Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New polling finds just 28% of GE2017 LAB voters support the pa

24

Comments

  • Options
    AmpfieldAndyAmpfieldAndy Posts: 1,445
    HYUFD said:

    For Labour voters unhappy with their party’s clueless position on Brexit, the big question is who else are they going to vote for if that position doesn’t change. There is no sign of an exodus to the LibDems who consistently support Remain so Brexit clearly isn’t the be all and end all of determining how they’ll vote. Similarly, it’s difficult to see them voting Tory with the complete abscence of aa domestic policy agenda.

    So Labour voters might be unhappy with their party’s position on Brexit but not enough to switch allegiance. In those circumstance, why would Labour change that position ?

    I can see Labour voters going LD in safe Labour inner city Remain and university town seats where the Tories are little threat. See the Lewisham East by election
    By elections are never a good guide to how people will vote at a General Election.
  • Options
    PClippPClipp Posts: 2,138
    malcolmg said:


    Shoes make the outfit. The wrong shoes can completely ruin a look. The right shoes can set it off perfectly. Men never seem to understand that. They all seem to think we should be tottering about in 6" heels.

    I can say with absolute certainty men do not care what footwear you have on. Heels are inflicted on women by other women.
    Exactly what man ever looks at a woman's shoes
    Accountants, I suppose.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,079

    Didn't ask permission before borrowing them, eh?

    :-)

    Lady Penelope & Parker. One of the classics. More than a match for all that new fangled 'improv' stuff.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,880
    forget make-up, what really turns me on is a woman who can write multithreaded code or design a VCO ... ;)

    Oddly enough, not many women meet my requirements.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,811
    edited January 2019
    SeanT said:

    malcolmg said:

    SeanT said:


    Shoes make the outfit. The wrong shoes can completely ruin a look. The right shoes can set it off perfectly. Men never seem to understand that. They all seem to think we should be tottering about in 6" heels.

    I can say with absolute certainty men do not care what footwear you have on. Heels are inflicted on women by other women.
    Er, you're gay.

    I'm straight. Shoes are absolutely important to me, stilettos on the right occasion can be hugely sexy, but so can Converse and hotpants. I'll stop there.

    The same goes both ways of course. I long ago realised a lot of women judge a guy by his shoes, happily I have been able to afford good ones. £300+
    Do you have large price tags on them so people know they were expensive, anybody that chooses you by your shoes should be avoided like the plague unless you are wearing wellies in town or your shoes are absolute bachles.
    You haven't met many women, have you, Malc?

    Loads of women say the first thing they look at in a man, after his face, is his feet.

    Basically if he's wearing trainers (and not actually playing sport) he's going to have to work harder to win her over. Cheap plastic shoes ditto. Sandals and socks, eek no. Crocs generally get the thumbs down (has anyone ever fallen in love with someone wearing crocs)?

    From there on, things get better. Riding boots, cowboy boots, motorbike boots can be a turn on, if they suit the man and his age and clothes. The safest bet is a very fine pair of leather oxfords or brogues, and I mention the cost merely because shoes are one place where you can't fake quality cheaply.

    Women really do notice this stuff. At least in England. Maybe in Scotland you all wear slippers to go to Lidl to buy your neeps so no one cares?
    LOL, I did say wellies and bachles were out, unless you are getting your neeps straight from the field. What is this Lidl you speak of.
    PS:I bet my wife would make yours look rough even if double her age.
  • Options

    Watching Sky and BBC all day they have been attacking the rail increases and showing Corbyn demonstrating against the rises at a London Station.

    Just watched ITV Wales news with an exact mirror image of the complaints in England but the difference here in Wales is the increase of 2.98% by TFW is labour's responsibility.

    Why are you not in Cardiff, Corbyn, or is that too embarrasssing

    You think that instead of criticising the Tories for something affecting his constituents in a place the news media cares about he should attack his own party in a place neither cares about? What politician would do that?
    Hypocrisy is the word
  • Options
    grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234
    edited January 2019
    I know Bob the Drag Queen is 6'7" and size 14 feet

    image
  • Options
    Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    edited January 2019

    For Labour voters unhappy with their party’s clueless position on Brexit, the big question is who else are they going to vote for if that position doesn’t change. There is no sign of an exodus to the LibDems who consistently support Remain so Brexit clearly isn’t the be all and end all of determining how they’ll vote. Similarly, it’s difficult to see them voting Tory with the complete abscence of aa domestic policy agenda.

    So Labour voters might be unhappy with their party’s position on Brexit but not enough to switch allegiance. In those circumstance, why would Labour change that position ?

    Far from a stampede of angry Remainers fleeing to the Lib Dems, the latest YouGov actually has proportionally more 2017 LibDem voters jumping to Labour (15%) than Labour voters going the other way (5%).
  • Options
    kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 3,933

    malcolmg said:

    Watching Sky and BBC all day they have been attacking the rail increases and showing Corbyn demonstrating against the rises at a London Station.

    Just watched ITV Wales news with an exact mirror image of the complaints in England but the difference here in Wales is the increase of 2.98% by TFW is labour's responsibility.

    Why are you not in Cardiff, Corbyn, or is that too embarrasssing

    Evening G, it is pathetic crap, why should we pay for rich commuters to go in to London and make huge salaries. If the greedy gets don't like it get a job nearer home, poncy grasping gits.
    You do express it so well if in your somewhat colourful way. As a example I believe a season ticket Brighton to London is in the region of £5,000. So travelling 5 days a week it is less than £20 a day return

    Looks like really good value to me
    Except for the fact you'd need to earn about 8k a year more (assuming you are a higher rate taxpayer, which I imagine most people forking out 5k a year for a train ticket are). You're then paying an additonal six or seven quid on your Oyster to move around London for the day, plus the cost of getting to and from home assuming you're not living within walking distance. All for the privilege of a probably two to three hour journey each way door to door.

    I've known people on salaries of 50-70k who have commuted that distance at that cost and most of them have agreed it just isn't worth it. They usually move out of the city because they have young kids so those salaries don't go as far as you think.
  • Options
    grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234
    SeanT said:


    Women really do notice this stuff. At least in England. Maybe in Scotland you all wear slippers to go to Lidl to buy your neeps so no one cares?

    You can't go wrong with a sturdy pair of leather boots. DMs or Timberlands. Oof.
  • Options
    TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    And yet, in spite of this supposed Remainer fury towards Labour, this exact same set of polling has the Lib Dems still stuck at the 7% they polled at the last election....

    I believe labour supporters do not believe Corbyn backs brexit to the extent he does and when the votes come on TM deal in a couple of weeks, labour mps will have nowhere to hide.

    It is at this point the balloon will go up and with it very serious problems for labour and a possible boost for the lib dems
    LOL, how many times have you previously predicted the "penny will drop" / "balloon will go up" for all these Labour Remain voters supposedly obsessed with the EU above all else? :D
    I am hoping the penny will drop with people predicting the penny will drop... the penny seems to be quite stubborn though...
  • Options
    grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234

    forget make-up, what really turns me on is a woman who can write multithreaded code or design a VCO ... ;)

    Oddly enough, not many women meet my requirements.

    That's because nobody can write multithreaded code.

    Your dream woman is an AI that will exist 25 years from now.
  • Options
    SeanT said:

    Foxy said:

    Cookie said:


    Shoes make the outfit. The wrong shoes can completely ruin a look. The right shoes can set it off perfectly. Men never seem to understand that. They all seem to think we should be tottering about in 6" heels.

    I can say with absolute certainty men do not care what footwear you have on. Heels are inflicted on women by other women.
    Ooh, while we're on about that sort of thing, if I can join in with generalising wildly from myself to 'men', men also find women's need to put make-upon deeply baffling. A face with make-up on almost never looks as good as a clean face. And in particular, a mouth with lipstick always looks less attractive than a clean mouth.

    On the point above, to my eye, a 'look' tailed off my high-heeled shoes can look attractive. But so can a look tailed off by Dr, Marten boots.

    And to enlatge on grabcoque's point, fashion in general is inflicted on women by other women.
    Indeed. Women dress for other women, men buy cars and other trinkets to impress other men. It is about rivalry rather than courting.
    I spend quite a lot of money on shoes. Unfortunately neither men nor women seem that impressed.
    I feel for you. Shoes are a joy and men just seem to have either brown or black canoes. :(
    I love buying shoes. I dislike buying most other clothes unless I already know exactly what I want. Clothes buying is generally a mild chore for me, which can end badly and remorsefully.

    But shoes, however, Mmm. I know all about them, I know where to get the best, I can afford the best. I've been known to drop a grand on Jermyn Street, in one afternoon of shoe-shopping.

    And, uniondivvie, I have had both men and women come up to me, uninvited, and say, "I;m sorry to intrude, but those are lovely shoes." One guy even waxed lyrical about my patina. As they say.

    You should come to London more. We appreciate a good brogue.
    In my 'what'll I do with the rest of my life after graduating' phase, I worked in a 2nd hand bookshop in Edinburgh. I wore cowboy boots quite a bit then (I know, but it was the '80s) and one bloke kept coming back in to admire them, eventually asking if he could photograph them. Unfortunately this progressed to him phoning up the shop to ask if I was wearing my boots, accompanied by breathy squelching. He had to be warned off by the owner in the end.

    I've had the occasional compliment on my footwear, but nothing else that extreme.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,247
    edited January 2019
    kyf_100 said:

    malcolmg said:

    Watching Sky and BBC all day they have been attacking the rail increases and showing Corbyn demonstrating against the rises at a London Station.

    Just watched ITV Wales news with an exact mirror image of the complaints in England but the difference here in Wales is the increase of 2.98% by TFW is labour's responsibility.

    Why are you not in Cardiff, Corbyn, or is that too embarrasssing

    Evening G, it is pathetic crap, why should we pay for rich commuters to go in to London and make huge salaries. If the greedy gets don't like it get a job nearer home, poncy grasping gits.
    You do express it so well if in your somewhat colourful way. As a example I believe a season ticket Brighton to London is in the region of £5,000. So travelling 5 days a week it is less than £20 a day return

    Looks like really good value to me
    Except for the fact you'd need to earn about 8k a year more (assuming you are a higher rate taxpayer, which I imagine most people forking out 5k a year for a train ticket are). You're then paying an additonal six or seven quid on your Oyster to move around London for the day, plus the cost of getting to and from home assuming you're not living within walking distance. All for the privilege of a probably two to three hour journey each way door to door.

    I've known people on salaries of 50-70k who have commuted that distance at that cost and most of them have agreed it just isn't worth it. They usually move out of the city because they have young kids so those salaries don't go as far as you think.
    Commuting to work is not my idea of heaven but for £20 a day return to London it has to be good value
  • Options
    AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900
    Ahh PB. The morning thread full of ferry stuff, and the evening thread full of feet fetishists.
  • Options
    StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092

    Watching Sky and BBC all day they have been attacking the rail increases and showing Corbyn demonstrating against the rises at a London Station.

    Just watched ITV Wales news with an exact mirror image of the complaints in England but the difference here in Wales is the increase of 2.98% by TFW is labour's responsibility.

    Why are you not in Cardiff, Corbyn, or is that too embarrasssing

    You think that instead of criticising the Tories for something affecting his constituents in a place the news media cares about he should attack his own party in a place neither cares about? What politician would do that?
    Hypocrisy is the word
    Corbyn attacking the fare raises in England, not mentioning the ones in Wales = hypocrisy. You attacking the fare raises in Wales and defending them in England = ???
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,880

    forget make-up, what really turns me on is a woman who can write multithreaded code or design a VCO ... ;)

    Oddly enough, not many women meet my requirements.

    That's because nobody can write multithreaded code.

    Your dream woman is an AI that will exist 25 years from now.
    If you think multithreaded code needs an AI, then a decent analogue VCO would require an enhanced AI which that AI will spend centuries developing ...

    It is the work of magicians and witches. ;)
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256

    forget make-up, what really turns me on is a woman who can write multithreaded code or design a VCO ... ;)

    Oddly enough, not many women meet my requirements.

    That's because nobody can write multithreaded code.

    Your dream woman is an AI that will exist 25 years from now.
    Do not be too sure of that. I wrote code like that for years, but I have retired from it now.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,937
    Verhofstadt clearly enjoyed Sadie Khan's New Year fireworks display


    https://mobile.twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/1080167379710214144
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,811

    forget make-up, what really turns me on is a woman who can write multithreaded code or design a VCO ... ;)

    Oddly enough, not many women meet my requirements.

    JJ, seek help
  • Options
    AmpfieldAndyAmpfieldAndy Posts: 1,445
    Danny565 said:

    For Labour voters unhappy with their party’s clueless position on Brexit, the big question is who else are they going to vote for if that position doesn’t change. There is no sign of an exodus to the LibDems who consistently support Remain so Brexit clearly isn’t the be all and end all of determining how they’ll vote. Similarly, it’s difficult to see them voting Tory with the complete abscence of aa domestic policy agenda.

    So Labour voters might be unhappy with their party’s position on Brexit but not enough to switch allegiance. In those circumstance, why would Labour change that position ?

    Far from a stampede of angry Remainers fleeing to the Lib Dems, the latest YouGov actually has proportionally more 2017 LibDem voters jumping to Labour (15%) than Labour voters going the other way (5%).
    I would imagine that’s for reasons other than Brexit - either disenchantment with Cable or fooled by Corbyn’s unfunded spending promises.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,811

    kyf_100 said:

    malcolmg said:

    Watching Sky and BBC all day they have been attacking the rail increases and showing Corbyn demonstrating against the rises at a London Station.

    Just watched ITV Wales news with an exact mirror image of the complaints in England but the difference here in Wales is the increase of 2.98% by TFW is labour's responsibility.

    Why are you not in Cardiff, Corbyn, or is that too embarrasssing

    Evening G, it is pathetic crap, why should we pay for rich commuters to go in to London and make huge salaries. If the greedy gets don't like it get a job nearer home, poncy grasping gits.
    You do express it so well if in your somewhat colourful way. As a example I believe a season ticket Brighton to London is in the region of £5,000. So travelling 5 days a week it is less than £20 a day return

    Looks like really good value to me
    Except for the fact you'd need to earn about 8k a year more (assuming you are a higher rate taxpayer, which I imagine most people forking out 5k a year for a train ticket are). You're then paying an additonal six or seven quid on your Oyster to move around London for the day, plus the cost of getting to and from home assuming you're not living within walking distance. All for the privilege of a probably two to three hour journey each way door to door.

    I've known people on salaries of 50-70k who have commuted that distance at that cost and most of them have agreed it just isn't worth it. They usually move out of the city because they have young kids so those salaries don't go as far as you think.
    Commuting to work is not my idea of heaven but for £20 a day return to London it has to be good value
    Subsidised by us poor taxpayers G
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,880
    malcolmg said:

    forget make-up, what really turns me on is a woman who can write multithreaded code or design a VCO ... ;)

    Oddly enough, not many women meet my requirements.

    JJ, seek help
    Too late... much too late ... ;)
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,079
    kyf_100 said:

    In short, high heels are no substitute for emotional intimacy.

    Undeniably true. Then again, emotional intimacy is no substitute for high heels.

    And I agree, nice change from Brexit.

    My venal prejudice?

    I don't trust men with very neat goatees (unless they are also short and/or bald).
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,123
    I am seriously impressed that so many people have been able to work out what Labour's position on Brexit is.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,937
    Trump tells Romney to be a team player saying he won big and Romney didn't



    https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1080447092882112512
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,811
    SeanT said:

    malcolmg said:

    SeanT said:

    malcolmg said:

    SeanT said:


    Shoes make the outfit. The wrong shoes can completely ruin a look. The right shoes can set it off perfectly. Men never seem to understand that. They all seem to think we should be tottering about in 6" heels.

    I can say with absolute certainty men do not care what footwear you have on. Heels are inflicted on women by other women.
    Er, you're gay.

    I'm straight. Shoes are absolutely important to me, stilettos on the right occasion can be hugely sexy, but so can Converse and hotpants. I'll stop there.

    The same goes both ways of course. I long ago realised a lot of women judge a guy by his shoes, happily I have been able to afford good ones. £300+
    Do you have large price tags on them so people know they were expensive, anybody that chooses you by your shoes should be avoided like the plague unless you are wearing wellies in town or your shoes are absolute bachles.
    You haven't met many women, have you, Malc?

    Loads of women say the first thing they look at in a man, after his face, is his feet.

    Basically if he's wearing trainers (and not actually playing sport) he's going to have to work harder to win her over. Cheap plastic shoes ditto. Sandals and socks, eek no. Crocs generally get the thumbs down (has anyone ever fallen in love with someone wearing crocs)?


    Women really do notice this stuff. At least in England. Maybe in Scotland you all wear slippers to go to Lidl to buy your neeps so no one cares?
    LOL, I did say wellies and bachles were out, unless you are getting your neeps straight from the field. What is this Lidl you speak of.
    PS:I bet my wife would make yours look rough even if double her age.
    lol. We must agree to differ. I am sure your wife is very lovely. My 23 year old wife, I have to say, IS genuinely an absolute stunner, the trouble with that is men (and women) constantly come on to her, so she has to bat them off. She's the kind of woman men rush up to on the street, begging for her number, I've seen it.

    The other trouble with this is that I know I've peaked. I'll never have another woman as lovely as this, it is surely impossible. But at least I did it once.

    Anyway, let us both rejoice in our good fortune, and a Happy New Year to you, old boy.
    Absolutely Sean, I have had that hassle for 40+ years, or my wife has. We are both very fortunate. A Very Happy New to you too. I do buy decent shoes as well.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,095

    Danny565 said:

    For Labour voters unhappy with their party’s clueless position on Brexit, the big question is who else are they going to vote for if that position doesn’t change. There is no sign of an exodus to the LibDems who consistently support Remain so Brexit clearly isn’t the be all and end all of determining how they’ll vote. Similarly, it’s difficult to see them voting Tory with the complete abscence of aa domestic policy agenda.

    So Labour voters might be unhappy with their party’s position on Brexit but not enough to switch allegiance. In those circumstance, why would Labour change that position ?

    Far from a stampede of angry Remainers fleeing to the Lib Dems, the latest YouGov actually has proportionally more 2017 LibDem voters jumping to Labour (15%) than Labour voters going the other way (5%).
    I would imagine that’s for reasons other than Brexit - either disenchantment with Cable or fooled by Corbyn’s unfunded spending promises.
    Or they like his anti-semitic stance on Israel......
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    SeanT said:

    Loads of women say the first thing they look at in a man, after his face, is his feet.

    Looks only go so far. The absolute killer beyond all others (for me) is smell. I have no objection to a man who smells like a man, but BO, stale sweat, bad breath or overpowering aftershave are beyond the pale. It does not matter what he looks like, how he dresses or how much money he waves around.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,789

    Looks more than a bit risky to me to fail to convince your support base on something that strikes closer to their identity than party allegiance.

    There was a recent article from Stephen Bush in the Times suggesting that his support base will stick with him, because they like his left wing record, despite disagreeing about the EU.
  • Options
    AmpfieldAndyAmpfieldAndy Posts: 1,445
    HYUFD said:

    Trump tells Romney to be a team player saying he won big and Romney didn't



    https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1080447092882112512

    Pots and kettles though isn’t it. The idea of Trump as a team player is risible.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,937

    HYUFD said:

    For Labour voters unhappy with their party’s clueless position on Brexit, the big question is who else are they going to vote for if that position doesn’t change. There is no sign of an exodus to the LibDems who consistently support Remain so Brexit clearly isn’t the be all and end all of determining how they’ll vote. Similarly, it’s difficult to see them voting Tory with the complete abscence of aa domestic policy agenda.

    So Labour voters might be unhappy with their party’s position on Brexit but not enough to switch allegiance. In those circumstance, why would Labour change that position ?

    I can see Labour voters going LD in safe Labour inner city Remain and university town seats where the Tories are little threat. See the Lewisham East by election
    By elections are never a good guide to how people will vote at a General Election.
    Depends, the big LD gains of 1997 and 2005 reflected by election gains in the previous parliaments
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,811
    DavidL said:

    I am seriously impressed that so many people have been able to work out what Labour's position on Brexit is.

    You fully recovered yet David, a nice bottle of Red needed I think. Don't listen to Doctor's telling you it is bad for you.
  • Options
    kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 3,933

    kyf_100 said:

    malcolmg said:

    Watching Sky and BBC all day they have been attacking the rail increases and showing Corbyn demonstrating against the rises at a London Station.

    Just watched ITV Wales news with an exact mirror image of the complaints in England but the difference here in Wales is the increase of 2.98% by TFW is labour's responsibility.

    Why are you not in Cardiff, Corbyn, or is that too embarrasssing

    Evening G, it is pathetic crap, why should we pay for rich commuters to go in to London and make huge salaries. If the greedy gets don't like it get a job nearer home, poncy grasping gits.
    You do express it so well if in your somewhat colourful way. As a example I believe a season ticket Brighton to London is in the region of £5,000. So travelling 5 days a week it is less than £20 a day return

    Looks like really good value to me
    Except for the fact you'd need to earn about 8k a year more (assuming you are a higher rate taxpayer, which I imagine most people forking out 5k a year for a train ticket are). You're then paying an additonal six or seven quid on your Oyster to move around London for the day, plus the cost of getting to and from home assuming you're not living within walking distance. All for the privilege of a probably two to three hour journey each way door to door.

    I've known people on salaries of 50-70k who have commuted that distance at that cost and most of them have agreed it just isn't worth it. They usually move out of the city because they have young kids so those salaries don't go as far as you think.
    Commuting to work is not my idea of heaven but for £20 a day return to London it has to be good value
    I agree with you there, £20 is not a lot when taken as a single journey but trying to put myself in the position of a middle class earner who has moved out to Brighton or the like because they have kids and want to get on the property ladder, I can understand why they are hopping mad about every fare rise.

    I've said it before, but Corbynism is a very middle class rebellion. From the swathes of students protesting tuition fees to the twenty somethings who can't get on the property ladder (how socialist is that?) to middle class commuters demanding subsidised rail fares. Corbynism is of and for the middle classes.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,811
    kinabalu said:

    kyf_100 said:

    In short, high heels are no substitute for emotional intimacy.

    Undeniably true. Then again, emotional intimacy is no substitute for high heels.

    And I agree, nice change from Brexit.

    My venal prejudice?

    I don't trust men with very neat goatees (unless they are also short and/or bald).
    They should be shot on sight
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,937

    HYUFD said:

    The fact 57% of Labour voters back a second EU referendum offers a clear opportunity for the LDs if Corbyn sticks to his stance of opposing one

    Do you think he will, though? If/when he loses a VONC in the government, there's really nowhere else for Corbyn to hide.
    I think he may allow enough Labour MPs to back the Deal to get it passed then push a VONC again with the DUP behind it rather than go for EUref2
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,937
    Sean_F said:

    Looks more than a bit risky to me to fail to convince your support base on something that strikes closer to their identity than party allegiance.

    There was a recent article from Stephen Bush in the Times suggesting that his support base will stick with him, because they like his left wing record, despite disagreeing about the EU.
    Some middle class Remainers may go LD though if Corbyn sticks with Brexit and opposing EUref2
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,789
    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    Looks more than a bit risky to me to fail to convince your support base on something that strikes closer to their identity than party allegiance.

    There was a recent article from Stephen Bush in the Times suggesting that his support base will stick with him, because they like his left wing record, despite disagreeing about the EU.
    Some middle class Remainers may go LD though if Corbyn sticks with Brexit and opposing EUref2
    They may, but how many competitive Lab/Lib Dem seats are there?
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,247
    edited January 2019

    Watching Sky and BBC all day they have been attacking the rail increases and showing Corbyn demonstrating against the rises at a London Station.

    Just watched ITV Wales news with an exact mirror image of the complaints in England but the difference here in Wales is the increase of 2.98% by TFW is labour's responsibility.

    Why are you not in Cardiff, Corbyn, or is that too embarrasssing

    You think that instead of criticising the Tories for something affecting his constituents in a place the news media cares about he should attack his own party in a place neither cares about? What politician would do that?
    Hypocrisy is the word
    Corbyn attacking the fare raises in England, not mentioning the ones in Wales = hypocrisy. You attacking the fare raises in Wales and defending them in England = ???
    No - I agree with the fare rises in both England and Wales. I am not a hypocrite
  • Options
    not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 4,341
    If Corbyn continues to disappoint his base over Brexit, is he vulnerable to another leadership challenge?
  • Options
    AmpfieldAndyAmpfieldAndy Posts: 1,445

    If Corbyn continues to disappoint his base over Brexit, is he vulnerable to another leadership challenge?

    He is safe for as long as he has McCluskey’s support.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,209
    edited January 2019
    Seems I've missed out on the PB fashion edition just now while on the old thread debating the Jews with a leftie, surprise surprise.

    I feel in no way qualified to discuss fashion but as for shoes isn't it the heels that are the most important/giveaway?
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,977



    Why are you not in Cardiff, Corbyn, or is that too embarrasssing

    Because London is more important than Cardiff.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,789
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cookie said:


    Shoes make the outfit. The wrong shoes can completely ruin a look. The right shoes can set it off perfectly. Men never seem to understand that. They all seem to think we should be tottering about in 6" heels.

    I can say with absolute certainty men do not care what footwear you have on. Heels are inflicted on women by other women.
    Ooh, while we're on about that sort of thing, if I can join in with generalising wildly from myself to 'men', men also find women's need to put make-upon deeply baffling. A face with make-up on almost never looks as good as a clean face. And in particular, a mouth with lipstick always looks less attractive than a clean mouth.

    On the point above, to my eye, a 'look' tailed off my high-heeled shoes can look attractive. But so can a look tailed off by Dr, Marten boots.

    And to enlatge on grabcoque's point, fashion in general is inflicted on women by other women.
    Bless. You do realise that all those women looking "natural" are in fact wearing make up designed to make it look as if they aren't wearing make up. There are even "nude" lipsticks.
    You don't speak for all women. Mrs J wears make-up very infrequently: I nearly fainted with surprise when she nipped into a Debenhams to ask which lipstick suited her. The lipstick was purchased, and was used once.

    The reason she does not need it, of course, is that she is naturally beautiful. ;)

    Our dressing table is sagging under the weight of hair products: then again, she does have the devil's curly hair ...
    I never said I did speak for all women. I speak only for myself.

    I do think - and I realise it is the Italian in me - that one ought to look presentable when out in public. Some people are absolute eye sores.
    I think it's good manners to look presentable in public, and sensible. Who would want to take legal advice from someone who looks like a slob, and smells like a fart?
  • Options
    TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    Sean_F said:

    Looks more than a bit risky to me to fail to convince your support base on something that strikes closer to their identity than party allegiance.

    There was a recent article from Stephen Bush in the Times suggesting that his support base will stick with him, because they like his left wing record, despite disagreeing about the EU.
    It shouldn't really be that shocking. Plenty of Tory remainers have stuck around, I'd suggest many of those that haven't would have done if they liked the direction they thought the party was heading in and only disliked Brexit.

    I think no deal is a stupid thing to aim for but I'd happily vote Labour tomorrow with that as the parties EU policy.
  • Options
    AmpfieldAndyAmpfieldAndy Posts: 1,445
    kyf_100 said:

    kyf_100 said:

    malcolmg said:

    Watching Sky and BBC all day they have been attacking the rail increases and showing Corbyn demonstrating against the rises at a London Station.

    Just watched ITV Wales news with an exact mirror image of the complaints in England but the difference here in Wales is the increase of 2.98% by TFW is labour's responsibility.

    Why are you not in Cardiff, Corbyn, or is that too embarrasssing

    Evening G, it is pathetic crap, why should we pay for rich commuters to go in to London and make huge salaries. If the greedy gets don't like it get a job nearer home, poncy grasping gits.
    You do express it so well if in your somewhat colourful way. As a example I believe a season ticket Brighton to London is in the region of £5,000. So travelling 5 days a week it is less than £20 a day return

    Looks like really good value to me
    Except for the fact you'd need to earn about 8k a year more (assuming you are a higher rate taxpayer, which I imagine most people forking out 5k a year for a train ticket are). You're then paying an additonal six or seven quid on your Oyster to move around London for the day, plus the cost of getting to and from home assuming you're not living within walking distance. All for the privilege of a probably two to three hour journey each way door to door.

    I've known people on salaries of 50-70k who have commuted that distance at that cost and most of them have agreed it just isn't worth it. They usually move out of the city because they have young kids so those salaries don't go as far as you think.
    Commuting to work is not my idea of heaven but for £20 a day return to London it has to be good value
    I agree with you there, £20 is not a lot when taken as a single journey but trying to put myself in the position of a middle class earner who has moved out to Brighton or the like because they have kids and want to get on the property ladder, I can understand why they are hopping mad about every fare rise.

    I've said it before, but Corbynism is a very middle class rebellion. From the swathes of students protesting tuition fees to the twenty somethings who can't get on the property ladder (how socialist is that?) to middle class commuters demanding subsidised rail fares. Corbynism is of and for the middle classes.
    Get out of town. McDonnell wants to overthrow capitalism and free market economics. There is nothing remotely middle class about that.

    Corbynism is a fools paradise.
  • Options
    TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840

    Watching Sky and BBC all day they have been attacking the rail increases and showing Corbyn demonstrating against the rises at a London Station.

    Just watched ITV Wales news with an exact mirror image of the complaints in England but the difference here in Wales is the increase of 2.98% by TFW is labour's responsibility.

    Why are you not in Cardiff, Corbyn, or is that too embarrasssing

    You think that instead of criticising the Tories for something affecting his constituents in a place the news media cares about he should attack his own party in a place neither cares about? What politician would do that?
    Hypocrisy is the word
    Corbyn attacking the fare raises in England, not mentioning the ones in Wales = hypocrisy. You attacking the fare raises in Wales and defending them in England = ???
    No - I agree with the fare rises in both England and Wales. I am not a hypocrite
    TBH Big G I can't help but feel if he did start attacking others in the party that disagree with him on policy that you may find fault in that.

    A lot of the complaints about Corbyn often centre on him being too willing to criticise and go against other parts of Labour. Although the more hardcore of his fanbase might agree with you!
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,789

    Foxy said:

    Its ok Jezza's on the case,

    “What we will do is vote against having no deal, we’ll vote against Theresa May’s deal; at that point she should go back to Brussels and say this is not acceptable to Britain and renegotiate a customs union, form a customs union with the European Union to secure trade,” he said.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/02/corbyn-tells-may-to-strike-new-brexit-deal-labour-can-back

    He is barking mad IMO. Has he not been paying attention or is this just the usual Marxist-detached-from-reality thing?
    He wants a no-deal Brexit to form his marxist utopia. It's as simple as that.
    I don't think that really so. Existing rules do allow for significant state support (via regional industrial policy for example) and a customs union, and indeed WTO rules also work against such subsidy.

    More likely Jezza is either uninterested in the EU, or thick, or both.
    Both.

    Brexiteers who have spent their lives obsessing about the EU tend to see Corbyn as one of them on this topic a la Kate Hoey but that is not really true IMO, he does not see it as a talismanic issue and does not care much about it either way. In the end he will have to listen to the views of his party - as he did at the referendum and has also done on other issues where he is in a clear minority such as Trident.
    Applying Occam's razor, it seems to me that Corbyn's behaviour is best explained by the fact that he approves Brexit.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,937
    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    Looks more than a bit risky to me to fail to convince your support base on something that strikes closer to their identity than party allegiance.

    There was a recent article from Stephen Bush in the Times suggesting that his support base will stick with him, because they like his left wing record, despite disagreeing about the EU.
    Some middle class Remainers may go LD though if Corbyn sticks with Brexit and opposing EUref2
    They may, but how many competitive Lab/Lib Dem seats are there?
    The LDs won quite a few in 2005 after the Iraq War, most of those seats voted strongly Remain too
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    Dress is meaningless in itself and a very bad barometer of character.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,789


    Shoes make the outfit. The wrong shoes can completely ruin a look. The right shoes can set it off perfectly. Men never seem to understand that. They all seem to think we should be tottering about in 6" heels.

    I can say with absolute certainty men do not care what footwear you have on. Heels are inflicted on women by other women.
    The only time I've ever heard men speak about women's shoes is in the case of eg knee-high boots.

    Which look best when nothing else is being worn.
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,977



    Get out of town. McDonnell wants to overthrow capitalism and free market economics. There is nothing remotely middle class about that.

    Corbynism is a fools paradise.

    Vanguardism has been an essential part of revolutionary theory since Engels and Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto. The idea of a politically enlightened elite leading the workers to revolution was further developed by Lenin (who was right about everything) in What is to be Done?
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,011
    Trump is having an epic rant on US TV at the moment. “I don’t care about Europe. I’m not elected by Europeans.”

    https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1080541772974039041?s=21
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,123
    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    I am seriously impressed that so many people have been able to work out what Labour's position on Brexit is.

    You fully recovered yet David, a nice bottle of Red needed I think. Don't listen to Doctor's telling you it is bad for you.
    I am off the booze for the foreseeable Malcolm, certainly till the end of this month and then it will be tiptoes. I wouldn't go through what I went through on the 30th for anything. It hurt.
  • Options

    Watching Sky and BBC all day they have been attacking the rail increases and showing Corbyn demonstrating against the rises at a London Station.

    Just watched ITV Wales news with an exact mirror image of the complaints in England but the difference here in Wales is the increase of 2.98% by TFW is labour's responsibility.

    Why are you not in Cardiff, Corbyn, or is that too embarrasssing

    You think that instead of criticising the Tories for something affecting his constituents in a place the news media cares about he should attack his own party in a place neither cares about? What politician would do that?
    Hypocrisy is the word
    Corbyn attacking the fare raises in England, not mentioning the ones in Wales = hypocrisy. You attacking the fare raises in Wales and defending them in England = ???
    No - I agree with the fare rises in both England and Wales. I am not a hypocrite
    TBH Big G I can't help but feel if he did start attacking others in the party that disagree with him on policy that you may find fault in that.

    A lot of the complaints about Corbyn often centre on him being too willing to criticise and go against other parts of Labour. Although the more hardcore of his fanbase might agree with you!
    The problem for him is that exactly the same problems on the rail rises and the NHS he blames on the government, but here in Wales his labour party is following the same pathway
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,503
    HYUFD said:

    The fact 57% of Labour voters back a second EU referendum offers a clear opportunity for the LDs if Corbyn sticks to his stance of opposing one

    Nah, no sign of that switch happening, more's the pity.

    Remainers are sticking by Labour, because they clearly are less hardline than the Tories on the subject.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,811

    Watching Sky and BBC all day they have been attacking the rail increases and showing Corbyn demonstrating against the rises at a London Station.

    Just watched ITV Wales news with an exact mirror image of the complaints in England but the difference here in Wales is the increase of 2.98% by TFW is labour's responsibility.

    Why are you not in Cardiff, Corbyn, or is that too embarrasssing

    You think that instead of criticising the Tories for something affecting his constituents in a place the news media cares about he should attack his own party in a place neither cares about? What politician would do that?
    Hypocrisy is the word
    Corbyn attacking the fare raises in England, not mentioning the ones in Wales = hypocrisy. You attacking the fare raises in Wales and defending them in England = ???
    No - I agree with the fare rises in both England and Wales. I am not a hypocrite
    TBH Big G I can't help but feel if he did start attacking others in the party that disagree with him on policy that you may find fault in that.

    A lot of the complaints about Corbyn often centre on him being too willing to criticise and go against other parts of Labour. Although the more hardcore of his fanbase might agree with you!
    He is a relic, 30 - 40 years out of his time, he should be moved to a museum. These idiots are the mirror opposite of the nasty party and will be even worse for the country than the Tories.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,079
    Turning (with enormous regret) from women's shoes to Jeremy Corbyn and Brexit, there is a point I've made before but will do so again since I'm not yet tired of it.

    If the next GE is post Brexit (as I think it will be), the votes he got in 2017 purely from fervent Remain sentiment, will be lost to him regardless of what position on the EU he takes now.

    Shifting to please them, and risking the loss of more agnostic and/or leave voters in target seats in the Midlands and the North, therefore makes no sense.
  • Options
    AmpfieldAndyAmpfieldAndy Posts: 1,445
    edited January 2019
    Dura_Ace said:



    Get out of town. McDonnell wants to overthrow capitalism and free market economics. There is nothing remotely middle class about that.

    Corbynism is a fools paradise.

    Vanguardism has been an essential part of revolutionary theory since Engels and Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto. The idea of a politically enlightened elite leading the workers to revolution was further developed by Lenin (who was right about everything) in What is to be Done?
    Except that Lenin impoverished Russia, imposed a dictatorship by murdering his rivals and opponents and quashing political debate. Not very enlightened imo which is probably why Gorbachev and Yeltsin changed tack.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,811
    Sean_F said:


    Shoes make the outfit. The wrong shoes can completely ruin a look. The right shoes can set it off perfectly. Men never seem to understand that. They all seem to think we should be tottering about in 6" heels.

    I can say with absolute certainty men do not care what footwear you have on. Heels are inflicted on women by other women.
    The only time I've ever heard men speak about women's shoes is in the case of eg knee-high boots.

    Which look best when nothing else is being worn.
    now you are talking
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,821
    On Topic more Labour voters support Corbyns BREXIT stance than oppose it.

    More Tory voters oppose Mays BREXIT stance than support it.

    Exactly as Mike says!!!
  • Options
    TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,387
    edited January 2019
    After a bit of fiddling I have put together a UNS table for the Canadian Federal election and can tell you that the most recent poll translates to:

    Liberals 165 seats (-19)
    Conservative 124 seats (+25)
    NPD 37 seats (-7)
    Green 1 seats (+0)
    BQ 11 seats (+1)

    Whereas the best poll for the Conservatives produces:

    Liberals 140 seats (-44)
    Conservative 143 seats (+44)
    NPD 40 seats (-4)
    Green 1 seats (+0)
    BQ 14 seats (+4)


    Note that the new PPC is not modelled and the modelling of the BQ is not great.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,560

    Dura_Ace said:



    Get out of town. McDonnell wants to overthrow capitalism and free market economics. There is nothing remotely middle class about that.

    Corbynism is a fools paradise.

    Vanguardism has been an essential part of revolutionary theory since Engels and Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto. The idea of a politically enlightened elite leading the workers to revolution was further developed by Lenin (who was right about everything) in What is to be Done?
    Except that Lenin improvershed Russia, imposed a dictatorship by murdering his rivals and opponents and quashing political debate. Not very enlightened imo.
    Hard to say the lot of the average Russian was much better before the revolution though, I'd suggest.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,618
    Foxy said:

    Cookie said:


    Shoes make the outfit. The wrong shoes can completely ruin a look. The right shoes can set it off perfectly. Men never seem to understand that. They all seem to think we should be tottering about in 6" heels.

    I can say with absolute certainty men do not care what footwear you have on. Heels are inflicted on women by other women.
    Ooh, while we're on about that sort of thing, if I can join in with generalising wildly from myself to 'men', men also find women's need to put make-upon deeply baffling. A face with make-up on almost never looks as good as a clean face. And in particular, a mouth with lipstick always looks less attractive than a clean mouth.

    On the point above, to my eye, a 'look' tailed off my high-heeled shoes can look attractive. But so can a look tailed off by Dr, Marten boots.

    And to enlatge on grabcoque's point, fashion in general is inflicted on women by other women.
    Indeed. Women dress for other women, men buy cars and other trinkets to impress other men. It is about rivalry rather than courting.
    In evolution, dogs do not compete with cats: cats compete with other cats to survive the dogs, and dogs compete with other dogs to prey on the cats. Subgroup A, when faced with an external threat or scarce resources, will cheerfully throw Subgroup B to the wolves. This is the cause of things like "women beware women".

    Although solidarity in theory affords a better survival strategy, sacrifice of more vulnerable members also works. The world is not as nice as I would wish.
  • Options
    AmpfieldAndyAmpfieldAndy Posts: 1,445

    Dura_Ace said:



    Get out of town. McDonnell wants to overthrow capitalism and free market economics. There is nothing remotely middle class about that.

    Corbynism is a fools paradise.

    Vanguardism has been an essential part of revolutionary theory since Engels and Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto. The idea of a politically enlightened elite leading the workers to revolution was further developed by Lenin (who was right about everything) in What is to be Done?
    Except that Lenin improvershed Russia, imposed a dictatorship by murdering his rivals and opponents and quashing political debate. Not very enlightened imo.
    Hard to say the lot of the average Russian was much better before the revolution though, I'd suggest.
    Difficult to make a credible case that it was worse.
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,977

    Dura_Ace said:



    Get out of town. McDonnell wants to overthrow capitalism and free market economics. There is nothing remotely middle class about that.

    Corbynism is a fools paradise.

    Vanguardism has been an essential part of revolutionary theory since Engels and Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto. The idea of a politically enlightened elite leading the workers to revolution was further developed by Lenin (who was right about everything) in What is to be Done?
    Except that Lenin impoverished Russia, imposed a dictatorship by murdering his rivals and opponents and quashing political debate. Not very enlightened imo which is probably why Gorbachev and Yeltsin changed tack.
    Irrelevant. The point remains, contrary to your assertion, that revolutionary socialism is essentially a bourgeois directed project in theory and praxis.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,618
    malcolmg said:

    I rarely use trains or any other public transport, if it cannot support itself then I say tough.

    Off the top of my head, I spend approx 8-10% of my waking life on them. I f*****g hate trains... :(

  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,821
    In other good news Mrs BJO is now home. The heart attack from yesterday is now problems with the muscles round the heart that prese ted as a heart attack and not a real heart attack at al.

    Thank fook for that.
  • Options
    FenmanFenman Posts: 1,047
    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    Looks more than a bit risky to me to fail to convince your support base on something that strikes closer to their identity than party allegiance.

    There was a recent article from Stephen Bush in the Times suggesting that his support base will stick with him, because they like his left wing record, despite disagreeing about the EU.
    Some middle class Remainers may go LD though if Corbyn sticks with Brexit and opposing EUref2
    They may, but how many competitive Lab/Lib Dem seats are there?
    Not that many. But squeezing Labour voters would allow the Lib Dems to win back much of the West Country. Take a look
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,152

    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Cookie said:

    +1. I grew up in Denmark where women largely agreed with what you say, and found the whole rigmarole that they observed in France and Britain completely perplexing. The more political ones also found it repellent in terms of accepting a sexist role - "Why should women make a special effort to dress to please men when men don't do the same?".

    I've come to feel relaxed about it - if people want to make an effort to look good and feel happy in the results, why not? But I also think it's largely done for personal and peer satisfaction, in the same way as some men like to cultivate a finely-trimmed beard. The exception is hairstyle, which I think does make a major difference to how people look for both sexes and is worth taking time to consider what you want.
    Ah yes, hair.

    How many women dye their hair? And why?

    Well, ask yourself this: if you were dating, would you choose a woman who had silver hair - however gorgeous and well kept and well cut - and however lovely her face, however engaging her personality, blah blah?

    And be honest in your answers.

    Men may not look at make up or what women wear or even their shoes (though I am sceptical - or perhaps it is just the men I know) but they do look at women's hair. And silver hair - even if you went silver in your 30's - means "old" and no man (or very few of them) want old or older women.

    I will put my cards on the table. I have silver hair - gorgeous it is. But I am unique among my peers. And it - to some extent - helped in my job. Looking older and experienced and wise and like someone's mother and, if necessary, like a witch was very useful when interrogating some over-entitled overpaid toerag.

    But pretty much every senior woman I have ever encountered, plenty of them older than me, did the opposite to me. If women care about their appearance, it's because they are often judged on their appearance - even in contexts where this should not matter and even when working with men who claim to be above such superficial issues.
  • Options
    AmpfieldAndyAmpfieldAndy Posts: 1,445
    edited January 2019
    Dura_Ace said:

    Dura_Ace said:



    Get out of town. McDonnell wants to overthrow capitalism and free market economics. There is nothing remotely middle class about that.

    Corbynism is a fools paradise.

    Vanguardism has been an essential part of revolutionary theory since Engels and Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto. The idea of a politically enlightened elite leading the workers to revolution was further developed by Lenin (who was right about everything) in What is to be Done?
    Except that Lenin impoverished Russia, imposed a dictatorship by murdering his rivals and opponents and quashing political debate. Not very enlightened imo which is probably why Gorbachev and Yeltsin changed tack.
    Irrelevant. The point remains, contrary to your assertion, that revolutionary socialism is essentially a bourgeois directed project in theory and praxis.
    Not really. The February Revolution was a totally artificial construction that Lenin devised simply to hold true to Marx. Nothing much bourgeois about the French Revolution either or the European revolutions of 1848.
  • Options
    Cyclefree said:

    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Cookie said:

    +1. I grew up in Denmark where women largely agreed with what you say, and found the whole rigmarole that they observed in France and Britain completely perplexing. The more political ones also found it repellent in terms of accepting a sexist role - "Why should women make a special effort to dress to please men when men don't do the same?".

    I've come to feel relaxed about it - if people want to make an effort to look good and feel happy in the results, why not? But I also think it's largely done for personal and peer satisfaction, in the same way as some men like to cultivate a finely-trimmed beard. The exception is hairstyle, which I think does make a major difference to how people look for both sexes and is worth taking time to consider what you want.
    Ah yes, hair.

    How many women dye their hair? And why?

    Well, ask yourself this: if you were dating, would you choose a woman who had silver hair - however gorgeous and well kept and well cut - and however lovely her face, however engaging her personality, blah blah?

    And be honest in your answers.

    Men may not look at make up or what women wear or even their shoes (though I am sceptical - or perhaps it is just the men I know) but they do look at women's hair. And silver hair - even if you went silver in your 30's - means "old" and no man (or very few of them) want old or older women.

    I will put my cards on the table. I have silver hair - gorgeous it is. But I am unique among my peers. And it - to some extent - helped in my job. Looking older and experienced and wise and like someone's mother and, if necessary, like a witch was very useful when interrogating some over-entitled overpaid toerag.

    But pretty much every senior woman I have ever encountered, plenty of them older than me, did the opposite to me. If women care about their appearance, it's because they are often judged on their appearance - even in contexts where this should not matter and even when working with men who claim to be above such superficial issues.
    I will put my cards on the table - I am 43 and still single :)
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,123

    In other good news Mrs BJO is now home. The heart attack from yesterday is now problems with the muscles round the heart that prese ted as a heart attack and not a real heart attack at al.

    Thank fook for that.

    Great news BJO. Delighted to hear that.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,503
    Fenman said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    Looks more than a bit risky to me to fail to convince your support base on something that strikes closer to their identity than party allegiance.

    There was a recent article from Stephen Bush in the Times suggesting that his support base will stick with him, because they like his left wing record, despite disagreeing about the EU.
    Some middle class Remainers may go LD though if Corbyn sticks with Brexit and opposing EUref2
    They may, but how many competitive Lab/Lib Dem seats are there?
    Not that many. But squeezing Labour voters would allow the Lib Dems to win back much of the West Country. Take a look
    Tactical voting by both LD and Lab voters was a key part of the 97 landslide, and needs to be repeated, but you are wrong. In the West Country, and indeed even in constituencies like Harborough, Lab are often way ahead of the LDs. Corbynism is not just an urban, student phenomenon.
  • Options
    TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    edited January 2019

    Watching Sky and BBC all day they have been attacking the rail increases and showing Corbyn demonstrating against the rises at a London Station.

    Just watched ITV Wales news with an exact mirror image of the complaints in England but the difference here in Wales is the increase of 2.98% by TFW is labour's responsibility.

    Why are you not in Cardiff, Corbyn, or is that too embarrasssing

    You think that instead of criticising the Tories for something affecting his constituents in a place the news media cares about he should attack his own party in a place neither cares about? What politician would do that?
    Hypocrisy is the word
    Corbyn attacking the fare raises in England, not mentioning the ones in Wales = hypocrisy. You attacking the fare raises in Wales and defending them in England = ???
    No - I agree with the fare rises in both England and Wales. I am not a hypocrite
    TBH Big G I can't help but feel if he did start attacking others in the party that disagree with him on policy that you may find fault in that.

    A lot of the complaints about Corbyn often centre on him being too willing to criticise and go against other parts of Labour. Although the more hardcore of his fanbase might agree with you!
    The problem for him is that exactly the same problems on the rail rises and the NHS he blames on the government, but here in Wales his labour party is following the same pathway
    Weren't you celebrating the other day the Welsh government handing out a 15 year franchise and how it showed they had no faith in national Labour...

    Can't have it both ways.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,789
    Cyclefree said:

    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Cookie said:

    +1. I grew up in Denmark where women largely agreed with what you say, and found the whole rigmarole that they observed in France and Britain completely perplexing. The more political ones also found it repellent in terms of accepting a sexist role - "Why should women make a special effort to dress to please men when men don't do the same?".

    I've come to feel relaxed about it - if people want to make an effort to look good and feel happy in the results, why not? But I also think it's largely done for personal and peer satisfaction, in the same way as some men like to cultivate a finely-trimmed beard. The exception is hairstyle, which I think does make a major difference to how people look for both sexes and is worth taking time to consider what you want.
    Ah yes, hair.

    How many women dye their hair? And why?

    Well, ask yourself this: if you were dating, would you choose a woman who had silver hair - however gorgeous and well kept and well cut - and however lovely her face, however engaging her personality, blah blah?

    And be honest in your answers.

    Men may not look at make up or what women wear or even their shoes (though I am sceptical - or perhaps it is just the men I know) but they do look at women's hair. And silver hair - even if you went silver in your 30's - means "old" and no man (or very few of them) want old or older women.

    I will put my cards on the table. I have silver hair - gorgeous it is. But I am unique among my peers. And it - to some extent - helped in my job. Looking older and experienced and wise and like someone's mother and, if necessary, like a witch was very useful when interrogating some over-entitled overpaid toerag.

    But pretty much every senior woman I have ever encountered, plenty of them older than me, did the opposite to me. If women care about their appearance, it's because they are often judged on their appearance - even in contexts where this should not matter and even when working with men who claim to be above such superficial issues.
    I've always found attractive older women very appealing, especially as I get older. Silver hair and high cheekbones are a great combination.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,108

    In other good news Mrs BJO is now home. The heart attack from yesterday is now problems with the muscles round the heart that prese ted as a heart attack and not a real heart attack at al.

    Thank fook for that.

    Really pleased to hear that BJO. Best wishes to you both.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,618

    In other good news Mrs BJO is now home. The heart attack from yesterday is now problems with the muscles round the heart that prese ted as a heart attack and not a real heart attack at al.

    Thank fook for that.

    Oh good news!
  • Options
    CD13CD13 Posts: 6,351
    Can I ask a strange question why we're talking about attraction. Having been married for 43 years to the same woman, I didn't realise the fashion is now to shave your pubes. I saw a TV show briefly and it came as a total surprise. I had to check with my son who knows these things, and he confirmed it.

    Surely pubic hair is a turn on? I can only speak about women because men are ugly, smelly creatures at the best of times (but I'm sure gay men may have different views).

    Yes, I do realise I'm an old git.
  • Options

    In other good news Mrs BJO is now home. The heart attack from yesterday is now problems with the muscles round the heart that prese ted as a heart attack and not a real heart attack at al.

    Thank fook for that.

    So pleased for you both. Best wishes
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,152

    SeanT said:

    Loads of women say the first thing they look at in a man, after his face, is his feet.

    Looks only go so far. The absolute killer beyond all others (for me) is smell. I have no objection to a man who smells like a man, but BO, stale sweat, bad breath or overpowering aftershave are beyond the pale. It does not matter what he looks like, how he dresses or how much money he waves around.
    Long and/or dirty fingernails, yuk.

    On the other hand, if you're Monty Don and your hands (and he does have lovely large hands) are a bit dirty from messing about in the garden, then come round to my house NOW. Oh - and don't forget to bring Nigel.
  • Options
    kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 3,933

    kyf_100 said:

    kyf_100 said:



    You do express it so well if in your somewhat colourful way. As a example I believe a season ticket Brighton to London is in the region of £5,000. So travelling 5 days a week it is less than £20 a day return

    Looks like really good value to me

    Except for the fact you'd need to earn about 8k a year more (assuming you are a higher rate taxpayer, which I imagine most people forking out 5k a year for a train ticket are). You're then paying an additonal six or seven quid on your Oyster to move around London for the day, plus the cost of getting to and from home assuming you're not living within walking distance. All for the privilege of a probably two to three hour journey each way door to door.

    I've known people on salaries of 50-70k who have commuted that distance at that cost and most of them have agreed it just isn't worth it. They usually move out of the city because they have young kids so those salaries don't go as far as you think.
    Commuting to work is not my idea of heaven but for £20 a day return to London it has to be good value
    I agree with you there, £20 is not a lot when taken as a single journey but trying to put myself in the position of a middle class earner who has moved out to Brighton or the like because they have kids and want to get on the property ladder, I can understand why they are hopping mad about every fare rise.

    I've said it before, but Corbynism is a very middle class rebellion. From the swathes of students protesting tuition fees to the twenty somethings who can't get on the property ladder (how socialist is that?) to middle class commuters demanding subsidised rail fares. Corbynism is of and for the middle classes.
    Get out of town. McDonnell wants to overthrow capitalism and free market economics. There is nothing remotely middle class about that.

    Corbynism is a fools paradise.
    Yes, but look at what his supporters want. They don't want the overthrow of the capitalist system, they want to be able to afford to buy a house, raise kids, and educate them properly. As I've said on here many times, it is an absolute travesty that these people who should be natural Conservative voters are now in thrall to the bearded svengali in red. And I do not mean Santa Claus.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,123
    Cyclefree said:

    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Cookie said:

    +1. I grew up in Denmark where women largely agreed with what you say, and found the whole rigmarole that they observed in France and Britain completely perplexing. The more political ones also found it repellent in terms of accepting a sexist role - "Why should women make a special effort to dress to please men when men don't do the same?".

    I've come to feel relaxed about it - if people want to make an effort to look good and feel happy in the results, why not? But I also think it's largely done for personal and peer satisfaction, in the same way as some men like to cultivate a finely-trimmed beard. The exception is hairstyle, which I think does make a major difference to how people look for both sexes and is worth taking time to consider what you want.
    Ah yes, hair.

    How many women dye their hair? And why?

    Well, ask yourself this: if you were dating, would you choose a woman who had silver hair - however gorgeous and well kept and well cut - and however lovely her face, however engaging her personality, blah blah?

    And be honest in your answers.

    Men may not look at make up or what women wear or even their shoes (though I am sceptical - or perhaps it is just the men I know) but they do look at women's hair. And silver hair - even if you went silver in your 30's - means "old" and no man (or very few of them) want old or older women.

    I will put my cards on the table. I have silver hair - gorgeous it is. But I am unique among my peers. And it - to some extent - helped in my job. Looking older and experienced and wise and like someone's mother and, if necessary, like a witch was very useful when interrogating some over-entitled overpaid toerag.

    But pretty much every senior woman I have ever encountered, plenty of them older than me, did the opposite to me. If women care about their appearance, it's because they are often judged on their appearance - even in contexts where this should not matter and even when working with men who claim to be above such superficial issues.
    I asked my better half and she tells me she dyes her hair from habit having done so for many years. She probably started getting a little bit of grey which started her off. To me, it really doesn't matter. She is a very special lady and I am a very lucky man, even if she is currently beside me wearing a worn out pair of baffies (slippers).
  • Options
    viewcode said:

    malcolmg said:

    I rarely use trains or any other public transport, if it cannot support itself then I say tough.

    Off the top of my head, I spend approx 8-10% of my waking life on them. I f*****g hate trains... :(

    I f***ing love trains, man!

    Apart from oddities running at weekends only (like Brigg, Reddish South, Okehampton etc.) I just need 12 journeys, all in Scotland, to complete the UK National Network!

    Ayr to Stranraer
    Falkirk to Perth to Inverness
    Croy to Alloa
    Cardenden Loop
    Leuchars to Dundee
    Ladybank to Perth
    Perth to Aberdeen
    Aberdeen to Inverness
    Craigendoran to Oban
    Crianlarich to Mallaig
    Inverness to Kyle
    Dingwall to Thurso and Wick

  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,108
    kyf_100 said:

    malcolmg said:

    Watching Sky and BBC all day they have been attacking the rail increases and showing Corbyn demonstrating against the rises at a London Station.

    Just watched ITV Wales news with an exact mirror image of the complaints in England but the difference here in Wales is the increase of 2.98% by TFW is labour's responsibility.

    Why are you not in Cardiff, Corbyn, or is that too embarrasssing

    Evening G, it is pathetic crap, why should we pay for rich commuters to go in to London and make huge salaries. If the greedy gets don't like it get a job nearer home, poncy grasping gits.
    You do express it so well if in your somewhat colourful way. As a example I believe a season ticket Brighton to London is in the region of £5,000. So travelling 5 days a week it is less than £20 a day return

    Looks like really good value to me
    Except for the fact you'd need to earn about 8k a year more (assuming you are a higher rate taxpayer, which I imagine most people forking out 5k a year for a train ticket are). You're then paying an additonal six or seven quid on your Oyster to move around London for the day, plus the cost of getting to and from home assuming you're not living within walking distance. All for the privilege of a probably two to three hour journey each way door to door.

    I've known people on salaries of 50-70k who have commuted that distance at that cost and most of them have agreed it just isn't worth it. They usually move out of the city because they have young kids so those salaries don't go as far as you think.
    London to Brighton is 64 miles. At 30p per mile (conservative estimate) it would cost around £40 a day to drive back and forth. So it is half the price of the competition.

    Of course, there may be other considerations. Car sharing can bring down the cost. If four car share, then it's actually cost effective. Also, in a car you're guaranteed a seat.

    But equally, on a train you aren't stuck in traffic either fuming or suffering an asthma attack.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,108

    Cyclefree said:

    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Cookie said:

    +1. I grew up in Denmark where women largely agreed with what you say, and found the whole rigmarole that they observed in France and Britain completely perplexing. The more political ones also found it repellent in terms of accepting a sexist role - "Why should women make a special effort to dress to please men when men don't do the same?".

    I've come to feel relaxed about it - if people want to make an effort to look good and feel happy in the results, why not? But I also think it's largely done for personal and peer satisfaction, in the same way as some men like to cultivate a finely-trimmed beard. The exception is hairstyle, which I think does make a major difference to how people look for both sexes and is worth taking time to consider what you want.
    Ah yes, hair.

    How many women dye their hair? And why?

    Well, ask yourself this: if you were dating, would you choose a woman who had silver hair - however gorgeous and well kept and well cut - and however lovely her face, however engaging her personality, blah blah?

    And be honest in your answers.

    Men may not look at make up or what women wear or even their shoes (though I am sceptical - or perhaps it is just the men I know) but they do look at women's hair. And silver hair - even if you went silver in your 30's - means "old" and no man (or very few of them) want old or older women.

    I will put my cards on the table. I have silver hair - gorgeous it is. But I am unique among my peers. And it - to some extent - helped in my job. Looking older and experienced and wise and like someone's mother and, if necessary, like a witch was very useful when interrogating some over-entitled overpaid toerag.

    But pretty much every senior woman I have ever encountered, plenty of them older than me, did the opposite to me. If women care about their appearance, it's because they are often judged on their appearance - even in contexts where this should not matter and even when working with men who claim to be above such superficial issues.
    I will put my cards on the table - I am 43 and still single :)
    I am 36 shortly and still a merry bachelor.

    It used to be a 'gay bachelor' but that led to one or two embarrassing misunderstandings...
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,209

    In other good news Mrs BJO is now home. The heart attack from yesterday is now problems with the muscles round the heart that prese ted as a heart attack and not a real heart attack at al.

    Thank fook for that.

    Fantastic news delighted to hear! May she be back to normal (and wearing whatever damn shoes she pleases) as soon as possible.
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,977
    CD13 said:

    Can I ask a strange question why we're talking about attraction. Having been married for 43 years to the same woman, I didn't realise the fashion is now to shave your pubes. I saw a TV show briefly and it came as a total surprise. I had to check with my son who knows these things, and he confirmed it.

    Surely pubic hair is a turn on? I can only speak about women because men are ugly, smelly creatures at the best of times (but I'm sure gay men may have different views).

    Yes, I do realise I'm an old git.

    My ex-CO once had to perform emergency topiary on a Manila bar girl while she stood over the bin in his hotel room. Such was the thicket that faced the intrepid explorer.
  • Options
    kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 3,933
    Cyclefree said:

    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Cookie said:

    +1. I grew up in Denmark where women largely agreed with what you say, and found the whole rigmarole that they observed in France and Britain completely perplexing. The more political ones also found it repellent in terms of accepting a sexist role - "Why should women make a special effort to dress to please men when men don't do the same?".

    I've come to feel relaxed about it - if people want to make an effort to look good and feel happy in the results, why not? But I also think it's largely done for personal and peer satisfaction, in the same way as some men like to cultivate a finely-trimmed beard. The exception is hairstyle, which I think does make a major difference to how people look for both sexes and is worth taking time to consider what you want.
    Ah yes, hair.

    How many women dye their hair? And why?

    Well, ask yourself this: if you were dating, would you choose a woman who had silver hair - however gorgeous and well kept and well cut - and however lovely her face, however engaging her personality, blah blah?

    And be honest in your answers.

    Men may not look at make up or what women wear or even their shoes (though I am sceptical - or perhaps it is just the men I know) but they do look at women's hair. And silver hair - even if you went silver in your 30's - means "old" and no man (or very few of them) want old or older women.

    I will put my cards on the table. I have silver hair - gorgeous it is. But I am unique among my peers. And it - to some extent - helped in my job. Looking older and experienced and wise and like someone's mother and, if necessary, like a witch was very useful when interrogating some over-entitled overpaid toerag.

    But pretty much every senior woman I have ever encountered, plenty of them older than me, did the opposite to me. If women care about their appearance, it's because they are often judged on their appearance - even in contexts where this should not matter and even when working with men who claim to be above such superficial issues.
    On the other hand, a quick look at any hair loss forum will tell you the lengths (no pun intended) men are prepared to go to keep their locks. Minoxidil, propecia, even hair transplants at £1000s a pop.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,152

    In other good news Mrs BJO is now home. The heart attack from yesterday is now problems with the muscles round the heart that prese ted as a heart attack and not a real heart attack at al.

    Thank fook for that.

    I am so pleased for you both!
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,789
    CD13 said:

    Can I ask a strange question why we're talking about attraction. Having been married for 43 years to the same woman, I didn't realise the fashion is now to shave your pubes. I saw a TV show briefly and it came as a total surprise. I had to check with my son who knows these things, and he confirmed it.

    Surely pubic hair is a turn on? I can only speak about women because men are ugly, smelly creatures at the best of times (but I'm sure gay men may have different views).

    Yes, I do realise I'm an old git.

    Tattoos, breast enhancements, and shaven pubes are a real turn-off, for me.
  • Options
    CD13CD13 Posts: 6,351
    Mr Ace,

    Consider my mind boggled.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,108

    viewcode said:

    malcolmg said:

    I rarely use trains or any other public transport, if it cannot support itself then I say tough.

    Off the top of my head, I spend approx 8-10% of my waking life on them. I f*****g hate trains... :(

    I f***ing love trains, man!

    Apart from oddities running at weekends only (like Brigg, Reddish South, Okehampton etc.) I just need 12 journeys, all in Scotland, to complete the UK National Network!

    Ayr to Stranraer
    Falkirk to Perth to Inverness
    Croy to Alloa
    Cardenden Loop
    Leuchars to Dundee
    Ladybank to Perth
    Perth to Aberdeen
    Aberdeen to Inverness
    Craigendoran to Oban
    Crianlarich to Mallaig
    Inverness to Kyle
    Dingwall to Thurso and Wick

    Interesting to reflect I've done all of those, except the line from Aberdeen to Elgin.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,789

    In other good news Mrs BJO is now home. The heart attack from yesterday is now problems with the muscles round the heart that prese ted as a heart attack and not a real heart attack at al.

    Thank fook for that.

    Excellent news. You've been through the wars.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,108
    CD13 said:

    Mr Ace,

    Consider my mind boggled.

    At least he referred to topiary and not Yorkshire terriers.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,691
    People focus on the economic effect of Brexit and underestimate its debilitating effect on politics and diplomacy. Brexit is the exact opposite of taking control. It means abdicating any effective opinion on what we want. If in practice you always go along with what others have already decided, you stop discussing the issues because there is no point arguing about things you can't influence.
  • Options
    TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840

    In other good news Mrs BJO is now home. The heart attack from yesterday is now problems with the muscles round the heart that prese ted as a heart attack and not a real heart attack at al.

    Thank fook for that.

    Yay, happy days.
  • Options
    AmpfieldAndyAmpfieldAndy Posts: 1,445
    edited January 2019
    kyf_100 said:

    kyf_100 said:

    kyf_100 said:



    You do express it so well if in your somewhat colourful way. As a example I believe a season ticket Brighton to London is in the region of £5,000. So travelling 5 days a week it is less than £20 a day return

    Looks like really good value to me

    Except for the fact you'd need to earn about 8k a year more (assuming you are a higher rate taxpayer, which I imagine most people forking out 5k a year for a train ticket are). You're then paying an additonal six or seven quid on your Oyster to move around London for the day, plus the cost of getting to and from home assuming you're not living within walking distance. All for the privilege of a probably two to three hour journey each way door to door.

    I've known people on salaries of 50-70k who have commuted that distance at that cost and most of them have agreed it just isn't worth it. They usually move out of the city because they have young kids so those salaries don't go as far as you think.
    Commuting to work is not my idea of heaven but for £20 a day return to London it has to be good value
    I agree with you there, £20 is not a lot when taken as a single journey but trying to put myself in the position of a middle class earner who has moved out to Brighton or the like because they have kids and want to get on the property ladder, I can understand why they are hopping mad about every fare rise.

    I've said it before, but Corbynism is a very middle class rebellion. From the swathes of students protesting tuition fees to the twenty somethings who can't get on the property ladder (how socialist is that?) to middle class commuters demanding subsidised rail fares. Corbynism is of and for the middle classes.
    Get out of town. McDonnell wants to overthrow capitalism and free market economics. There is nothing remotely middle class about that.

    Corbynism is a fools paradise.
    Yes, but look at what his supporters want. They don't want the overthrow of the capitalist system, they want to be able to afford to buy a house, raise kids, and educate them properly. As I've said on here many times, it is an absolute travesty that these people who should be natural Conservative voters are now in thrall to the bearded svengali in red. And I do not mean Santa Claus.
    Sure they want the house, kids and education etc etc put they want someone else to pay for it. Soak the rich and tax the hell out of business figures pretty large in Corbynism which is why, inter alia, his unfunded promises on tuition fees and renationalisation were so popular.
  • Options
    ydoethur said:

    viewcode said:

    malcolmg said:

    I rarely use trains or any other public transport, if it cannot support itself then I say tough.

    Off the top of my head, I spend approx 8-10% of my waking life on them. I f*****g hate trains... :(

    I f***ing love trains, man!

    Apart from oddities running at weekends only (like Brigg, Reddish South, Okehampton etc.) I just need 12 journeys, all in Scotland, to complete the UK National Network!

    Ayr to Stranraer
    Falkirk to Perth to Inverness
    Croy to Alloa
    Cardenden Loop
    Leuchars to Dundee
    Ladybank to Perth
    Perth to Aberdeen
    Aberdeen to Inverness
    Craigendoran to Oban
    Crianlarich to Mallaig
    Inverness to Kyle
    Dingwall to Thurso and Wick

    Interesting to reflect I've done all of those, except the line from Aberdeen to Elgin.
    Aberdeen to Inverness goes through Elgin
This discussion has been closed.