I really have a very difficult decision at the next election. I had been assuming I'd be abstaining, but the more I think about the fact that my MP is Bernard Jenkin, the more I feel I need to vote against him. But I have huge difficulty voting for the nearest challenger party, Labour, while Jeremy Corbyn is leader of the opposition. I think I still abstain. Maybe I vote Lib Dem.
Hmm.
The same conundrum going on in millions of households I would imagine. Certainly in mine. (Though if I was in your constituency getting rid of Bernard Jenkin would override all other considerations).
The question isn't aimed at me, but Labour really did promise that referendum, I'd be sorely tempted to hold my nose on Corbyn and vote for them. If not or the pledge was woolly (options on table etc, anything with the word 'if' in) then I wouldn't.
And I'm someone who thought I lived in a safe seat till 2017 and now live in a marginal.
Well the Q was aimed at anybody who is both anti Corbyn and anti Brexit. It covers an awful lot of people which is why I find it fascinating.
So, right, you would lend Lab your vote. That is 2 of the 6 who have answered to say that, the other 4 would not. 33%. Small sample, I need quite a few more data points before I can conclude and publish in one of the nationals, but very very interesting.
Congratulations BTW on living in a marginal. My seat (Hampstead & Kilburn) has gone the other way. It used to be an incredibly tight 3 way marginal (almost the only one in the country) but it is now rock solid safe for the Reds.
I know. Thanks to May. The silly cow. I live here too. I enjoyed elections because candidates actually had to do some work. Now they can ignore us again.
But in Cumbria, we live in a marginal. So I shall be able to annoy the local Tory MP there instead.....
I really have a very difficult decision at the next election. I had been assuming I'd be abstaining, but the more I think about the fact that my MP is Bernard Jenkin, the more I feel I need to vote against him. But I have huge difficulty voting for the nearest challenger party, Labour, while Jeremy Corbyn is leader of the opposition. I think I still abstain. Maybe I vote Lib Dem.
Hmm.
Yes this is the "Foremain Dilemma" (or the TOPPING one, for that matter).
The short answer is that one must vote and hence it comes down to the party most likely to do least harm. There is no way on the planet that anyone sane could think that a Bernard Jenkin's-populated Conservative Party would not do immense damage to the UK.
However. On the other side is Jeremy Corbyn.
Hence for me, of the choices, available, the party which is not lead by Jeremy Corbyn will always be better than a party lead by Jeremy Corbyn.
It is difficult to deny your logic. The problem in said dilemma is; a Corbyn Government, massively damaging though it would be, might well be rendered less damaging by his immense stupidity, and ultimately he and his government could be voted out. Reversing the damaging effects of Brexit would be next to impossible for another 25 years.
Stupid people can cause a lot of damage. Foolish to think that his stupidity (I think he is cunning - even if he is not academically intelligent) will render his government less damaging than it might otherwise be. And he has smart people around him.
It is an interesting irony if I am being foolish over his stupidity, and you could be right. It doesn't help with the dilemma though!
Sorry wrong link and can't edit. That's the border with Serbia, this is the EU's border fence with its "customs union" partner Turkey. Complete with barbwire.
I've heard a few suggest they would go for the soft Brexit with referendum to confirm option, it's that or just go for soft Brexit. Tough to call, maybe the one with a referendum, I couldn't call it really but I lean that way.
Although there are a fair few in Labour against it, if it is the manifesto I imagine most would just accept it rather than leave.
I think I saw something from OJ suggesting that renegotiate and refer(endum) should be the position.
It's said by some that he is close to the leadership but I am rather skeptical about that.
79% of people in Ireland say the the government should hold out for the backstop even if it leads to no deal.
Almost as if the previously colonised have little sympathy for their previous oppressor; shock indeed.
The UK (although mostly England) needs to realise that this is what leaving the EU will mean. India will tell us what deals they want and we will take them. Greece will ask for the Elgin Marbles back and will have to answer the hard questions. Hundreds of years of extracting wealth from countries all around the world when we were strong will come back to bite us in the arse.
Even if the letter to Juncker was staged, it said something important. For once in modern history the UK have to listen to the Irish and do what they want, not the other way around. Who else is gonna join that line? Spain, Argentina, etc.
What about people like me? If the Cons were lead by an ERG-o-loon and you lot were lead by someone unrelated by politics to TheJezziah, then I would seriously consider voting Lab. Now of course, what I am actually doing is hoping Lab will become less like Lab and more like the Cons, in a Blair, centre-ground-y kind of way and I perfectly understand if you and JC's supporters reject that.
But as we have seen with the way that JC treats the membership (shibboleth when it comes to leader, ignorable irritant when it comes to EURef2) it's a trait in JC that sets this apart from normal Lab vs Cons rivalry.
It is a trade off and whilst it is debatable I think there are more of the 'me's' voting Labour currently who wouldn't vote centrist than there are 'Toppings' currently voting Tory who would switch. Obviously less are needed but even then the situation is so partisan and the Conservative vote so loyal that even ignoring my own feelings I don't think it works electorally for Labour.
The membership were polled as supporting the current Labour policy most recent poll I saw (which asked that question) asking people if they are remainers or would like a second referendum is not the same as asking them if they are distraught and if Corbyn is going against their wishes.
There are plenty of members who disagree but the ones claiming betrayal or feel Corbyn is going against their wishes are not a majority.
79% of people in Ireland say the the government should hold out for the backstop even if it leads to no deal.
Almost as if the previously colonised have little sympathy for their previous oppressor; shock indeed.
The UK (although mostly England) needs to realise that this is what leaving the EU will mean. India will tell us what deals they want and we will take them. Greece will ask for the Elgin Marbles back and will have to answer the hard questions. Hundreds of years of extracting wealth from countries all around the world when we were strong will come back to bite us in the arse.
Even if the letter to Juncker was staged, it said something important. For once in modern history the UK have to listen to the Irish and do what they want, not the other way around. Who else is gonna join that line? Spain, Argentina, etc.
Yes, affection for the days of Empire is pretty rare outside these isles. Even though in large part the end of Empire was peaceful, there are still those who have long memories of how they were exploited.
Yes this is the "Foremain Dilemma" (or the TOPPING one, for that matter).
The short answer is that one must vote and hence it comes down to the party most likely to do least harm. There is no way on the planet that anyone sane could think that a Bernard Jenkin's-populated Conservative Party would not do immense damage to the UK.
However. On the other side is Jeremy Corbyn.
Hence for me, of the choices, available, the party which is not lead by Jeremy Corbyn will always be better than a party lead by Jeremy Corbyn.
But Corbyn is for Christmas, Brexit is forever.
As an ex-City type you should be aware of the importance of the early years in any DCF analysis.
I'm not convinced that heavily discounting quality of life in one's retirement years is necessarily the best way to determine voting strategies in the here and now.
So this is interesting. It looks like there was too much wind for the Irish grid last night and they had to stop a large number of the turbines from generating electricity. This provides an opportunity for someone to store that energy and sell it back later. These opportunities are only going to grow as more wind is added to the grid - and then we'll have electricity from the wind even when the wind isn't blowing. http://smartgriddashboard.eirgrid.com/#all/wind
If that’s more than a single freak weather event, they should be encouraging industrial users to install energy storage systems to take the energy cheaper when there’s over-supply.
Tesla set up 100MW system in Australia to do this, based on their car battery technology, as the grid was suffering from brownouts at peak demand.
What about people like me? If the Cons were lead by an ERG-o-loon and you lot were lead by someone unrelated by politics to TheJezziah, then I would seriously consider voting Lab. Now of course, what I am actually doing is hoping Lab will become less like Lab and more like the Cons, in a Blair, centre-ground-y kind of way and I perfectly understand if you and JC's supporters reject that.
But as we have seen with the way that JC treats the membership (shibboleth when it comes to leader, ignorable irritant when it comes to EURef2) it's a trait in JC that sets this apart from normal Lab vs Cons rivalry.
It is a trade off and whilst it is debatable I think there are more of the 'me's' voting Labour currently who wouldn't vote centrist than there are 'Toppings' currently voting Tory who would switch. Obviously less are needed but even then the situation is so partisan and the Conservative vote so loyal that even ignoring my own feelings I don't think it works electorally for Labour.
The membership were polled as supporting the current Labour policy most recent poll I saw (which asked that question) asking people if they are remainers or would like a second referendum is not the same as asking them if they are distraught and if Corbyn is going against their wishes.
There are plenty of members who disagree but the ones claiming betrayal or feel Corbyn is going against their wishes are not a majority.
Did you not vote Labour under Blair, Brown or Miliband? Or support them under Smith or Kinnoch if you are old enough? All of these are clearly centrist compared to Corbyn.
I really have a very difficult decision at the next election. I had been assuming I'd be abstaining, but the more I think about the fact that my MP is Bernard Jenkin, the more I feel I need to vote against him. But I have huge difficulty voting for the nearest challenger party, Labour, while Jeremy Corbyn is leader of the opposition. I think I still abstain. Maybe I vote Lib Dem.
Hmm.
What you need is an erudite local candidate - possibly one with a passing resemblance to popular billionaire Jeff Bezos - who can unite the opposition to the incumbent.
I have a feeling that if I weee to stand one or two things I’ve said in the past on pb might be quoted out of context against me. Crazy, I know.
I've heard a few suggest they would go for the soft Brexit with referendum to confirm option, it's that or just go for soft Brexit. Tough to call, maybe the one with a referendum, I couldn't call it really but I lean that way.
Although there are a fair few in Labour against it, if it is the manifesto I imagine most would just accept it rather than leave.
I think I saw something from OJ suggesting that renegotiate and refer(endum) should be the position.
It's said by some that he is close to the leadership but I am rather skeptical about that.
I think Nick on here made a similar suggestion, my guess was it just seems like a plausible route to go that could work out well rather than leadership directed. I think time could force Labour down this route with a valid claim that they tried to make Brexit work.
I really have a very difficult decision at the next election. I had been assuming I'd be abstaining, but the more I think about the fact that my MP is Bernard Jenkin, the more I feel I need to vote against him. But I have huge difficulty voting for the nearest challenger party, Labour, while Jeremy Corbyn is leader of the opposition. I think I still abstain. Maybe I vote Lib Dem.
Hmm.
What you need is an erudite local candidate - possibly one with a passing resemblance to popular billionaire Jeff Bezos - who can unite the opposition to the incumbent.
I have a feeling that if I weee to stand one or two things I’ve said in the past on pb might be quoted out of context against me. Crazy, I know.
You'll be okay, the brexiteers still have PTSD from Tusk.
I've heard a few suggest they would go for the soft Brexit with referendum to confirm option, it's that or just go for soft Brexit. Tough to call, maybe the one with a referendum, I couldn't call it really but I lean that way.
Although there are a fair few in Labour against it, if it is the manifesto I imagine most would just accept it rather than leave.
I think I saw something from OJ suggesting that renegotiate and refer(endum) should be the position.
It's said by some that he is close to the leadership but I am rather skeptical about that.
On voting... hmm - I don't think I'll be able to tick the Labour box, but my MP should get back in - and that'll be fair enough. His biggest problem might be potential deselection if the momentum loons get their way
What about people like me? If the Cons were lead by an ERG-o-loon and you lot were lead by someone unrelated by politics to TheJezziah, then I would seriously consider voting Lab. Now of course, what I am actually doing is hoping Lab will become less like Lab and more like the Cons, in a Blair, centre-ground-y kind of way and I perfectly understand if you and JC's supporters reject that.
But as we have seen with the way that JC treats the membership (shibboleth when it comes to leader, ignorable irritant when it comes to EURef2) it's a trait in JC that sets this apart from normal Lab vs Cons rivalry.
It is a trade off and whilst it is debatable I think there are more of the 'me's' voting Labour currently who wouldn't vote centrist than there are 'Toppings' currently voting Tory who would switch. Obviously less are needed but even then the situation is so partisan and the Conservative vote so loyal that even ignoring my own feelings I don't think it works electorally for Labour.
The membership were polled as supporting the current Labour policy most recent poll I saw (which asked that question) asking people if they are remainers or would like a second referendum is not the same as asking them if they are distraught and if Corbyn is going against their wishes.
There are plenty of members who disagree but the ones claiming betrayal or feel Corbyn is going against their wishes are not a majority.
What is the current Labour policy on it, btw?
Here's a poll which seems to say that members want a second referendum.
Guido’s been doing some more digging around Liverpool Labour members’ Facebook accounts.
“It now emerges that the local Labour member who proposed one of the (two) no confidence motions, Kenneth Campbell, goes on regular rants about “traitorous Blairites” on Facebook, saying it is “about time [Berger] was exposed for the disruptive Zionist she is” and even claiming that Israel supports ISIS. In another rant he menacingly said that Laura Kuenssberg’s days are “nearing there [sic] end”:
This story isn’t going away, and John McDonnell is again pouring petrol on the fire.
Seems fair enough, could argue we tried our best if we went down that route. I think I'd favour Norway Plus but if no agreement at all then a referendum is better than no deal.
Tactically quite smart as well. If Brexit is done and dusted by the next election Labour under Corbyn are likely to lose heavily. If they can be seen as the only party to save the country from a disasterous Brexit by standing for a second vote they might be rewarded with a general election which with that as their USP they could win..
79% of people in Ireland say the the government should hold out for the backstop even if it leads to no deal.
Almost as if the previously colonised have little sympathy for their previous oppressor; shock indeed.
The UK (although mostly England) needs to realise that this is what leaving the EU will mean. India will tell us what deals they want and we will take them. Greece will ask for the Elgin Marbles back and will have to answer the hard questions. Hundreds of years of extracting wealth from countries all around the world when we were strong will come back to bite us in the arse.
Even if the letter to Juncker was staged, it said something important. For once in modern history the UK have to listen to the Irish and do what they want, not the other way around. Who else is gonna join that line? Spain, Argentina, etc.
Yes, affection for the days of Empire is pretty rare outside these isles. Even though in large part the end of Empire was peaceful, there are still those who have long memories of how they were exploited.
In large part peaceful? How are you reckoning that? India, Ireland, Zimbabwe, Kenya and Malaya stack up on the contrary side from my rudimentary knowledge.
79% of people in Ireland say the the government should hold out for the backstop even if it leads to no deal.
Almost as if the previously colonised have little sympathy for their previous oppressor; shock indeed.
The UK (although mostly England) needs to realise that this is what leaving the EU will mean. India will tell us what deals they want and we will take them. Greece will ask for the Elgin Marbles back and will have to answer the hard questions. Hundreds of years of extracting wealth from countries all around the world when we were strong will come back to bite us in the arse.
Even if the letter to Juncker was staged, it said something important. For once in modern history the UK have to listen to the Irish and do what they want, not the other way around. Who else is gonna join that line? Spain, Argentina, etc.
Yes, affection for the days of Empire is pretty rare outside these isles. Even though in large part the end of Empire was peaceful, there are still those who have long memories of how they were exploited.
True. But there is also a long memory for the positive things it brought.
Neil McGregor's programme "As others see us" on BBC iPlayer is well worth listening to in this regard. He goes to Germany, Nigeria, Canada, Egypt and India. There is a surprising amount of affection and regard for Britain and what it stands (stood?) for, surprise at Brexit and sadness at its current confusion. But what surprised me was the extent to which Britain's participation in the second Iraq war damaged its reputation and was still seen as a defining event in the view of Britain, even now, 15 years later.
So this is interesting. It looks like there was too much wind for the Irish grid last night and they had to stop a large number of the turbines from generating electricity. This provides an opportunity for someone to store that energy and sell it back later. These opportunities are only going to grow as more wind is added to the grid - and then we'll have electricity from the wind even when the wind isn't blowing. http://smartgriddashboard.eirgrid.com/#all/wind
If that’s more than a single freak weather event, they should be encouraging industrial users to install energy storage systems to take the energy cheaper when there’s over-supply.
Tesla set up 100MW system in Australia to do this, based on their car battery technology, as the grid was suffering from brownouts at peak demand.
It's due to storm Erik today, but as more wind is added to the grid it will happen more often.
I really have a very difficult decision at the next election. I had been assuming I'd be abstaining, but the more I think about the fact that my MP is Bernard Jenkin, the more I feel I need to vote against him. But I have huge difficulty voting for the nearest challenger party, Labour, while Jeremy Corbyn is leader of the opposition. I think I still abstain. Maybe I vote Lib Dem.
Hmm.
What you need is an erudite local candidate - possibly one with a passing resemblance to popular billionaire Jeff Bezos - who can unite the opposition to the incumbent.
I have a feeling that if I weee to stand one or two things I’ve said in the past on pb might be quoted out of context against me. Crazy, I know.
You could get another PBer to stand instead, someone without a worry in the world about his past. SeanT perhaps?
I really have a very difficult decision at the next election. I had been assuming I'd be abstaining, but the more I think about the fact that my MP is Bernard Jenkin, the more I feel I need to vote against him. But I have huge difficulty voting for the nearest challenger party, Labour, while Jeremy Corbyn is leader of the opposition. I think I still abstain. Maybe I vote Lib Dem.
Hmm.
What you need is an erudite local candidate - possibly one with a passing resemblance to popular billionaire Jeff Bezos - who can unite the opposition to the incumbent.
I have a feeling that if I weee to stand one or two things I’ve said in the past on pb might be quoted out of context against me. Crazy, I know.
Pah - that shouldn't be a problem. Just deny you ever said them. Or that they were out of context. It seems to work for most politicians these days.
Honesty and consistency are barely even optional extras these days.
So this is interesting. It looks like there was too much wind for the Irish grid last night and they had to stop a large number of the turbines from generating electricity. This provides an opportunity for someone to store that energy and sell it back later. These opportunities are only going to grow as more wind is added to the grid - and then we'll have electricity from the wind even when the wind isn't blowing. http://smartgriddashboard.eirgrid.com/#all/wind
If that’s more than a single freak weather event, they should be encouraging industrial users to install energy storage systems to take the energy cheaper when there’s over-supply.
Tesla set up 100MW system in Australia to do this, based on their car battery technology, as the grid was suffering from brownouts at peak demand.
It's due to storm Erik today, but as more wind is added to the grid it will happen more often.
Indeed. Plenty of data centres in Ireland that would be up for cheaper electricity in the middle of the night.
79% of people in Ireland say the the government should hold out for the backstop even if it leads to no deal.
Almost as if the previously colonised have little sympathy for their previous oppressor; shock indeed.
The UK (although mostly England) needs to realise that this is what leaving the EU will mean. India will tell us what deals they want and we will take them. Greece will ask for the Elgin Marbles back and will have to answer the hard questions. Hundreds of years of extracting wealth from countries all around the world when we were strong will come back to bite us in the arse.
Even if the letter to Juncker was staged, it said something important. For once in modern history the UK have to listen to the Irish and do what they want, not the other way around. Who else is gonna join that line? Spain, Argentina, etc.
Yes, affection for the days of Empire is pretty rare outside these isles. Even though in large part the end of Empire was peaceful, there are still those who have long memories of how they were exploited.
In large part peaceful? How are you reckoning that? India, Ireland, Zimbabwe, Kenya and Malaya stack up on the contrary side from my rudimentary knowledge.
Zimbabwe was a problem years after UDI, Kenya and Malaya, along with Aden (and the 13 US Colonies) are exceptions, in general we vacated our Empire consensually and peacefully. Partition violence was brutal, but not directed at the British and occurred after we had decided to leave.
There was little on the scale of the French wars in Indochina or Algeria, or the Portuguese in Africa.
I really have a very difficult decision at the next election. I had been assuming I'd be abstaining, but the more I think about the fact that my MP is Bernard Jenkin, the more I feel I need to vote against him. But I have huge difficulty voting for the nearest challenger party, Labour, while Jeremy Corbyn is leader of the opposition. I think I still abstain. Maybe I vote Lib Dem.
Hmm.
One should never abstain, IMHO. People have fought for the right for you to vote. You should vote for whom you find the least repulsive.
. Voting should be made compulsory in my view - though a NOTA option should be made available to people.I intend to spoil my ballot paper next time
Where was all this heartbreak when Kate Hoey suffered a no confidence vote?
No confidence votes are not bullying, if people want a different representative then that is their decision.
If a party branch can't VoNC their representative for saying they might leave the party and set up a competitor to it, when can they? I understand this isn't in a vacuum, but if you're a Lab member predisposed to the idea that the antisemitism issue exists but not at the scale the media suggests, and you're generally annoyed by centrist Labour anyway, I can easily see why VoNCing her would happen. It looks bad, but also having the centralised party saying a local branch can't have an opinion on their MP is also bad.
Sorry wrong link and can't edit. That's the border with Serbia, this is the EU's border fence with its "customs union" partner Turkey. Complete with barbwire.
Iraq was a unambiguous military defeat (for the British) than Suez which was more of a geopolitical humbling. We were knee deep in civilian blood in both of them though.
I really have a very difficult decision at the next election. I had been assuming I'd be abstaining, but the more I think about the fact that my MP is Bernard Jenkin, the more I feel I need to vote against him. But I have huge difficulty voting for the nearest challenger party, Labour, while Jeremy Corbyn is leader of the opposition. I think I still abstain. Maybe I vote Lib Dem.
Hmm.
What you need is an erudite local candidate - possibly one with a passing resemblance to popular billionaire Jeff Bezos - who can unite the opposition to the incumbent.
I have a feeling that if I weee to stand one or two things I’ve said in the past on pb might be quoted out of context against me. Crazy, I know.
You could get another PBer to stand instead, someone without a worry in the world about his past. SeanT perhaps?
Local members have the absolute right to deselect their MP as their PPC if they so choose; that is their right.
If deselection is the only thing that will force the gutless centrists to stop briefing newspapers anonynmously and into actually doing something like quit the party, then so be it.
Guido’s been doing some more digging around Liverpool Labour members’ Facebook accounts.
“It now emerges that the local Labour member who proposed one of the (two) no confidence motions, Kenneth Campbell, goes on regular rants about “traitorous Blairites” on Facebook, saying it is “about time [Berger] was exposed for the disruptive Zionist she is” and even claiming that Israel supports ISIS. In another rant he menacingly said that Laura Kuenssberg’s days are “nearing there [sic] end”:
This story isn’t going away, and John McDonnell is again pouring petrol on the fire.
Iraq was a unambiguous military defeat (for the British) than Suez which was more of a geopolitical humbling. We were knee deep in civilian blood in both of them though.
True.
But I was thinking more of the effect on Britain's reputation and on its self-confidence.
Anyway, must be off. Have a girly lunch with an interesting political figure to get ready for.
He tried to continue The Loser's Vote shtick but he looked like a man who knows the games up to me...
What did you think of Portillo’s prediction that Brexit will dominate politics for decades and there’s no escape from it?
Probably right. Not sure it will be "Brexit" per se - Brexit is just a means to an end (leaving the EU) but rather the destination of the new course that we've chartered for ourselves.
Once we leave the EU there are several potential directions we can go in over the next few decades and that will certainly be the defining issue of this century in British politics.
What about people like me? If the Cons were lead by an ERG-o-loon and you lot were lead by someone unrelated by politics to TheJezziah, then I would seriously consider voting Lab. Now of course, what I am actually doing is hoping Lab will become less like Lab and more like the Cons, in a Blair, centre-ground-y kind of way and I perfectly understand if you and JC's supporters reject that.
But as we have seen with the way that JC treats the membership (shibboleth when it comes to leader, ignorable irritant when it comes to EURef2) it's a trait in JC that sets this apart from normal Lab vs Cons rivalry.
It is a trade off and whilst it is debatable I think there are more of the 'me's' voting Labour currently who wouldn't vote centrist than there are 'Toppings' currently voting Tory who would switch. Obviously less are needed but even then the situation is so partisan and the Conservative vote so loyal that even ignoring my own feelings I don't think it works electorally for Labour.
The membership were polled as supporting the current Labour policy most recent poll I saw (which asked that question) asking people if they are remainers or would like a second referendum is not the same as asking them if they are distraught and if Corbyn is going against their wishes.
There are plenty of members who disagree but the ones claiming betrayal or feel Corbyn is going against their wishes are not a majority.
What is the current Labour policy on it, btw?
Here's a poll which seems to say that members want a second referendum.
I'm sure you've heard it plenty of times, CU, close SM bla bla, prioritise getting a good deal but all options remain on the table. When asked the question (admittedly I can't find the poll that did) nothing has come out showing Labour members as opposed to Corbyn's Brexit policy, this could be with the assumption that is where Labour heads. The one that did showed (from memory) around half supporting, a third again and the rest don't know / unsure.
The other thing to point out is there hasn't been a motion through the party on Brexit he has ignored or gone against, polling isn't the same as the Labour members asking for something. What democracy in the party has he actually ignored?
We have a process for electing a leader, our democratic process for Brexit policy isn't based on polling on somewhat undefined ideas.
I wonder what former TV host Lauren Sanchez first found attractive in the bald billionaire, richest man in the world, Jeff Bezos?
Probably that he was married. Forbidden fruit, and all that.
or perhaps his overwhelming good looks
When I put my picture up on pb before Christmas several people said I look like Jeff Bezos. It's clearly his looks.
Ah, well perhaps in that case, perhaps I misjudged Lauren Sanchez's motivations.
For a women, it is not all about a man's look. His personality counts for a lot. Maybe he is charming,witty, attentive and makes her laugh?
True - but having lots of money and a nice bottom also helps.
Does that statement also apply to Donald Trump?
Not for me. I can only guess why Melania married him...
I’m not sure Melania quite expected the last three years of her life, I’m sure she was quite happy living the somewhat enjoyable life of a billionaire’s wife before he decided he wanted to be president.
Iraq was a unambiguous military defeat (for the British) than Suez which was more of a geopolitical humbling. We were knee deep in civilian blood in both of them though.
If you watch the film 'Vice' -a biography of Dick Cheney-they claim/imply he was personally responsible for the deaths of nearly a million people.
As I can't edit I'll also make this a separate comment isn't it completely hypocritical of those who want Corbyn gone as Labour leader to cite Labour members as a reason for something they want happening but then completely ignore that Labour members want Corbyn as leader?
I wonder what former TV host Lauren Sanchez first found attractive in the bald billionaire, richest man in the world, Jeff Bezos?
Probably that he was married. Forbidden fruit, and all that.
or perhaps his overwhelming good looks
When I put my picture up on pb before Christmas several people said I look like Jeff Bezos. It's clearly his looks.
Ah, well perhaps in that case, perhaps I misjudged Lauren Sanchez's motivations.
For a women, it is not all about a man's look. His personality counts for a lot. Maybe he is charming,witty, attentive and makes her laugh?
True - but having lots of money and a nice bottom also helps.
Does that statement also apply to Donald Trump?
Not for me. I can only guess why Melania married him...
I’m not sure Melania quite expected the last three years of her life, I’m sure she was quite happy living the somewhat enjoyable life of a billionaire’s wife before he decided he wanted to be president.
Bit the late Lady Wilson who thought she'd married an Oxford don.
I wonder what former TV host Lauren Sanchez first found attractive in the bald billionaire, richest man in the world, Jeff Bezos?
Probably that he was married. Forbidden fruit, and all that.
or perhaps his overwhelming good looks
When I put my picture up on pb before Christmas several people said I look like Jeff Bezos. It's clearly his looks.
Ah, well perhaps in that case, perhaps I misjudged Lauren Sanchez's motivations.
For a women, it is not all about a man's look. His personality counts for a lot. Maybe he is charming,witty, attentive and makes her laugh?
True - but having lots of money and a nice bottom also helps.
Does that statement also apply to Donald Trump?
Not for me. I can only guess why Melania married him...
I’m not sure Melania quite expected the last three years of her life, I’m sure she was quite happy living the somewhat enjoyable life of a billionaire’s wife before he decided he wanted to be president.
Bit LIKE......agree about the edit button......the late Lady Wilson who thought she'd married an Oxford don.
There have never been enough willing Labour converts on the basis of remain for Labour just to come out for it, the Conservatives needed to thoroughly fail at Brexit first to make that movement from Labour electorally possible without it being harmful.
From the yougov polling on voting reasons after the last election if both Tories and Labour lose voters who prioritised Brexit as the reason for their vote Tories lose out more.
Perhaps you are right. It could be that Labour's best route to power in the near term is for the Tories to somehow combine cock-up and conspiracy in the exact proportions needed for a No Deal crash out.
However, despite copious recent evidence to the contrary, I simply cannot see this happening. I think that she will either get the deal through eventually (with her own side falling into line plus just enough Labour rebels) or if not she will wish to go for a snap election.
And, on balance, I think it will be the former. Deal passes. Maybe with a tweak or two, maybe not.
I wonder what former TV host Lauren Sanchez first found attractive in the bald billionaire, richest man in the world, Jeff Bezos?
Probably that he was married. Forbidden fruit, and all that.
or perhaps his overwhelming good looks
When I put my picture up on pb before Christmas several people said I look like Jeff Bezos. It's clearly his looks.
Ah, well perhaps in that case, perhaps I misjudged Lauren Sanchez's motivations.
For a women, it is not all about a man's look. His personality counts for a lot. Maybe he is charming,witty, attentive and makes her laugh?
True - but having lots of money and a nice bottom also helps.
Does that statement also apply to Donald Trump?
Not for me. I can only guess why Melania married him...
I’m not sure Melania quite expected the last three years of her life, I’m sure she was quite happy living the somewhat enjoyable life of a billionaire’s wife before he decided he wanted to be president.
Bit LIKE......agree about the edit button......the late Lady Wilson who thought she'd married an Oxford don.
For some bizarre reason I kept reading the name in the first few posts as Lawrie Sanchez, the former Wimbledon Soccer player and later Manager of Fulham FC
Where was all this heartbreak when Kate Hoey suffered a no confidence vote?
No confidence votes are not bullying, if people want a different representative then that is their decision.
So trying to get rid of “the disruptive Zionist” is okay?
How’s about “the disruptive ni***r”, said of a black MP?
TBH what the Conservatives do with Anne Marie Morris is their business.
Can't we pretend this conversation is about Diane Abbott instead of Luciana Berger and then people can point out she just gets criticism because she is wrong and of course people should have the right to vote against her whilst of course saying the abuse against her is wrong.
I'm not going to get into the abusing Luciana like right wingers do with Abbott, she gets that enough of it already but there are plenty of reasons to want a different representative, if she doesn't want Labour to win the next election then she shouldn't be a Labour candidate.
As I can't edit I'll also make this a separate comment isn't it completely hypocritical of those who want Corbyn gone as Labour leader to cite Labour members as a reason for something they want happening but then completely ignore that Labour members want Corbyn as leader?
One might argue it's more hypocritical of the leadership to ignore their membership, and perhaps more importantly a large majority of this who voted Labour on such an issue.
As I can't edit I'll also make this a separate comment isn't it completely hypocritical of those who want Corbyn gone as Labour leader to cite Labour members as a reason for something they want happening but then completely ignore that Labour members want Corbyn as leader?
No of course I get that, just that Corbyn listens to "the membership" when it suits him and ignores him when it doesn't, as you have demonstrated. The members wanted him as leader, and, as you note, it was as a result of a formal vote so he became leader. The members also, however, want a second referendum (overwhelmingly so, according to the Graun's survey) but as this was no formal process or vote, he is allowed to ignore it.
That is the letter not the spirit of listening to the membership.
I know. Thanks to May. The silly cow. I live here too. I enjoyed elections because candidates actually had to do some work. Now they can ignore us again.
But in Cumbria, we live in a marginal. So I shall be able to annoy the local Tory MP there instead.....
Yes, great pity. There used to be a real sense of occasion and suspense about an election in H&K. Ah well. Still, I am Labour so mustn't grumble too much.
79% of people in Ireland say the the government should hold out for the backstop even if it leads to no deal.
Almost as if the previously colonised have little sympathy for their previous oppressor; shock indeed.
The UK (although mostly England) needs to realise that this is what leaving the EU will mean. India will tell us what deals they want and we will take them. Greece will ask for the Elgin Marbles back and will have to answer the hard questions. Hundreds of years of extracting wealth from countries all around the world when we were strong will come back to bite us in the arse.
Even if the letter to Juncker was staged, it said something important. For once in modern history the UK have to listen to the Irish and do what they want, not the other way around. Who else is gonna join that line? Spain, Argentina, etc.
They can huff and puff as they like. We don't have to accede to their complaints.
As I can't edit I'll also make this a separate comment isn't it completely hypocritical of those who want Corbyn gone as Labour leader to cite Labour members as a reason for something they want happening but then completely ignore that Labour members want Corbyn as leader?
Probably, a bit. In order to square the circle you need to realise that we can't understand why those members can't seem to figure out that the leadership they claim to want isn't actually doing what they want it to do.
As I can't edit I'll also make this a separate comment isn't it completely hypocritical of those who want Corbyn gone as Labour leader to cite Labour members as a reason for something they want happening but then completely ignore that Labour members want Corbyn as leader?
One might argue it's more hypocritical of the leadership to ignore their membership, and perhaps more importantly a large majority of this who voted Labour on such an issue.
On both issues what was voted on by the party membership has been followed. Corbyn became leader and the Brexit motion which mapped out a fairly vague route but one he has followed.
Opinion polls, especially the ones with push questions are not how Labour decides policy. But those who are anti Corbyn don't care about what was actually voted on or what the Labour members actually want, they would happily see Corbyn gone against members wishes. They care about what they want and use the cover of what the Labour members want.
I don't mind people playing politics but it is completely hypocritical to suggest it is for the members they argue.
79% of people in Ireland say the the government should hold out for the backstop even if it leads to no deal.
Almost as if the previously colonised have little sympathy for their previous oppressor; shock indeed.
The UK (although mostly England) needs to realise that this is what leaving the EU will mean. India will tell us what deals they want and we will take them. Greece will ask for the Elgin Marbles back and will have to answer the hard questions. Hundreds of years of extracting wealth from countries all around the world when we were strong will come back to bite us in the arse.
Even if the letter to Juncker was staged, it said something important. For once in modern history the UK have to listen to the Irish and do what they want, not the other way around. Who else is gonna join that line? Spain, Argentina, etc.
They can huff and puff as they like. We don't have to accede to their complaints.
Of course we don't but neither should we expect tolerance not to say compliance with our demands as we are about to put ourselves out of the nearest community of nations to hand and show no loyalty to our erstwhile co-members.
79% of people in Ireland say the the government should hold out for the backstop even if it leads to no deal.
Almost as if the previously colonised have little sympathy for their previous oppressor; shock indeed.
The UK (although mostly England) needs to realise that this is what leaving the EU will mean. India will tell us what deals they want and we will take them. Greece will ask for the Elgin Marbles back and will have to answer the hard questions. Hundreds of years of extracting wealth from countries all around the world when we were strong will come back to bite us in the arse.
Even if the letter to Juncker was staged, it said something important. For once in modern history the UK have to listen to the Irish and do what they want, not the other way around. Who else is gonna join that line? Spain, Argentina, etc.
They can huff and puff as they like. We don't have to accede to their complaints.
We don't have to accede to their just complaints. It's just that when we want a trade deal........
79% of people in Ireland say the the government should hold out for the backstop even if it leads to no deal.
Almost as if the previously colonised have little sympathy for their previous oppressor; shock indeed.
The UK (although mostly England) needs to realise that this is what leaving the EU will mean. India will tell us what deals they want and we will take them. Greece will ask for the Elgin Marbles back and will have to answer the hard questions. Hundreds of years of extracting wealth from countries all around the world when we were strong will come back to bite us in the arse.
Even if the letter to Juncker was staged, it said something important. For once in modern history the UK have to listen to the Irish and do what they want, not the other way around. Who else is gonna join that line? Spain, Argentina, etc.
They can huff and puff as they like. We don't have to accede to their complaints.
I'm enjoying the characterisation of the Elgin Marbles as "wealth".
I really have a very difficult decision at the next election. I had been assuming I'd be abstaining, but the more I think about the fact that my MP is Bernard Jenkin, the more I feel I need to vote against him. But I have huge difficulty voting for the nearest challenger party, Labour, while Jeremy Corbyn is leader of the opposition. I think I still abstain. Maybe I vote Lib Dem.
Hmm.
What you need is an erudite local candidate - possibly one with a passing resemblance to popular billionaire Jeff Bezos - who can unite the opposition to the incumbent.
I have a feeling that if I weee to stand one or two things I’ve said in the past on pb might be quoted out of context against me. Crazy, I know.
The late Plato sent clippings of what I said on PB to the Conservatives to use against me, which they had a feeble attempt at doing. I never met a Broxtowe voter who mentioned it, so as far as I know it met a collective meh. It's the upside of voter lack of interest in the detail of politics - you have to say something really outrageous for people to pay attention, and you have to keep doing it (like Ken Livingstone going on and on about Hitler) or they just forget.
As I can't edit I'll also make this a separate comment isn't it completely hypocritical of those who want Corbyn gone as Labour leader to cite Labour members as a reason for something they want happening but then completely ignore that Labour members want Corbyn as leader?
No of course I get that, just that Corbyn listens to "the membership" when it suits him and ignores him when it doesn't, as you have demonstrated. The members wanted him as leader, and, as you note, it was as a result of a formal vote so he became leader. The members also, however, want a second referendum (overwhelmingly so, according to the Graun's survey) but as this was no formal process or vote, he is allowed to ignore it.
That is the letter not the spirit of listening to the membership.
The membership want a Corbyn government more, they had the option of Smith with a 2nd ref and turned him down. There have been polls showing Labour members want this or that but never that they are against Labours current Brexit policy or what Corbyn is doing (with Brexit)
You can claim there is a contradiction in their views (in which case Corbyn can't deliver it) confusion or something else but there has not been the membership clearly telling him to change tack. My take (for some) is the membership supports our current strategy and many want it to end in a second referendum.
Thinking the members should chose the party leader doesn't automatically translate to every policy having to have a majority in polling of members, even greater democracy in the party doesn't imply that.
McD saying the no confidence vote is about Luciana wavering reportedly about staying in Labour ..... I'm trying to work out what possibly might be making her doubt (allegedly) her wanting to remain in the current Labour party?
McD saying the no confidence vote is about Luciana wavering reportedly about staying in Labour ..... I'm trying to work out what possibly might be making her doubt (allegedly) her wanting to remain in the current Labour party?
As I can't edit I'll also make this a separate comment isn't it completely hypocritical of those who want Corbyn gone as Labour leader to cite Labour members as a reason for something they want happening but then completely ignore that Labour members want Corbyn as leader?
Probably, a bit. In order to square the circle you need to realise that we can't understand why those members can't seem to figure out that the leadership they claim to want isn't actually doing what they want it to do.
Do you only ever support people who you agree with on everything?
I can be quite demanding but for me if you get a high percentage of what you want you take it. Also many remainers who would vote remain again would also accept a softer Brexit rather than a harder one.
As I can't edit I'll also make this a separate comment isn't it completely hypocritical of those who want Corbyn gone as Labour leader to cite Labour members as a reason for something they want happening but then completely ignore that Labour members want Corbyn as leader?
No of course I get that, just that Corbyn listens to "the membership" when it suits him and ignores him when it doesn't, as you have demonstrated. The members wanted him as leader, and, as you note, it was as a result of a formal vote so he became leader. The members also, however, want a second referendum (overwhelmingly so, according to the Graun's survey) but as this was no formal process or vote, he is allowed to ignore it.
That is the letter not the spirit of listening to the membership.
The membership want a Corbyn government more, they had the option of Smith with a 2nd ref and turned him down. There have been polls showing Labour members want this or that but never that they are against Labours current Brexit policy or what Corbyn is doing (with Brexit)
You can claim there is a contradiction in their views (in which case Corbyn can't deliver it) confusion or something else but there has not been the membership clearly telling him to change tack. My take (for some) is the membership supports our current strategy and many want it to end in a second referendum.
Thinking the members should chose the party leader doesn't automatically translate to every policy having to have a majority in polling of members, even greater democracy in the party doesn't imply that.
No of course not I said the spirit not the letter - it gives substance to the charge that rather than being a member-led organisation, the membership is listened to when it suits the leadership. Like every other party, in other words.
The late Plato sent clippings of what I said on PB to the Conservatives to use against me, which they had a feeble attempt at doing. I never met a Broxtowe voter who mentioned it, so as far as I know it met a collective meh. It's the upside of voter lack of interest in the detail of politics - you have to say something really outrageous for people to pay attention, and you have to keep doing it (like Ken Livingstone going on and on about Hitler) or they just forget.
I find the Dan Kawczynski example illuminating. He told what he knew was a deliberate lie, and when he got exposed on all sides, rather than apologising and withdrawing, he doubled down on his lie, and played the victim card, and there were zero consequences for either him or his enablers.
Nobody really cares what you say, as long as you present the correct tribal identity, you will be appluded for it.
A solid set of LD results overnight but we'll see if it marks the start of a trend or an outlier. The May local elections will be interesting, first to see how many candidates the Party can put up and second what kind of impact they will have in the 5,000 or more seats being defended by the Conservatives.
Another day nearer 29/3 and I'm back to a state of moderate confusion. The Corbyn Plan (sounds good?), parts of which I don't really understand but which seems to basically mean a permanent CU with the EU, wouldn't be far off a majority in the Commons with some Conservative dissenters.
I have to say I'm puzzled by Owen Smith's comments - Tusk has a valid point in that the pro-REMAIN or pro-referendum side has been spectacularly ineffective. The problem is they come up against the notion the referendum result, however deleterious it may turn out to be, has to be respected and enacted. That's the accountability of democracy - it's our decision, it may not be the right decision, indeed it might be the wrong decision but it was the decision.
I now see rumours of the "Singapore Budget" heaving into view with reports the Government "will slash taxes to save the economy" in the event of a No Deal. Perhaps though I'm far from convinced large scale tax cuts will save anything especially if they are complimented by further tightening of public spending.
I imagine the "plan" is big tax cuts followed by an election while we bask in our new "wealth" - well, we'll see. It's a plan I suppose.
The late Plato sent clippings of what I said on PB to the Conservatives to use against me, which they had a feeble attempt at doing. I never met a Broxtowe voter who mentioned it, so as far as I know it met a collective meh. It's the upside of voter lack of interest in the detail of politics - you have to say something really outrageous for people to pay attention, and you have to keep doing it (like Ken Livingstone going on and on about Hitler) or they just forget.
I find the Dan Kawczynski example illuminating. He told what he knew was a deliberate lie, and when he got exposed on all sides, rather than apologising and withdrawing, he doubled down on his lie, and played the victim card, and there were zero consequences for either him or his enablers.
Nobody really cares what you say, as long as you present the correct tribal identity, you will be appluded for it.
As I can't edit I'll also make this a separate comment isn't it completely hypocritical of those who want Corbyn gone as Labour leader to cite Labour members as a reason for something they want happening but then completely ignore that Labour members want Corbyn as leader?
Probably, a bit. In order to square the circle you need to realise that we can't understand why those members can't seem to figure out that the leadership they claim to want isn't actually doing what they want it to do.
Do you only ever support people who you agree with on everything?
I can be quite demanding but for me if you get a high percentage of what you want you take it. Also many remainers who would vote remain again would also accept a softer Brexit rather than a harder one.
a) the whole point of Corbyn is that he advocates member-led policy setting b) Brexit is, for many of Corbyn's most dedicated supporters, the single most important political issue of the day c) it's not that he's out of line with the membership; it's that (large sections of) the membership still believes he agrees with them, and will ultimately pivot to supporting a referendum, despite all the evidence against this
I think this should clear everything up to everyone's satisfaction. Let's hope that there are some helpful bottoms for him to grab onto if he feels a bit faint when he's back at work on Monday.
a) the whole point of Corbyn is that he advocates member-led policy setting b) Brexit is, for many of Corbyn's most dedicated supporters, the single most important political issue of the day c) it's not that he's out of line with the membership; it's that (large sections of) the membership still believes he agrees with them, and will ultimately pivot to supporting a referendum, despite all the evidence against this
TBH, if conference wanted a 2nd ref, they should have voted for a policy that included one. Corbyn has been following the policy adopted by conference. If conference didn't *like* that policy, then why the hell did they vote for it?
Comments
Trouble is, often as not, she promptly laughs me out of it.
But in Cumbria, we live in a marginal. So I shall be able to annoy the local Tory MP there instead.....
https://twitter.com/gabrielmilland/status/1093799958258610177
It's said by some that he is close to the leadership but I am rather skeptical about that.
The UK (although mostly England) needs to realise that this is what leaving the EU will mean. India will tell us what deals they want and we will take them. Greece will ask for the Elgin Marbles back and will have to answer the hard questions. Hundreds of years of extracting wealth from countries all around the world when we were strong will come back to bite us in the arse.
Even if the letter to Juncker was staged, it said something important. For once in modern history the UK have to listen to the Irish and do what they want, not the other way around. Who else is gonna join that line? Spain, Argentina, etc.
The membership were polled as supporting the current Labour policy most recent poll I saw (which asked that question) asking people if they are remainers or would like a second referendum is not the same as asking them if they are distraught and if Corbyn is going against their wishes.
There are plenty of members who disagree but the ones claiming betrayal or feel Corbyn is going against their wishes are not a majority.
Tesla set up 100MW system in Australia to do this, based on their car battery technology, as the grid was suffering from brownouts at peak demand.
To be perfectly honest, I have not - and would rather not - think about Donald Trump's bottom - or any other part of his anatomy.
His biggest problem might be potential deselection if the momentum loons get their way
Here's a poll which seems to say that members want a second referendum.
https://theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/02/most-labour-members-believe-corbyn-should-back-second-brexit-vote
“It now emerges that the local Labour member who proposed one of the (two) no confidence motions, Kenneth Campbell, goes on regular rants about “traitorous Blairites” on Facebook, saying it is “about time [Berger] was exposed for the disruptive Zionist she is” and even claiming that Israel supports ISIS. In another rant he menacingly said that Laura Kuenssberg’s days are “nearing there [sic] end”:
This story isn’t going away, and John McDonnell is again pouring petrol on the fire.
India, Ireland, Zimbabwe, Kenya and Malaya stack up on the contrary side from my rudimentary knowledge.
Neil McGregor's programme "As others see us" on BBC iPlayer is well worth listening to in this regard. He goes to Germany, Nigeria, Canada, Egypt and India. There is a surprising amount of affection and regard for Britain and what it stands (stood?) for, surprise at Brexit and sadness at its current confusion. But what surprised me was the extent to which Britain's participation in the second Iraq war damaged its reputation and was still seen as a defining event in the view of Britain, even now, 15 years later.
Iraq 2003 = Suez 1956? Discuss.
(PS I may nab this for a thread header.....)
No confidence votes are not bullying, if people want a different representative then that is their decision.
Pah - that shouldn't be a problem. Just deny you ever said them. Or that they were out of context. It seems to work for most politicians these days.
Honesty and consistency are barely even optional extras these days.
He tried to continue The Loser's Vote shtick but he looked like a man who knows the games up to me...
There was little on the scale of the French wars in Indochina or Algeria, or the Portuguese in Africa.
How’s about “the disruptive ni***r”, said of a black MP?
Let the good times roll!
If deselection is the only thing that will force the gutless centrists to stop briefing newspapers anonynmously and into actually doing something like quit the party, then so be it.
But I was thinking more of the effect on Britain's reputation and on its self-confidence.
Anyway, must be off. Have a girly lunch with an interesting political figure to get ready for.
TTFN.
Once we leave the EU there are several potential directions we can go in over the next few decades and that will certainly be the defining issue of this century in British politics.
The other thing to point out is there hasn't been a motion through the party on Brexit he has ignored or gone against, polling isn't the same as the Labour members asking for something. What democracy in the party has he actually ignored?
We have a process for electing a leader, our democratic process for Brexit policy isn't based on polling on somewhat undefined ideas.
https://twitter.com/AngelaRayner/status/1093800015322071040
However, despite copious recent evidence to the contrary, I simply cannot see this happening. I think that she will either get the deal through eventually (with her own side falling into line plus just enough Labour rebels) or if not she will wish to go for a snap election.
And, on balance, I think it will be the former. Deal passes. Maybe with a tweak or two, maybe not.
Can't we pretend this conversation is about Diane Abbott instead of Luciana Berger and then people can point out she just gets criticism because she is wrong and of course people should have the right to vote against her whilst of course saying the abuse against her is wrong.
I'm not going to get into the abusing Luciana like right wingers do with Abbott, she gets that enough of it already but there are plenty of reasons to want a different representative, if she doesn't want Labour to win the next election then she shouldn't be a Labour candidate.
That is the letter not the spirit of listening to the membership.
Opinion polls, especially the ones with push questions are not how Labour decides policy. But those who are anti Corbyn don't care about what was actually voted on or what the Labour members actually want, they would happily see Corbyn gone against members wishes. They care about what they want and use the cover of what the Labour members want.
I don't mind people playing politics but it is completely hypocritical to suggest it is for the members they argue.
The Juice is centre-right. I'd place him very close, politically, to Dominic Raab.
Edit: but you basically quote yourself and then edit out the code instructions "<....>"
Finished it for you.
Looking beyond 3 to 5 years it all starts to get rather misty.
You can claim there is a contradiction in their views (in which case Corbyn can't deliver it) confusion or something else but there has not been the membership clearly telling him to change tack. My take (for some) is the membership supports our current strategy and many want it to end in a second referendum.
Thinking the members should chose the party leader doesn't automatically translate to every policy having to have a majority in polling of members, even greater democracy in the party doesn't imply that.
https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1093820374339518465
I'm a walking talking cliche of a North London left liberal.
But not always. I have my moments.
I can be quite demanding but for me if you get a high percentage of what you want you take it. Also many remainers who would vote remain again would also accept a softer Brexit rather than a harder one.
https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/evening-standard-comment-why-mr-corbyn-s-poll-ratings-are-so-dismal-best-of-the-best-schools-horse-a4061431.html
Nobody really cares what you say, as long as you present the correct tribal identity, you will be appluded for it.
A solid set of LD results overnight but we'll see if it marks the start of a trend or an outlier. The May local elections will be interesting, first to see how many candidates the Party can put up and second what kind of impact they will have in the 5,000 or more seats being defended by the Conservatives.
Another day nearer 29/3 and I'm back to a state of moderate confusion. The Corbyn Plan (sounds good?), parts of which I don't really understand but which seems to basically mean a permanent CU with the EU, wouldn't be far off a majority in the Commons with some Conservative dissenters.
I have to say I'm puzzled by Owen Smith's comments - Tusk has a valid point in that the pro-REMAIN or pro-referendum side has been spectacularly ineffective. The problem is they come up against the notion the referendum result, however deleterious it may turn out to be, has to be respected and enacted. That's the accountability of democracy - it's our decision, it may not be the right decision, indeed it might be the wrong decision but it was the decision.
I now see rumours of the "Singapore Budget" heaving into view with reports the Government "will slash taxes to save the economy" in the event of a No Deal. Perhaps though I'm far from convinced large scale tax cuts will save anything especially if they are complimented by further tightening of public spending.
I imagine the "plan" is big tax cuts followed by an election while we bask in our new "wealth" - well, we'll see. It's a plan I suppose.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/jeremy-corbyns-leadership-ratings-crash-to-worst-level-yet-over-brexit-a4061246.html
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1093532422866636800?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed&ref_url=http://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/1225/ipsos-mori?page=26
b) Brexit is, for many of Corbyn's most dedicated supporters, the single most important political issue of the day
c) it's not that he's out of line with the membership; it's that (large sections of) the membership still believes he agrees with them, and will ultimately pivot to supporting a referendum, despite all the evidence against this
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/jeremy-corbyns-leadership-ratings-crash-to-worst-level-yet-over-brexit-a4061246.html
Yet still the old fool is out flanking his opponents in Labour.
https://twitter.com/RossThomson_MP/status/1093833296188968960