year it rose sharply - to a significant extent due to Geoffrey Howe's June Budget when he raised VAT from 8% to 15% and forced the utilities to increase their prices. By Spring 1980 inflation had more than doubled to reach 22%. Moreover, in the final years of Thatcher's Government - 1989 & 1990 -inflation was higher than in the last full year of the Callaghan Government.
The number one reason to have political parties is to educate the voters on issues. You are crazy to even consider circumventing that.
Influence, yes. Educate, no.
No. You are wrong. If there’s enough difference between them, it creates a dialectic we learn from.
The main purpose of political parties is they help educate us on the issues. They have their particular view. They argue it out. That is important to democracy here in Britain. Healthy political party democracy means healthy British democracy. But When policy gets samey between the parties, you elect a Labour government and it’s actually just as in favour of privatisation and outsourcing for example, that’s not healthy for British democracy. That is bad.
What’s currently very bad for British democracy is two thirds of PLP is New Labour, whilst the Labour movement isn’t New Labour at all now. The New Labour dominance of PLP is illegitimate and undemocratic. and democratic efforts to put right whats wrong now under attack by New Labour, who are defending a PLP majority that when it sides with Tory government in HOC is something bad for British democracy. They show their colours with their calculated use of “dogs” to demonise and bully their opponents.
I can’t put it any more simply. This is cornerstones of British democracy, right here, this weekend.
And allowing Iranian press tv into the Enfield meeting is the cornerstone of democracy
And with respect I do not need educating by you or anyone else, thank you
There is no point in trying to reason with an obvious troll who is spouting McDonnell's lines
I’m a dog and a troll in the same day! What will you call me tomorrow?
As for desperation, I wasn’t the first to resort to insults and name calling.
I've been a bit torn but having just seen Chukka Umuna and John McDonnell it's clear McDonnell is making a big mistake. Ummuna is not a Blair Clone but what most on the centre left hope for from their Labour MPs. Heavyweight throwbacks to the 70's like McDonnell is voter poison. Gone was the avuncular uncle and what we saw was very ugly indeed.
Excellent! I’m glad you’ve made yourself available to answer the question. Now answer the question.
Q) What is actually wrong with Democratic reelection of candidates, so constituency members actually have candidate who represents their views?
Because those who turn up are not representative of activists let alone members or voters
That surely is an argument against members selecting candidates in the first place. What is reselection but the same?
The new boundaries make it mandatory in many places anyway. Though I note that in Leics there isvery little change, so Vaz, Kendall and Ashworth will all be safe. They are all pretty popular with their members from what I have seen
The number one reason to have political parties is to educate the voters on issues. You are crazy to even consider circumventing that.
Influence, yes. Educate, no.
No. You are wrong. If there’s enough difference between them, it creates a dialectic we learn from.
The main purpose of political parties is they help educate us on the issues. They have their particular view. They argue it out. That is important to democracy here in Britain. Healthy political party democracy means healthy British democracy. But When policy gets samey between the parties, you elect a Labour government and it’s actually just as in favour of privatisation and outsourcing for example, that’s not healthy for British democracy. That is bad.
What’s currently very bad for British democracy is two thirds of PLP is New Labour, whilst the Labour movement isn’t New Labour at all now. The New Labour dominance of PLP is illegitimate and undemocratic. and democratic efforts to put right whats wrong now under attack by New Labour, who are defending a PLP majority that when it sides with Tory government in HOC is something bad for British democracy. They show their colours with their calculated use of “dogs” to demonise and bully their opponents.
I can’t put it any more simply. This is cornerstones of British democracy, right here, this weekend.
And allowing Iranian press tv into the Enfield meeting is the cornerstone of democracy
And with respect I do not need educating by you or anyone else, thank you
And with respect, both you and I are contributing to one of the most educational political blogs in the universe.
Sadly only one of us understands that. Unless I’ve just educated you.
You could never educate me. When you have reached over 15,000 posts you may have learnt the error of your ways
The number one reason to have political parties is to educate the voters on issues. You are crazy to even consider circumventing that.
Influence, yes. Educate, no.
No. You are wrong. If there’s enough difference between them, it creates a dialectic we learn from.
The main purpose of political parties is they help educate us on the issues. They have their particular view. They argue it out. That is important to democracy here in Britain. Healthy political party democracy means healthy British democracy. But When policy gets samey between the parties, you elect a Labour government and it’s actually just as in favour of privatisation and outsourcing for example, that’s not healthy for British democracy. That is bad.
What’s currently very bad for British democracy is two thirds of PLP is New Labour, whilst the Labour movement isn’t New Labour at all now. The New Labour dominance of PLP is illegitimate and undemocratic. and democratic efforts to put right whats wrong now under attack by New Labour, who are defending a PLP majority that when it sides with Tory government in HOC is something bad for British democracy. They show their colours with their calculated use of “dogs” to demonise and bully their opponents.
I can’t put it any more simply. This is cornerstones of British democracy, right here, this weekend.
And allowing Iranian press tv into the Enfield meeting is the cornerstone of democracy
And with respect I do not need educating by you or anyone else, thank you
And with respect, both you and I are contributing to one of the most educational political blogs in the universe.
Sadly only one of us understands that. Unless I’ve just educated you.
But you are assuming that the views of left leaning Labour members are exactly the same as the voters. I seriously doubt the views of 1000 very left wing political activists in a constituency Labour Party are exactly the same as the 5-10,000 voters (in the swing constituencies) who switch between the Labour and Conservatives politics and determine which party wins the election.
"Word has reached me from the Commons' tea room that Boris Johnson is about to go public with a full-frontal leadership bid to topple Theresa May and install himself in Downing Street.
Johnson, enabled by Tory election mastermind and new sidekick Lynton Crosby, has mapped out a timeline to power which will torpedo the PM's Chequers plan for Brexit.
Having scanned the Trump playbook for inspiration (see letterbox attack on Muslim women), Johnson cleared the decks on his personal life after his marriage break-up story appeared in The Sun on Friday.
I am told that Johnson's MP backers are now compiling the requisite 48 names required to send to the backbench 1922 Committee to trigger a no confidence vote in Mrs May. One source even says this will happen on Monday.
Look out for Johnson's Monday column in the Telegraph (invoice £5,000 a time) in which many of his colleagues expect him to fire the gun."
May will win any no confidence vote at the moment, the question will only be her margin of victory
I agree. I'd go further: I think that a challenge by Boris would increase May's margin of victory, compared to 48 letters going in without a "plot".
Might well be true. Doesn’t change the fact she’s crap.
To appropriate old Punch cartoon
"I'm afraid you've seeded a crap PM, vicar" "Oh, no, I assure you parts of her government are quite excellent!"
The number one reason to have political parties is to educate the voters on issues. You are crazy to even consider circumventing that.
Influence, yes. Educate, no.
No. You are wrong. If there’s enough difference between them, it creates a dialectic we learn from.
The main purpose of political parties is they help educate us on the issues. They have their particular view. They argue it out. That is important to democracy here in Britain. Healthy political party democracy means healthy British democracy. But When policy gets samey between the parties, you elect a Labour government and it’s actually just as in favour of privatisation and outsourcing for example, that’s not healthy for British democracy. That is bad.
What’s currently very bad for British democracy is two thirds of PLP is New Labour, whilst the Labour movement isn’t New Labour at all now. The New Labour dominance of PLP is illegitimate and undemocratic. and democratic efforts to put right whats wrong now under attack by New Labour, who are defending a PLP majority that when it sides with Tory government in HOC is something bad for British democracy. They show their colours with their calculated use of “dogs” to demonise and bully their opponents.
I can’t put it any more simply. This is cornerstones of British democracy, right here, this weekend.
And allowing Iranian press tv into the Enfield meeting is the cornerstone of democracy
And with respect I do not need educating by you or anyone else, thank you
There is no point in trying to reason with an obvious troll who is spouting McDonnell's lines
I’m a dog and a troll in the same day! What will you call me tomorrow?
As for desperation, I wasn’t the first to resort to insults and name calling.
I shall start with calling you a liar now. I have not called anyone a dog.
The number one reason to have political parties is to educate the voters on issues. You are crazy to even consider circumventing that.
Influence, yes. Educate, no.
No. You are wrong. If there’s enough difference between them, it creates a dialectic we learn from.
The main purpose of political parties is they help educate us on the issues. They have their particular view. They argue it out. That is important to democracy here in Britain. Healthy political party democracy means healthy British democracy. But When policy gets samey between the parties, you elect a Labour government and it’s actually just as in favour of privatisation and outsourcing for example, that’s not healthy for British democracy. That is bad.
What’s currently very bad for British democracy is two thirds of PLP is New Labour, whilst the Labour movement isn’t New Labour at all now. The New Labour dominance of PLP is illegitimate and undemocratic. and democratic efforts to put right whats wrong now under attack by New Labour, who are defending a PLP majority that when it sides with Tory government in HOC is something bad for British democracy. They show their colours with their calculated use of “dogs” to demonise and bully their opponents.
I can’t put it any more simply. This is cornerstones of British democracy, right here, this weekend.
And allowing Iranian press tv into the Enfield meeting is the cornerstone of democracy
And with respect I do not need educating by you or anyone else, thank you
And if the Iranian press wasn’t in there, you and New Labour wouldn’t have a problem with the process then?
The Iranian tv seems like a bad idea as it’s allowed opponents, and people like yourself, an angle of attack. I didn’t invite them. I’m smarter than that.
Just because the Labour membership is not blairite doesn’t mean the electorate isn’t. The people who made them MPs are the electorate, Labour MPs only proposed them.
I've been a bit torn but having just seen Chukka Umuna and John McDonnell it's clear McDonnell is making a big mistake. Ummuna is not a Blair Clone but what most on the centre left hope for from their Labour MPs. Heavyweight throwbacks to the 70's like McDonnell is voter poison. Gone was the avuncular uncle and what we saw was very ugly indeed.
Excellent! I’m glad you’ve made yourself available to answer the question. Now answer the question.
Q) What is actually wrong with Democratic reelection of candidates, so constituency members actually have candidate who represents their views?
Because those who turn up are not representative of activists let alone members or voters
That surely is an argument against members selecting candidates in the first place. What is reselection but the same?
The new boundaries make it mandatory in many places anyway. Though I note that in Leics there isvery little change, so Vaz, Kendall and Ashworth will all be safe. They are all pretty popular with their members from what I have seen
I read somwhere that the Boundary proposals are not likely to be voted on for several months. Doubtful that they will be implemented at all.
"There’s a feeling that as regards the Troubles and the conflict, Northern Ireland is sorted and we don’t need to worry about it, when actually we’re working flat out 24/7 to keep a lid on it."
Isn't it true that some of the Republican paramilitaries are in fact in favour of Brexit (or at least Ire-exit)?
If Corbyn goes and is succeeded by Williamson it is difficult to see how the Labour Party does not split as Williamson has been pushing the deselection of Labour moderates. A Williamson leadership would likely see Umunna and other moderates defect en masse to a new centrist party formed with the LDs and maybe a few pro EU Tories
And history and fptp shows not represent the Labour Party membership or broader Labour movement one iota. Why are they even hanging around in politics, the country will never allow New Labour to form a government again, quite rightly.
Fact. What is actually wrong with Democlomatic and insulting as Chuck your spokesman has been today?
You will also see a numbemove to it the Tories will be more united as well
If Labour loses the next ge7
When Labour left office in 1979 inflation was significantly lower than the level inherited from the Tories in March 1974. Throughout 1978 RPI inflation had hovered around 8% - though it had ticked up to 10% in May 1979 .
Thatcher and Major reversed both the economic failures of Heathism as well as Labour that is true
The economy was in better shape in nheritance.
GDP per capita was one of the lowest in western Europe in 1979 and inflation was 17% (compared to 1.7% when the Tories finally left office in 1997). Healey also had to request the IMF for a bailout.
The fact Heath's government was equally economically inept does not change that
Not in May 1979. When Callaghan left office inflation was 10.2% . From the middle of the year it rose sharply - to a significant extent due to Geoffrey Howe's June Budget when he raised VAT from 8% to 15% and forced the utilities to increase their prices. By Spring 1980 inflation had more than doubled to reach 22%. Moreover, in the final years of Thatcher's Government - 1989 & 1990 -inflation was higher than in the last full year of the Callaghan Government.
By the time the Tories left office in 1997 inflation was lower than Labour had left it in 1979, as I said
The number one reason to have political parties is to educate the voters on issues. You are crazy to even consider circumventing that.
Influence, yes. Educate, no.
No. You are wrong. If there’s enough difference between them, it creates a dialectic we learn from.
The main purpose of political parties is they help educate us on the issues. They have their particular view. They argue it out. That is important to democracy here in Britain. Healthy political party democracy means healthy British democracy. But When policy gets samey between the parties, you elect a Labour government and it’s actually just as in favour of privatisation and outsourcing for example, that’s not healthy for British democracy. That is bad.
What’s currently very bad for British democracy is two thirds of PLP is New Labour, whilst the Labour movement isn’t New Labour at all now. The New Labour dominance of PLP is illegitimate and undemocratic. and democratic efforts to put right whats wrong now under attack by New Labour, who are defending a PLP majority that when it sides with Tory government in HOC is something bad for British democracy. They show their colours with their calculated use of “dogs” to demonise and bully their opponents.
I can’t put it any more simply. This is cornerstones of British democracy, right here, this weekend.
And allowing Iranian press tv into the Enfield meeting is the cornerstone of democracy
And with respect I do not need educating by you or anyone else, thank you
And with respect, both you and I are contributing to one of the most educational political blogs in the universe.
Sadly only one of us understands that. Unless I’ve just educated you.
But you are assuming that the views of left leaning Labour members are exactly the same as the voters. I seriously doubt the views of 1000 very left wing political activists in a constituency Labour Party are exactly the same as the 5-10,000 voters (in the swing constituencies) who switch between the Labour and Conservatives politics and determine which party wins the election.
Parties arnt there to win elections. The primary purpose is educate voters on issues. They need internal democracy to create clear water between them for the health of nations democracy.
For the record, Apple does not manufacture iPhones. That is done by HonHai/Foxconn.
If you are Apple, and President Trump is threatening tariffs on everything, and to rip up the US-South Korea FTA, then why would you want to manufacture in the US? Given the level of imported components, it would be incredibly risky to pick anywhere that didn't have (long term, stable) free trade agreements with China, Singapore Taiwan and South Korea.
I don't really want to bring Brexit into it, but there are essentially no Brexiteers who think "Trade is bad". Trump on the other hand genuinely seems to believe that buying anything Chinese or manufactured in China harms America. His mercantilist view of trade is centuries out of date. He's an old school American nativist, isolationist, buffoon.
I've been a bit torn but having just seen Chukka Umuna and John McDonnell it's clear McDonnell is making a big mistake. Ummuna is not a Blair Clone but what most on the centre left hope for from their Labour MPs. Heavyweight throwbacks to the 70's like McDonnell is voter poison. Gone was the avuncular uncle and what we saw was very ugly indeed.
Excellent! I’m glad you’ve made yourself available to answer the question. Now answer the question.
Q) What is actually wrong with Democratic reelection of candidates, so constituency members actually have candidate who represents their views?
Because the democracy is limited to party members.
And the problem with that is?
The number one reason to have political parties is to educate the voters on issues. You are crazy to even consider circumventing that.
I'd be interested to know how you believe that education to be happening. I never see or hear from any political party until there's an election coming up and even then all they want to know is whether I'm going to vote for them.
I've been a bit torn but having just seen Chukka Umuna and John McDonnell it's clear McDonnell is making a big mistake. Ummuna is not a Blair Clone but what most on the centre left hope for from their Labour MPs. Heavyweight throwbacks to the 70's like McDonnell is voter poison. Gone was the avuncular uncle and what we saw was very ugly indeed.
Excellent! I’m glad you’ve made yourself available to answer the question. Now answer the question.
Q) What is actually wrong with Democratic reelection of candidates, so constituency members actually have candidate who represents their views?
Because those who turn up are not representative of activists let alone members or voters
That surely is an argument against members selecting candidates in the first place. What is reselection but the same?
The new boundaries make it mandatory in many places anyway. Though I note that in Leics there isvery little change, so Vaz, Kendall and Ashworth will all be safe. They are all pretty popular with their members from what I have seen
I read somwhere that the Boundary proposals are not likely to be voted on for several months. Doubtful that they will be implemented at all.
I am confident they will be now the DUP are on board
I've been a bit torn but having just seen Chukka Umuna and John McDonnell it's clear McDonnell is making a big mistake. Ummuna is not a Blair Clone but what most on the centre left hope for from their Labour MPs. Heavyweight throwbacks to the 70's like McDonnell is voter poison. Gone was the avuncular uncle and what we saw was very ugly indeed.
Excellent! I’m glad you’ve made yourself available to answer the question. Now answer the question.
Q) What is actually wrong with Democratic reelection of candidates, so constituency members actually have candidate who represents their views?
Because the democracy is limited to party members.
And the problem with that is?
The number one reason to have political parties is to educate the voters on issues. You are crazy to even consider circumventing that.
I'd be interested to know how you believe that education to be happening. I never see or hear from any political party until there's an election coming up and even then all they want to know is whether I'm going to vote for them.
Have you ever stood at a water cooler, a queue at a trade counter, a bus stop, a pub, where people don’t have views on issues?
I've been a bit torn but having just seen Chukka Umuna and John McDonnell it's clear McDonnell is making a big mistake. Ummuna is not a Blair Clone but what most on the centre left hope for from their Labour MPs. Heavyweight throwbacks to the 70's like McDonnell is voter poison. Gone was the avuncular uncle and what we saw was very ugly indeed.
Excellent! I’m glad you’ve made yourself available to answer the question. Now answer the question.
Q) What is actually wrong with Democratic reelection of candidates, so constituency members actually have candidate who represents their views?
Because those who turn up are not representative of activists let alone members or voters
That surely is an argument against members selecting candidates in the first place. What is reselection but the same?
The new boundaries make it mandatory in many places anyway. Though I note that in Leics there isvery little change, so Vaz, Kendall and Ashworth will all be safe. They are all pretty popular with their members from what I have seen
I read somwhere that the Boundary proposals are not likely to be voted on for several months. Doubtful that they will be implemented at all.
I am confident they will be now the DUP are on board
I am not sure they are - and they are 1 short at present due to Paisley's suspension.There are also likely to be Tory rebels such as David Davis and Peter Bone. There are quite a few Tory MPs too who would have lost their seats in 2017 on the basis of the initial recommendations - including my own MP - Chloe Smith - who happens to be the Minister presenting these changes.
Sky pick up Boris on his own on his phone at the Oval and he looks up as the crowd boo him
Good on the crowd
Why do you think it's ok for the crowd to boo Boris when he's watching the cricket?
He wasnt. He was immersed on his phone or looking at himself in a mirror.
He was not watching the cricket
So you think that's reason to boo him do you. How about giving the bloke a break? Your not usually slow to appeal for more civility.
I do have a humour and why should anyone give him a break. He told Airbus to FO - doubt their workers will give him a break. Inded an interesing poll on that subject tonight indicates workers are turning against Brexit
I've been a bit torn but having just seen Chukka Umuna and John McDonnell it's clear McDonnell is making a big mistake. Ummuna is not a Blair Clone but what most on the centre left hope for from their Labour MPs. Heavyweight throwbacks to the 70's like McDonnell is voter poison. Gone was the avuncular uncle and what we saw was very ugly indeed.
Excellent! I’m glad you’ve made yourself available to answer the question. Now answer the question.
Q) What is actually wrong with Democratic reelection of candidates, so constituency members actually have candidate who represents their views?
Because the democracy is limited to party members.
And the problem with that is?
The number one reason to have political parties is to educate the voters on issues. You are crazy to even consider circumventing that.
I'd be interested to know how you believe that education to be happening. I never see or hear from any political party until there's an election coming up and even then all they want to know is whether I'm going to vote for them.
Have you ever stood at a water cooler, a queue at a trade counter, a bus stop, a pub, where people don’t have views on issues?
So who needs political parties in order to have an opinion?
As you've just commented yourself, this blog is the best for political opinion. Sponsored by a political party, is it?
"There’s a feeling that as regards the Troubles and the conflict, Northern Ireland is sorted and we don’t need to worry about it, when actually we’re working flat out 24/7 to keep a lid on it."
Isn't it true that some of the Republican paramilitaries are in fact in favour of Brexit (or at least Ire-exit)?
I understand an Ire-ext party has been formed recently
Parties arnt there to win elections. The primary purpose is educate voters on issues. They need internal democracy to create clear water between them for the health of nations democracy.
How typical of the entryist not to have the first clue about the Labour Party. Not there to win elections you say? Lets look at the rule book for a second.
Chapter 1 Constitutional rules Clause I. Name and objects 1. This organisation shall be known as ‘The Labour Party’ (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Party’). 2. Its purpose is to organise and maintain in Parliament and in the country a political Labour Party 3. The Party shall bring together members and supporters who share its values to develop policies, make communities stronger through collective action and support, and promote the election of Labour Party representatives at all levels of the democratic process.
We exist to win power at all levels of election. Its that simple.
Sky pick up Boris on his own on his phone at the Oval and he looks up as the crowd boo him
Good on the crowd
Why do you think it's ok for the crowd to boo Boris when he's watching the cricket?
He wasnt. He was immersed on his phone or looking at himself in a mirror.
He was not watching the cricket
So you think that's reason to boo him do you. How about giving the bloke a break? Your not usually slow to appeal for more civility.
I do have a humour and why should anyone give him a break. He told Airbus to FO - doubt their workers will give him a break. Inded an interesing poll on that subject tonight indicates workers are turning against Brexit
So you don't think a politician you disagree with is entitled to a Saturday at the cricket without being booed? Honestly, with attitudes like that from supposedly reasonable people is it any wonder that talented people avoid going into politics. I suppose you think it would be ok for people to boo Boris in a restaurant or at the cinema or walking in the park. Perhaps they should stand outside his house all night booing too.
I've been a bit torn but having just seen Chukka Umuna and John McDonnell it's clear McDonnell is making a big mistake. Ummuna is not a Blair Clone but what most on the centre left hope for from their Labour MPs. Heavyweight throwbacks to the 70's like McDonnell is voter poison. Gone was the avuncular uncle and what we saw was very ugly indeed.
Excellent! I’m glad you’ve made yourself available to answer the question. Now answer the question.
Q) What is actually wrong with Democratic reelection of candidates, so constituency members actually have candidate who represents their views?
Because those who turn up are not representative of activists let alone members or voters
That surely is an argument against members selecting candidates in the first place. What is reselection but the same?
The new boundaries make it mandatory in many places anyway. Though I note that in Leics there isvery little change, so Vaz, Kendall and Ashworth will all be safe. They are all pretty popular with their members from what I have seen
I read somwhere that the Boundary proposals are not likely to be voted on for several months. Doubtful that they will be implemented at all.
I am confident they will be now the DUP are on board
I am not sure they are - and they are 1 short at present due to Paisley's suspension.There are also likely to be Tory rebels such as David Davis and Peter Bone. There are quite a few Tory MPs too who would have lost their seats in 2017 on the basis of the initial recommendations - including my own MP - Chloe Smith - who happens to be the Minister presenting these changes.
I've been a bit torn but having just seen Chukka Umuna and John McDonnell it's clear McDonnell is making a big mistake. Ummuna is not a Blair Clone but what most on the centre left hope for from their Labour MPs. Heavyweight throwbacks to the 70's like McDonnell is voter poison. Gone was the avuncular uncle and what we saw was very ugly indeed.
Excellent! I’m glad you’ve made yourself available to answer the question. Now answer the question.
Q) What is actually wrong with Democratic reelection of candidates, so constituency members actually have candidate who represents their views?
Because the democracy is limited to party members.
And the problem with that is?
The number one reason to have political parties is to educate the voters on issues. You are crazy to even consider circumventing that.
I'd be interested to know how you believe that education to be happening. I never see or hear from any political party until there's an election coming up and even then all they want to know is whether I'm going to vote for them.
Have you ever stood at a water cooler, a queue at a trade counter, a bus stop, a pub, where people don’t have views on issues?
So who needs political parties in order to have an opinion?
As you've just commented yourself, this blog is the best for political opinion. Sponsored by a political party, is it?
No it’s not sponsored by a political party. Yes I agree with you it’s an educational read. internet blogs like this barely 20 years old, and in many ways a good thing. Yet this blog, other media, political parties, pressure groups, all play a part in the discussion that is educating us, forming our opinions.
Print media actually began life as bias political phamplets by the way, before ending up... actually much the same. So what is good about “new” media, is exactly what you said. Pleased to be in agreement with you Ann.
Sky pick up Boris on his own on his phone at the Oval and he looks up as the crowd boo him
Good on the crowd
Why do you think it's ok for the crowd to boo Boris when he's watching the cricket?
He wasnt. He was immersed on his phone or looking at himself in a mirror.
He was not watching the cricket
So you think that's reason to boo him do you. How about giving the bloke a break? Your not usually slow to appeal for more civility.
I do have a humour and why should anyone give him a break. He told Airbus to FO - doubt their workers will give him a break. Inded an interesing poll on that subject tonight indicates workers are turning against Brexit
So you don't think a politician you disagree with is entitled to a Saturday at the cricket without being booed? Honestly, with attitudes like that from supposedly reasonable people is it any wonder that talented people avoid going into politics. I suppose you think it would be ok for people to boo Boris in a restaurant or at the cinema or walking in the park. Perhaps they should stand outside his house all night booing too.
Come on - over the top there. I had no control over the crowd or Sky highlighting it
A one off occasion is funny and of course I do not think he should be booed as a norm
I've been a bit torn but having just seen Chukka Umuna and John McDonnell it's clear McDonnell is making a big mistake. Ummuna is not a Blair Clone but what most on the centre left hope for from their Labour MPs. Heavyweight throwbacks to the 70's like McDonnell is voter poison. Gone was the avuncular uncle and what we saw was very ugly indeed.
Excellent! I’m glad you’ve made yourself available to answer the question. Now answer the question.
Q) What is actually wrong with Democratic reelection of candidates, so constituency members actually have candidate who represents their views?
Because those who turn up are not representative of activists let alone members or voters
That surely is an argument against members selecting candidates in the first place. What is reselection but the same?
The new boundaries make it mandatory in many places anyway. Though I note that in Leics there isvery little change, so Vaz, Kendall and Ashworth will all be safe. They are all pretty popular with their members from what I have seen
I read somwhere that the Boundary proposals are not likely to be voted on for several months. Doubtful that they will be implemented at all.
I am confident they will be now the DUP are on board
I am not sure they are - and they are 1 short at present due to Paisley's suspension.There are also likely to be Tory rebels such as David Davis and Peter Bone. There are quite a few Tory MPs too who would have lost their seats in 2017 on the basis of the initial recommendations - including my own MP - Chloe Smith - who happens to be the Minister presenting these changes.
House of Lords is a good consolation prize
Not everybody wants that - particularly MPs as young as Chloe Smith.. Several Tories will oppose the changes on principle in that they strengthen the Executive branch to the detriment of the Legislative.
Parties arnt there to win elections. The primary purpose is educate voters on issues. They need internal democracy to create clear water between them for the health of nations democracy.
How typical of the entryist not to have the first clue about the Labour Party. Not there to win elections you say? Lets look at the rule book for a second.
Chapter 1 Constitutional rules Clause I. Name and objects 1. This organisation shall be known as ‘The Labour Party’ (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Party’). 2. Its purpose is to organise and maintain in Parliament and in the country a political Labour Party 3. The Party shall bring together members and supporters who share its values to develop policies, make communities stronger through collective action and support, and promote the election of Labour Party representatives at all levels of the democratic process.
We exist to win power at all levels of election. Its that simple.
Nonsense. . If you read para 3 it’s exactly what I am saying!
How exactly do you achieve number 3 without engaging in exactly what I have been talking about? Not everyone in the world is going to start off sharing its values.
I started laughing when I read the word Entryist and still laughing as I type.
Yes, makes debate on the #peoplesvote more likely at Labour Conference. It could be last chance saloon for Jezza. Not backing it could do him in.
Massacre at Ballymurphy on C4 is difficult TV to watch, but compelling.
With Leave on 49% with Survation today ie the same as its final pre EU referendum poll, do not by any means think a 'People's Vote' is a guarantee of a Remain landslide, indeed it could easily be almost exactly the same result as last time
I've been a bit torn but having just seen Chukka Umuna and John McDonnell it's clear McDonnell is making a big mistake. Ummuna is not a Blair Clone but what most on the centre left hope for from their Labour MPs. Heavyweight throwbacks to the 70's like McDonnell is voter poison. Gone was the avuncular uncle and what we saw was very ugly indeed.
Excellent! I’m glad you’ve made yourself available to answer the question. Now answer the question.
Q) What is actually wrong with Democratic reelection of candidates, so constituency members actually have candidate who represents their views?
Because those who turn up are not representative of activists let alone members or voters
That surely is an argument against members selecting candidates in the first place. What is reselection but the same?
The new boundaries make it mandatory in many places anyway. Though I note that in Leics there isvery little change, so Vaz, Kendall and Ashworth will all be safe. They are all pretty popular with their members from what I have seen
I read somwhere that the Boundary proposals are not likely to be voted on for several months. Doubtful that they will be implemented at all.
I am confident they will be now the DUP are on board
I am not sure they are - and they are 1 short at present due to Paisley's suspension.There are also likely to be Tory rebels such as David Davis and Peter Bone. There are quite a few Tory MPs too who would have lost their seats in 2017 on the basis of the initial recommendations - including my own MP - Chloe Smith - who happens to be the Minister presenting these changes.
House of Lords is a good consolation prize
Not everybody wants that - particularly MPs as young as Chloe Smith.. Several Tories will oppose the changes on principle in that they strengthen the Executive branch to the detriment of the Legislative.
On topic, of course Voldemort is manuevering. But I suspect its the deputy leadership he has in mind. If MPs don't deserve a job for life then surely the same has to be true for deputy leaders?
Watson will be challenged, will lose the deputy leadership role, and will then be deselected as an MP. He's a Blairite. Yes I know he was directky involved in removing Blair but if you are short on facts and brain everyone who hasn't joined the Kali Ma is a Blairite. And by Blairite they mean Tory.
Yes, makes debate on the #peoplesvote more likely at Labour Conference. It could be last chance saloon for Jezza. Not backing it could do him in.
Massacre at Ballymurphy on C4 is difficult TV to watch, but compelling.
With Leave on 49% with Survation today ie the same as its final pre EU referendum poll, do not by any means think a 'People's Vote' is a guarantee of a Remain landslide, indeed it could easily be almost exactly the same result as last time
Nobody could be confident of the result of a second referendum. However the Unions poll tonight chimes with a changing mood in the workers at some of our manufacturers
Yes, makes debate on the #peoplesvote more likely at Labour Conference. It could be last chance saloon for Jezza. Not backing it could do him in.
Massacre at Ballymurphy on C4 is difficult TV to watch, but compelling.
With Leave on 49% with Survation today ie the same as its final pre EU referendum poll, do not by any means think a 'People's Vote' is a guarantee of a Remain landslide, indeed it could easily be almost exactly the same result as last time
Quite possibly, but there is only one way to find out.
My point was about the impact of Conference backing a #peoplesvote on Jezza as Leader. Wounded but not defenestrated is my first thought.
On topic, of course Voldemort is manuevering. But I suspect its the deputy leadership he has in mind. If MPs don't deserve a job for life then surely the same has to be true for deputy leaders?
Watson will be challenged, will lose the deputy leadership role, and will then be deselected as an MP. He's a Blairite. Yes I know he was directky involved in removing Blair but if you are short on facts and brain everyone who hasn't joined the Kali Ma is a Blairite. And by Blairite they mean Tory.
How would you describe yourself. New Labour? Moderate?
Yes, makes debate on the #peoplesvote more likely at Labour Conference. It could be last chance saloon for Jezza. Not backing it could do him in.
Massacre at Ballymurphy on C4 is difficult TV to watch, but compelling.
With Leave on 49% with Survation today ie the same as its final pre EU referendum poll, do not by any means think a 'People's Vote' is a guarantee of a Remain landslide, indeed it could easily be almost exactly the same result as last time
Nobody could be confident of the result of a second referendum. However the Unions poll tonight chimes with a changing mood in the workers at some of our manufacturers
I think if it was hard Brexit with No Deal it is almost certain Remain would win a second Referendum, albeit with Leave still around 40%.
However as it is we are heading for a BINO Brexit, probably staying aligned to EEA rules on services as well as customs union rules on goods with some minor changes to free movement requiring work permits on arrival so on that basis I think there will be little change in view
Yes, makes debate on the #peoplesvote more likely at Labour Conference. It could be last chance saloon for Jezza. Not backing it could do him in.
Massacre at Ballymurphy on C4 is difficult TV to watch, but compelling.
With Leave on 49% with Survation today ie the same as its final pre EU referendum poll, do not by any means think a 'People's Vote' is a guarantee of a Remain landslide, indeed it could easily be almost exactly the same result as last time
Nobody could be confident of the result of a second referendum. However the Unions poll tonight chimes with a changing mood in the workers at some of our manufacturers
I think if it was hard Brexit with No Deal it is almost certain Remain would win a second Referendum, albeit with Leave still around 40%.
However as it is we are heading for a BINO Brexit, probably staying aligned to EEA rules on services as well as customs union rules on goods with some minor changes to free movement requiring work permits on arrival so on that basis I think there will be little change in view
Yes, makes debate on the #peoplesvote more likely at Labour Conference. It could be last chance saloon for Jezza. Not backing it could do him in.
Massacre at Ballymurphy on C4 is difficult TV to watch, but compelling.
With Leave on 49% with Survation today ie the same as its final pre EU referendum poll, do not by any means think a 'People's Vote' is a guarantee of a Remain landslide, indeed it could easily be almost exactly the same result as last time
Quite possibly, but there is only one way to find out.
My point was about the impact of Conference backing a #peoplesvote on Jezza as Leader. Wounded but not defenestrated is my first thought.
I cannot see the membership going against Corbyn regardless
Yes, makes debate on the #peoplesvote more likely at Labour Conference. It could be last chance saloon for Jezza. Not backing it could do him in.
Massacre at Ballymurphy on C4 is difficult TV to watch, but compelling.
With Leave on 49% with Survation today ie the same as its final pre EU referendum poll, do not by any means think a 'People's Vote' is a guarantee of a Remain landslide, indeed it could easily be almost exactly the same result as last time
Nobody could be confident of the result of a second referendum. However the Unions poll tonight chimes with a changing mood in the workers at some of our manufacturers
I think if it was hard Brexit with No Deal it is almost certain Remain would win a second Referendum, albeit with Leave still around 40%.
However as it is we are heading for a BINO Brexit, probably staying aligned to EEA rules on services as well as customs union rules on goods with some minor changes to free movement requiring work permits on arrival so on that basis I think there will be little change in view
If that is the end result I would be very pleased
I think it is the likely result, at least in terms of the withdrawal agreement and transition deal
On topic, of course Voldemort is manuevering. But I suspect its the deputy leadership he has in mind. If MPs don't deserve a job for life then surely the same has to be true for deputy leaders?
Watson will be challenged, will lose the deputy leadership role, and will then be deselected as an MP. He's a Blairite. Yes I know he was directky involved in removing Blair but if you are short on facts and brain everyone who hasn't joined the Kali Ma is a Blairite. And by Blairite they mean Tory.
Yes, makes debate on the #peoplesvote more likely at Labour Conference. It could be last chance saloon for Jezza. Not backing it could do him in.
Massacre at Ballymurphy on C4 is difficult TV to watch, but compelling.
With Leave on 49% with Survation today ie the same as its final pre EU referendum poll, do not by any means think a 'People's Vote' is a guarantee of a Remain landslide, indeed it could easily be almost exactly the same result as last time
Quite possibly, but there is only one way to find out.
My point was about the impact of Conference backing a #peoplesvote on Jezza as Leader. Wounded but not defenestrated is my first thought.
I cannot see the membership going against Corbyn regardless
40% voted for the lacklustre Owen Smith. It wouldn't take a big swing.
William Glenn will be pleased there are still plenty of EU flags alongside Union Jacks in the Albert Hall during 'Land of Hope and Glory', though almost entirely Union Jacks and St George's crosses alone in Hyde Park
On topic, of course Voldemort is manuevering. But I suspect its the deputy leadership he has in mind. If MPs don't deserve a job for life then surely the same has to be true for deputy leaders?
Watson will be challenged, will lose the deputy leadership role, and will then be deselected as an MP. He's a Blairite. Yes I know he was directky involved in removing Blair but if you are short on facts and brain everyone who hasn't joined the Kali Ma is a Blairite. And by Blairite they mean Tory.
How would you describe yourself. New Labour? Moderate?
Comments
On the issue of political education: voters choosing to remain ignorant is arguably entirely rational! From the Concise Encylopedia of Economics entry on public choice :
One of the chief underpinnings of public choice theory is the lack of incentives for voters to monitor government effectively. Anthony Downs, in one of the earliest public choice books, An Economic Theory of Democracy, pointed out that the voter is largely ignorant of political issues and that this ignorance is rational. Even though the result of an election may be very important, an individual's vote rarely decides an election. Thus, the direct impact of casting a well-informed vote is almost nil; the voter has virtually no chance to determine the outcome of the election. So spending time following the issues is not personally worthwhile for the voter. Evidence for this claim is found in the fact that public opinion polls consistently find that less than half of all voting-age Americans can name their own congressional representative.
Public choice economists point out that this incentive to be ignorant is rare in the private sector. Someone who buys a car typically wants to be well informed about the car he or she selects. That is because the car buyer's choice is decisive—he or she pays only for the one chosen. If the choice is wise, the buyer will benefit; if it is unwise, the buyer will suffer directly. Voting lacks that kind of direct result. Therefore, most voters are largely ignorant about the positions of the people for whom they vote. Except for a few highly publicized issues, they do not pay a lot of attention to what legislative bodies do, and even when they do pay attention, they have little incentive to gain the background knowledge and analytic skill needed to understand the issues.
The fact Heath's government was equally economically inept does not change that
Why?
Because Intel chips depreciate every day. Minimising supply chain lengths is essential when you are in such a low margin business (making PCs).
If you go to Dublin, there's an Intel fab (which used to be the most productive one in the world), and within a couple of miles there are Apple, Dell and HP assembly shops.
But there's one final point: the labour content of an Intel chip is de minimis. Go visit the Intel fab in Dublin. They no longer have the people in space suits because they bring dust in. Everything is hermetically sealed and automated. It's absolutely extraordinary.
"There’s a feeling that as regards the Troubles and the conflict, Northern Ireland is sorted and we don’t need to worry about it, when actually we’re working flat out 24/7 to keep a lid on it."
Good on the crowd
The main purpose of political parties is they help educate us on the issues. They have their particular view. They argue it out. That is important to democracy here in Britain. Healthy political party democracy means healthy British democracy. But When policy gets samey between the parties, you elect a Labour government and it’s actually just as in favour of privatisation and outsourcing for example, that’s not healthy for British democracy. That is bad.
What’s currently very bad for British democracy is two thirds of PLP is New Labour, whilst the Labour movement isn’t New Labour at all now. The New Labour dominance of PLP is illegitimate and undemocratic. and democratic efforts to put right whats wrong now under attack by New Labour, who are defending a PLP majority that when it sides with Tory government in HOC is something bad for British democracy. They show their colours with their calculated use of “dogs” to demonise and bully their opponents.
I can’t put it any more simply. This is cornerstones of British democracy, right here, this weekend.
(I thank you
And with respect I do not need educating by you or anyone else, thank you
To appropriate old Punch cartoon
"I'm afraid you've seeded a crap PM, vicar"
"Oh, no, I assure you parts of her government are quite excellent!"
https://www.statbureau.org/en/united-kingdom/inflation/1979
https://www.statbureau.org/en/united-kingdom/inflation/1997
The Iranian tv seems like a bad idea as it’s allowed opponents, and people like yourself, an angle of attack. I didn’t invite them. I’m smarter than that.
Sadly only one of us understands that. Unless I’ve just educated you.
Lord of reason has made me a centrist btw
If you are Apple, and President Trump is threatening tariffs on everything, and to rip up the US-South Korea FTA, then why would you want to manufacture in the US? Given the level of imported components, it would be incredibly risky to pick anywhere that didn't have (long term, stable) free trade agreements with China, Singapore Taiwan and South Korea.
As for desperation, I wasn’t the first to resort to insults and name calling.
The new boundaries make it mandatory in many places anyway. Though I note that in Leics there isvery little change, so Vaz, Kendall and Ashworth will all be safe. They are all pretty popular with their members from what I have seen
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-45460322
It is not right to compare what Toksvig was paid for her first three seasons in charge with what Fry was paid after 13 years of hosting the show.
You wouldn't pay someone with zero years experience in a role the same as someone with 13 years.
Plus Fry was a far more established name by the end of his tenure than Toksvig is now.
You have to compare like with like - and this article doesn't.
He was not watching the cricket
https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1038489695439806464?s=21
Soon be bedtime Big G
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/08/unions-poll-massive-backing-second-eu-brexit-referendum
9 mins injury time ffs
I suspect I can score better than BoJo but only in a cricket sense.
As you've just commented yourself, this blog is the best for political opinion. Sponsored by a political party, is it?
Chapter 1
Constitutional rules
Clause I.
Name and objects
1. This organisation shall be known as ‘The Labour Party’ (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Party’).
2. Its purpose is to organise and maintain in Parliament and in the country a political Labour Party
3. The Party shall bring together members and supporters who share its values to develop policies, make communities stronger through collective action and support, and promote the election of Labour Party representatives at all levels of the democratic process.
We exist to win power at all levels of election. Its that simple.
Print media actually began life as bias political phamplets by the way, before ending up... actually much the same. So what is good about “new” media, is exactly what you said. Pleased to be in agreement with you Ann.
Massacre at Ballymurphy on C4 is difficult TV to watch, but compelling.
A one off occasion is funny and of course I do not think he should be booed as a norm
How exactly do you achieve number 3 without engaging in exactly what I have been talking about?
Not everyone in the world is going to start off sharing its values.
I started laughing when I read the word Entryist and still laughing as I type.
Watson will be challenged, will lose the deputy leadership role, and will then be deselected as an MP. He's a Blairite. Yes I know he was directky involved in removing Blair but if you are short on facts and brain everyone who hasn't joined the Kali Ma is a Blairite. And by Blairite they mean Tory.
My point was about the impact of Conference backing a #peoplesvote on Jezza as Leader. Wounded but not defenestrated is my first thought.
However as it is we are heading for a BINO Brexit, probably staying aligned to EEA rules on services as well as customs union rules on goods with some minor changes to free movement requiring work permits on arrival so on that basis I think there will be little change in view
https://twitter.com/BBCHelenaLee/status/1038532118333272066