On topic: perhaps there are some advantages to keeping a low profile, but Damian Who? I like to imagine I follow politics quite closely, but I had literally never heard of this guy before. Turns out he's in charge of my kids' education! So is it his fault that they have to learn all this stupid grammar, or can I still blame Michael Fucking Gove* for that?
* this is his official title for all parents of children in the state education system.
On topic: perhaps there are some advantages to keeping a low profile, but Damian Who? I like to imagine I follow politics quite closely, but I had literally never heard of this guy before. Turns out he's in charge of my kids' education! So is it his fault that they have to learn all this stupid grammar, or can I still blame Michael Fucking Gove* for that?
* this is his official title for all parents of children in the state education system.
You missed out 'mother.'
And while I am all for blaming Michael Gove for many things, the teaching of grammar was tightened up by him but was reintroduced under Alan Johnson.
Anyone else wondering why the Mail is bothering with a story about the inside scoop on what Corbyn is like? Who doesn't know at this point who would care what he is like? And bringing in the exes just makes me think of the silly Ed M stuff, with the 'Look at the intelligent, accomplished and beautiful women this loser has been in a relationship with' story.
Chope proving friendless - this from Kevin Foster's weekly e-mail update:
"Sadly today in Parliament was also notable for the use of arcane procedure by one MP to block a bill aimed at tackling Female Genital Mutilation. I was present in the chamber for a moment which embarrassed the whole house. Thankfully the Government Chief Whip has this evening indicated time will be found, using more modern procedures in Government Time, to ensure the change progresses."
Theresa May could win parliament’s approval for her controversial Brexit deal in return for guaranteeing another referendum, under a new plan being drawn up by a cross-party group of MPs. The new vote would give the British people a simple choice: to confirm the decision or stay in the EU.
The initiative, aimed at breaking the political impasse, is being advanced by Labour MPs Peter Kyle and Phil Wilson and has won the support of prominent Remainers in the Tory party including Sarah Wollaston, Dominic Grieve and Anna Soubry.
Gus O'Donnell was neither great nor good. He was a stool pigeon for Brownstuff.
He has "I AM THE ESTABLISHMENT" tattooed on his left buttock.
Allegedly.
I thought it was his Clarkson.
That way, the establishment enters us as part of the screwing process.
But, more seriously, he was hopelessly incompetent. His management of the Treasury veered from the supine from the disastrous, and his mishandling of the aftermath of the 2010 election was utterly embarrassing. He's a sober version of Juncker.
Oh well if Gus O'Donnell thinks we should have a Peoples Vote that's game over.
Us leavers may as well give up and realise how the establishment were right all along
So Mogg and Johnson aren’t the establishment then ! It’s amazing how many fell for that vote against the elite guff !
There were and are elites on both sides. As a total number more Lords and MPs were in favour of Remain, but it'd be silly to pretend that there were not elite figures all over.
Although there were MPs on the Royalist side in the English Civil War too, which doesn't stop us referring to the other side as the parliamentarians of course.
Theresa May could win parliament’s approval for her controversial Brexit deal in return for guaranteeing another referendum, under a new plan being drawn up by a cross-party group of MPs. The new vote would give the British people a simple choice: to confirm the decision or stay in the EU.
The initiative, aimed at breaking the political impasse, is being advanced by Labour MPs Peter Kyle and Phil Wilson and has won the support of prominent Remainers in the Tory party including Sarah Wollaston, Dominic Grieve and Anna Soubry.
What a load of old piffle. Not the idea, it really is one of the few ways that would at least have an outcome, but that it is a new plan - it's been floating around as an idea since before the deal was even arranged. That the Tory backers are the remainer ultras, the most extreme of the most extreme, doesn't augur well for its chances yet.
Can anyone think of a Leader of the Opposition who has been unaccountably banging on about bus services at PMQs? Still confident the next election will be all about Brexit?
Rural bus routes are in a dreadful state. People in towns already hate having to subsisize them through the car parking charges.
Nonsense. Car parking charges go to District Councils. Public transport support comes from County Councils. Do try to stay in touching distance of reality.
Found reality yet?
Latest available figures:
Annual local authority bus subsidy £3023m Annual local authority parking income £819m Total annual local authority spending £111370m
Car parking charges are not contributing any significant amount towards local authority expenditure.
Off topic, does anyone else think that John Rentoul resembles Abraham Lincoln?
In the 1970's there was a hospital soap on ITV called "General Hospital". The actor Lewis Jones played the consultant Mr William Parker-Brown. He and John Rentoul resemble each other.
Can anyone think of a Leader of the Opposition who has been unaccountably banging on about bus services at PMQs? Still confident the next election will be all about Brexit?
Rural bus routes are in a dreadful state. People in towns already hate having to subsisize them through the car parking charges.
Nonsense. Car parking charges go to District Councils. Public transport support comes from County Councils. Do try to stay in touching distance of reality.
Found reality yet?
Latest available figures:
Annual local authority bus subsidy £3023m Annual local authority parking income £819m Total annual local authority spending £111370m
Car parking charges are not paying any significant amount towards local authority expenditure.
That was nothing to do with what you said was nonsense about it. You claimed that because car parking charges go to districts and public transport support comes from county councils my suggestion was out of step with reality.
That is, while my assertion was not an analysis of the numbers spent, your reasoning for why it was nonsense was based on the bizarre ignorance that unitary authorities exist (did you know that, because your post suggested not) as you explicitly tried to pretend subsidizing did not take place as a result.
Also I never said the whole amount of bus services was funded from parking services (and certainly not that it was a huge part of an overall budget of the council), just that subsidizing took place, which it demonstrably does - as I pointed out with my own local authority they explicitly preserve many routes that would otherwise close thanks to parking income.
You've gone from insulting me for suggesting subsidizing takes place because of two tier structures which don't exist everywhere, to arguing that it is not a significant amount of subsidizing, a completely different point altogether.Nice try.
Car parking charges are used for the purpose I described. I made no assertion of how much, because I didn't know nor was it relevant to the point I made that it happens at all, and that people in the towns don't like it (since they use the routes far less, and they feel the charges hurt the town economy - it caused a huge stink locally for just that reason).
A debate on how much they can or should subsidize or how much the government should help is a different debate.
But you are at least following your own advice now, and are in touching distance of reality, so congratulations and have a good evening.
Oh well if Gus O'Donnell thinks we should have a Peoples Vote that's game over.
Us leavers may as well give up and realise how the establishment were right all along
You like Corbyn.
I am apart from I am a loot younger and don't have a beard.
Corbyn has been an MP for 400 years a Westminster fossil. Part of the establishment.
Oh I see.
Well it's a view.
An entirely correct view (other than the hyperbole about how long he has been there). How could anyone, supporter or not of Jeremy Corbyn, suggest otherwise? A man so long an MP is establishment up to his eyeballs, even if you (and many others) believe that unlike so many others he has not succumbed to the worst excesses of such.
All MPs "who hand the decision back to the people" should be required to resign their seats - and acknowledge they are not fit for purpose.
Most MPs aren't bright enough (assuming they voted for A50) to understand that a No Deal brexit will be their fault - my MP's face was a picture as I explained that No Deal was the default result of her vote back in 2016 and if she didn't like it it was up to her to fix the mess...
Can anyone tces at PMQs? Still confident the next election will be all about Brexit?
Rural bus routesar parking charges.
Nonsense. Car parking charges go to District Councils. Public transport support comes from County Councils. Do try to stay in touching distance of reality.
Found reality yet?
Latest available figures:
Annual local authority bus subsidy £3023m Annual local authority parking income £819m Total annual local authority spending £111370m
Car parking charges are not paying any significant amount towards local authority expenditure.
That was nothing to do with what you said was nonsense about it. You claimed that because car parking charges go to districts and public transport support comes from county councils my suggestion was out of step with reality.
That is, while my assertion was not an analysis of the numbers spent, your reasoning for why it was nonsense was based on the bizarre ignorance that unitary authorities exist (did you know that, because your post suggested not) as you explicitly tried to pretend subsidizing did not take place as a result.
Also I never said the whole amount of bus services was funded from parking services (and certainly not that it was a huge part of an overall budget of the council), just that subsidizing took place, which it demonstrably does - as I pointed out with my own local authority they explicitly preserve many routes that would otherwise close thanks to parking income.
You've gone from insulting me for suggesting subsidizing takes place because of two tier structures which don't exist everywhere, to arguing that it is not a significant amount of subsidizing, a completely different point altogether.Nice try.
Car parking charges are used for the purpose I described. I made no assertion of how much, because I didn't know nor was it relevant to the point I made that it happens at all, and that people in the towns don't like it (since they use the routes far less, and they feel the charges hurt the town economy - it caused a huge stink locally for just that reason).
A debate on how much they can or should subsidize or how much the government should help is a different debate.
But you are at least following your own advice now, and are in touching distance of reality, so congratulations and have a good evening.
Edit : Seriously, if you'd just laid off the insult while being wrong in the first place you'd look less silly. It's like correcting someone's grammar while making a huge grammatical mistake.
Daily Mail hit gold. Those papers will fly off the shelves.
Who doesn’t want to hear steamy details of Corbyn and Abbott. It’s like 50 shades of grey with a Trotsky hat.
Bill Clinton wasn’t getting any traction in the early primaries, and then steamy stories came out, and it actually helped him, he ended up getting the nomination and 8 years in White House. We will never know the Clinton story if the front of the tomorrow’s Sunday MoS type stories hadn’t happened, but i fear the mail inadvertently help Corbyn with this non smoking gun just tittletattle on front page stuff and just bad timing too with his star so dull its magic and authority fading, dont preach to converted nor stir up what was is dwindling Corbyn base, its bad timing to make him interesting again 🙁
There's going to be a poll out tonight that shows a majority of voters want Brexit postponed, either for further negotiations or for a second referendum
Since we assume all remainers would want brexit postponed then I think we will take the poll with a pinch of NaCl.
Can anyone tces at PMQs? Still confident the next election will be all about Brexit?
Rural bus routesar parking charges.
Nonsense. Car parking charges go to District Councils. Public transport support comes from County Councils. Do try to stay in touching distance of reality.
Found reality yet?
Latest available figures:
Annual local authority bus subsidy £3023m Annual local authority parking income £819m Total annual local authority spending £111370m
Car parking charges are not paying any significant amount towards local authority expenditure.
Car parking charges are used for the purpose I described.
Nonsense. No they are not. Hypothecation in local government finance does not exist, it’s all just funding, no matter how much bleating drivers think (wrongly) they are being hard done to.
Can anyone tces at PMQs? Still confident the next election will be all about Brexit?
Rural bus routesar parking charges.
Nonsense. Car parking charges go to District Councils. Public transport support comes from County Councils. Do try to stay in touching distance of reality.
Found reality yet?
Latest available figures:
Annual local authority bus subsidy £3023m Annual local authority parking income £819m Total annual local authority spending £111370m
Car parking charges are not paying any significant amount towards local authority expenditure.
Car parking charges are used for the purpose I described.
Nonsense. No they are not. Hypothecation in local government finance does not exist, it’s all just funding, no matter how much bleating drivers think (wrongly) they are being hard done to.
A few points:
- S55(4) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act prescribes what councils may spend their parking revenue on - pretty much running their parking services or on other approved transport schemes. Or “hypothecation”, if you prefer.
- About two-thirds of the population of the UK live in single-tier (unitary or metropolitan) local authorities which run both parking and public transport.
- the rules are designed to stop councils profiting (it was a big thing of Eric Pickles at DCLG), and indeed when Barnet tried to increase parking specifically to raise revenue (even for transport schemes), they got slapped down by the High Court for their troubles.
Oh well if Gus O'Donnell thinks we should have a Peoples Vote that's game over.
Us leavers may as well give up and realise how the establishment were right all along
You like Corbyn.
I am apart from I am a loot younger and don't have a beard.
Corbyn has been an MP for 400 years a Westminster fossil. Part of the establishment.
Oh I see.
Well it's a view.
An entirely correct view (other than the hyperbole about how long he has been there). How could anyone, supporter or not of Jeremy Corbyn, suggest otherwise? A man so long an MP is establishment up to his eyeballs, even if you (and many others) believe that unlike so many others he has not succumbed to the worst excesses of such.
Unless you alone get to define what is 'establishment' and what isn't then it is up for debate.
If establishment to you just means has been involved in politics for a decent amount of time then Corbyn is certainly establishment. But then a politician (not necessarily Corbyn) who wanted to tear down the established order and was involved in politics for a time to do it would also be establishment, which seems silly really.
It is arguable, much as it is with Farage and it would depend on what your criteria for establishment is.
Establishment, or anti establishment are not good or bad on their own. Hitler was arguably anti establishment, until his preferred system was established but then the same would be true of many democracy campaigners, it isn't their establishment or anti establishment status that matters really.
Unless anyone has some hard and fast rules it is all arguable really, I read a wiki article on it which didn't really help...
Oh well if Gus O'Donnell thinks we should have a Peoples Vote that's game over.
Us leavers may as well give up and realise how the establishment were right all along
You like Corbyn.
I am apart from I am a loot younger and don't have a beard.
Corbyn has been an MP for 400 years a Westminster fossil. Part of the establishment.
Oh I see.
Well it's a view.
An entirely correct view (other than the hyperbole about how long he has been there). How could anyone, supporter or not of Jeremy Corbyn, suggest otherwise? A man so long an MP is establishment up to his eyeballs, even if you (and many others) believe that unlike so many others he has not succumbed to the worst excesses of such.
Unless you alone get to define what is 'establishment' and what isn't then it is up for debate.
If establishment to you just means has been involved in politics for a decent amount of time then Corbyn is certainly establishment. But then a politician (not necessarily Corbyn) who wanted to tear down the established order and was involved in politics for a time to do it would also be establishment, which seems silly really.
It is arguable, much as it is with Farage and it would depend on what your criteria for establishment is.
Establishment, or anti establishment are not good or bad on their own. Hitler was arguably anti establishment, until his preferred system was established but then the same would be true of many democracy campaigners, it isn't their establishment or anti establishment status that matters really.
Unless anyone has some hard and fast rules it is all arguable really, I read a wiki article on it which didn't really help...
The definition of establishment is hardly fixed it is true. But would any definition which does not include someone who has been an mp for half their life be seriously credible?
Anything can be argued but a political animal with closing in on 4 decades of parliamentary membership not being establishment, really? Can it be argued well?
The definition of establishment is hardly fixed it is true. But would any definition which does not include someone who has been an mp for half their life be seriously credible?
Anything can be argued but a political animal with closing in on 4 decades of parliamentary membership not being establishment, really? Can it be argued well?
Its arguable with Corbyn, he's been there for a while but he's never really been heavily involved in shaping things aside from his vote as an MP and a small influence on a few others. There are lots of factors each way and like I said it depends on what criteria you use.
If we had a BNP or neo nazi MP who had been in the commons for 40 years wanting to tear down the current order and set up a fascist state would he be a member of the establishment?
Surely that goes against the very idea of someone being establishment?
Now people argue about how revolutionary Corbyn would be, I tend to argue the evolution line myself and certainly not as revolutionary as the above BNP MP but that would surely be another criteria. Wanting to change the established order somewhat would be a factor in whether your anti establishment.
If we want to call the house of commons the establishment and thus you automatically become a member of the establishment by being a member of the commons then fair enough but you can see why many would disagree with my above BNP MP example, that person is surely not establishment.
To go back to Corbyn specifically it is hard to argue he didn't shake up the established order in the Labour party with his victory and second win in leadership contests for example.
I am not saying he is completely anti establishment and anything else is wrong, I think there is much more nuance to it than that. There are factors in it some of which you can argue are establishment some anti establishment. Overall everyone can come to their own answer and I'll generally let people judge for themselves but claiming only one answer is right doesn't seem correct to me.
"In the early stages of a presidential race, when polling measures little more than name recognition, the relative size of donor networks can provide one of the best metrics of strength."
Bar chart of the day. The EU may bluster about how we were just one small part of a club of 28, and it’s sad to see us go, but the EU will be fine... It may well be, but our gdp is the equivalent of 19 of the remaining 27 added together.
I'm surprised they've decided not to do the RAFAT fly past. That's exactly the sort of expensive, pointless and pseudo-patriotic nonsense this government loves.
Bar chart of the day. The EU may bluster about how we were just one small part of a club of 28, and it’s sad to see us go, but the EU will be fine... It may well be, but our gdp is the equivalent of 19 of the remaining 27 added together.
Bar chart of the day. The EU may bluster about how we were just one small part of a club of 28, and it’s sad to see us go, but the EU will be fine... It may well be, but our gdp is the equivalent of 19 of the remaining 27 added together.
Bar chart of the day. The EU may bluster about how we were just one small part of a club of 28, and it’s sad to see us go, but the EU will be fine... It may well be, but our gdp is the equivalent of 19 of the remaining 27 added together.
The EU, currently, has four very large economies : us, Germany, France and Italy. It then has another half dozen medium sized ones, and then quite a lot of small ones.
We're about 15% of EU GDP, iirc. A large part, but not outsized
Bar chart of the day. The EU may bluster about how we were just one small part of a club of 28, and it’s sad to see us go, but the EU will be fine... It may well be, but our gdp is the equivalent of 19 of the remaining 27 added together.
The EU, currently, has four very large economies : us, Germany, France and Italy. It then has another half dozen medium sized ones, and then quite a lot of small ones.
We're about 15% of EU GDP, iirc. A large part, but not outsized
You could see why so many of the smaller states would see it as madness for us to leave. France gets to ride Germany for all she’s worth, Spain’s gets lots of new highways and the Irish get to sit on the edge of the continent acting as a tax shelter for the worlds largest technology companies.
I'm surprised they've decided not to do the RAFAT fly past. That's exactly the sort of expensive, pointless and pseudo-patriotic nonsense this government loves.
Maybe they decided the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight would be more appropriate.
"Countdown star Rachel Riley joins Labour rebels to plot a 'Blairite' party and calls for JK Rowling to be its leader was greeted with applause at secret meeting of supporters"
Bar chart of the day. The EU may bluster about how we were just one small part of a club of 28, and it’s sad to see us go, but the EU will be fine... It may well be, but our gdp is the equivalent of 19 of the remaining 27 added together.
I'm surprised they've decided not to do the RAFAT fly past. That's exactly the sort of expensive, pointless and pseudo-patriotic nonsense this government loves.
Maybe they decided the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight would be more appropriate.
BoBMF are hurting for crew at the moment. They can't operate the Lancaster or Dakota without navs and the RAF no longer has a navigator training track. The only type that still has them is the RC-135S and those navs are trained at vast expense at Offut AFB in the US.
RAFAT + BoBMF = colossal waste of money that actually degrades the capacity of the RAF as a fighting force.
Comments
Asks the EU.....
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-47185724
No. But he does resemble Julian Clary
* this is his official title for all parents of children in the state education system.
And while I am all for blaming Michael Gove for many things, the teaching of grammar was tightened up by him but was reintroduced under Alan Johnson.
It's hardly new, is it?
Allegedly.
Us leavers may as well give up and realise how the establishment were right all along
"Sadly today in Parliament was also notable for the use of arcane procedure by one MP to block a bill aimed at tackling Female Genital Mutilation. I was present in the chamber for a moment which embarrassed the whole house. Thankfully the Government Chief Whip has this evening indicated time will be found, using more modern procedures in Government Time, to ensure the change progresses."
The initiative, aimed at breaking the political impasse, is being advanced by Labour MPs Peter Kyle and Phil Wilson and has won the support of prominent Remainers in the Tory party including Sarah Wollaston, Dominic Grieve and Anna Soubry.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/09/back-theresa-may-brexit-deal-then-hold-peoples-vote-backbencher-plan
That way, the establishment enters us as part of the screwing process.
But, more seriously, he was hopelessly incompetent. His management of the Treasury veered from the supine from the disastrous, and his mishandling of the aftermath of the 2010 election was utterly embarrassing. He's a sober version of Juncker.
Good night,
Although there were MPs on the Royalist side in the English Civil War too, which doesn't stop us referring to the other side as the parliamentarians of course.
Also in seriousness, I don't know why the thought would give nightmares.
Annual local authority bus subsidy £3023m
Annual local authority parking income £819m
Total annual local authority spending £111370m
Car parking charges are not contributing any significant amount towards local authority expenditure.
Who doesn’t want to hear steamy details of Corbyn and Abbott. It’s like 50 shades of grey with a Trotsky hat.
Well it's a view.
That is, while my assertion was not an analysis of the numbers spent, your reasoning for why it was nonsense was based on the bizarre ignorance that unitary authorities exist (did you know that, because your post suggested not) as you explicitly tried to pretend subsidizing did not take place as a result.
Also I never said the whole amount of bus services was funded from parking services (and certainly not that it was a huge part of an overall budget of the council), just that subsidizing took place, which it demonstrably does - as I pointed out with my own local authority they explicitly preserve many routes that would otherwise close thanks to parking income.
You've gone from insulting me for suggesting subsidizing takes place because of two tier structures which don't exist everywhere, to arguing that it is not a significant amount of subsidizing, a completely different point altogether.Nice try.
Car parking charges are used for the purpose I described. I made no assertion of how much, because I didn't know nor was it relevant to the point I made that it happens at all, and that people in the towns don't like it (since they use the routes far less, and they feel the charges hurt the town economy - it caused a huge stink locally for just that reason).
A debate on how much they can or should subsidize or how much the government should help is a different debate.
But you are at least following your own advice now, and are in touching distance of reality, so congratulations and have a good evening.
That is, while my assertion was not an analysis of the numbers spent, your reasoning for why it was nonsense was based on the bizarre ignorance that unitary authorities exist (did you know that, because your post suggested not) as you explicitly tried to pretend subsidizing did not take place as a result.
Also I never said the whole amount of bus services was funded from parking services (and certainly not that it was a huge part of an overall budget of the council), just that subsidizing took place, which it demonstrably does - as I pointed out with my own local authority they explicitly preserve many routes that would otherwise close thanks to parking income.
You've gone from insulting me for suggesting subsidizing takes place because of two tier structures which don't exist everywhere, to arguing that it is not a significant amount of subsidizing, a completely different point altogether.Nice try.
Car parking charges are used for the purpose I described. I made no assertion of how much, because I didn't know nor was it relevant to the point I made that it happens at all, and that people in the towns don't like it (since they use the routes far less, and they feel the charges hurt the town economy - it caused a huge stink locally for just that reason).
A debate on how much they can or should subsidize or how much the government should help is a different debate.
But you are at least following your own advice now, and are in touching distance of reality, so congratulations and have a good evening.
Edit : Seriously, if you'd just laid off the insult while being wrong in the first place you'd look less silly. It's like correcting someone's grammar while making a huge grammatical mistake.
I think his letter was brilliant
You still think he is a silly duffer
To coin a phrase nothing has changed.
What was wrong with Corbyns compromise offer?
#CorbynsCustomsUnion which the EU loves is our best way out of this mess.
xxx
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6686639/Jeremy-Corbyn-drove-friends-flat-WANTED-Diane-Abbott-naked-bed.html
- S55(4) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act prescribes what councils may spend their parking revenue on - pretty much running their parking services or on other approved transport schemes. Or “hypothecation”, if you prefer.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/27/section/55
- About two-thirds of the population of the UK live in single-tier (unitary or metropolitan) local authorities which run both parking and public transport.
- the rules are designed to stop councils profiting (it was a big thing of Eric Pickles at DCLG), and indeed when Barnet tried to increase parking specifically to raise revenue (even for transport schemes), they got slapped down by the High Court for their troubles.
https://amp.theguardian.com/society/2013/jul/22/residents-high-court-barnet-council-parking-permit
More seriously, perhaps the Cabinet will finally take May's hands away from the levers of power?
From the outside she appears in a bunker with only the closet aides and utterly lost and deluded imho.
If establishment to you just means has been involved in politics for a decent amount of time then Corbyn is certainly establishment. But then a politician (not necessarily Corbyn) who wanted to tear down the established order and was involved in politics for a time to do it would also be establishment, which seems silly really.
It is arguable, much as it is with Farage and it would depend on what your criteria for establishment is.
Establishment, or anti establishment are not good or bad on their own. Hitler was arguably anti establishment, until his preferred system was established but then the same would be true of many democracy campaigners, it isn't their establishment or anti establishment status that matters really.
Unless anyone has some hard and fast rules it is all arguable really, I read a wiki article on it which didn't really help...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Establishment
Anything can be argued but a political animal with closing in on 4 decades of parliamentary membership not being establishment, really? Can it be argued well?
We would take gold.
If we had a BNP or neo nazi MP who had been in the commons for 40 years wanting to tear down the current order and set up a fascist state would he be a member of the establishment?
Surely that goes against the very idea of someone being establishment?
Now people argue about how revolutionary Corbyn would be, I tend to argue the evolution line myself and certainly not as revolutionary as the above BNP MP but that would surely be another criteria. Wanting to change the established order somewhat would be a factor in whether your anti establishment.
If we want to call the house of commons the establishment and thus you automatically become a member of the establishment by being a member of the commons then fair enough but you can see why many would disagree with my above BNP MP example, that person is surely not establishment.
To go back to Corbyn specifically it is hard to argue he didn't shake up the established order in the Labour party with his victory and second win in leadership contests for example.
I am not saying he is completely anti establishment and anything else is wrong, I think there is much more nuance to it than that. There are factors in it some of which you can argue are establishment some anti establishment. Overall everyone can come to their own answer and I'll generally let people judge for themselves but claiming only one answer is right doesn't seem correct to me.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/09/us/politics/2020-democrats-campaign-funding.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage
Sanders way ahead...
Notional trump supporting midfle American “gee that woman who pretended to be Native American so she could advance her career is just the gal for me”.
Worryingly, I am not convinced the Dem base wont put her in against Trump.
In which case, they lose.
But the Mail’s front page is utterly shit.
A proper, “who the fuck cares?” moment.
In fairness, Tom Bower is a pound shop biographer. Really very poor indeed.
https://twitter.com/hopenothate/status/1093492872509353985
I am genuinely lolling at how poor this story is.
It’s like a Laura Kuenessberg exclusive: we have heard it all before, and no one gave a fuck first time around.
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/4187653/8516136/IMG+graph+news+item+share+GDP.png/38ba3874-8cec-426e-b8fa-6ef67d8c2fa8?t=1525352918737
"Britain’s top investigative author has been researching Corbyn for 18 months "
We're about 15% of EU GDP, iirc. A large part, but not outsized
"Countdown star Rachel Riley joins Labour rebels to plot a 'Blairite' party and calls for JK Rowling to be its leader was greeted with applause at secret meeting of supporters"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6686861/Countdown-star-Rachel-Riley-teaming-advisers-Blairs-government-launch-new-party.html
But the same link says we are 15% of the whole.
RAFAT + BoBMF = colossal waste of money that actually degrades the capacity of the RAF as a fighting force.