Starmer finally comes clean on his own position, and sells out those who wanted to remain. He s no better than the rest of the Labour leadership.
Those who want to remain - as I did - have lost. Those who were foolish enough to try and prevent us leaving have made any other outcome untenable. It is now time to deal with the world as it is, not the world as we would have liked it to be. That is what Starmer is doing and given he would rightly be attacked for being totally delusional if he had said the opposite, it is unfair to criticise him for it.
Not at all. Starmer is an unprincipled opportunist. How else would anybody describe him?
Former Head of the CPS?
He was appointed - by whom? Friends and relations? - to occupy an important administrative post. OK, so far perhaps. How did he do there? Has there ever been a proper appraisal of his achievements? If I remember correctly, the latest incumbent has been showered with honours, despite reports that she was singularly useless.
The application of patronage,, I am afraid is the only way to ascend the greasy pole.
That Cummings talk posted earlier this thread by @FrancisUrquhart about the Referendum campaign is very enlightening. Reminds me a bit how the Japanese (Leave) took Singapore from the jungle behind because the defending guns (Remain) were pointing to the sea.
23% is a good number, but it's only equal first with Biden and Buttigieg.
He then has three specific issues to overcome:
1. He has the weakest organisation in Iowa. He has nine field offices, Biden has 17 and Buttigieg has 27. Against that, he has lots of enthusiastic young (unpaid) volunteers.
2. He's not the obvious sewa.
What works in Sanders favour, though, are two things. Firstly, Warren is stuttering hard. He should be the biggest benficiary of that. Secondly, the "moderate" lane is currently very crowded. If Biden, Klobuchar, and Buttigieg all get delegates, then it potentially allows him to slip through the middle and grab a win.
My guess, though, is that he shouldn't be favourite. I think Biden has the better organisation, and is a more natural second choice for those voters who's candidates are eliminated. Biden is also camped in Iowa right now with his "No Malarkey" tour. Finally, Iowa tends to go establishment. When was the last time a non-establishment candidate won the state?
Obama
A fair point. Perhaps I should have said "moderate". Because neither Obama nor Clinton were on the left of the party.
Obama was the left wing candidate in 2008 compared to Hillary
an that.
Trump also opposed NAFTA
I don't think that affects my point.
It does, support for NAFTA is not a left/right issue, but a populist v globalist one, to some extent like Brexit
I think you'd find support for NAFTA correlates pretty strongly with other centrist views. But feel free to argue the point of you like.
And opposition to NAFTA was a key plank of the populist right, hence Pat Buchanan led the opposition to it in 1992 when Bush Snr signed it (and Bill Clinton implemented it anyway with a few amendments)
And they are most influential in Democratic primaries in the South, which are not enough on their own to win the nomination, Obama also had Left Liberals, they are going for Sanders this time
Tehran have put an $80million bounty on Trump's head....only $80 million, bloody cheap arses.
Just to clarify - is that the money they will pay if he’s killed, or is that the money a Certain Person has said he will pay them if he can kill him and they take the blame?
Starmer finally comes clean on his own position, and sells out those who wanted to remain. He s no better than the rest of the Labour leadership.
Those who want to remain - as I did - have lost. Those who were foolish enough to try and prevent us leaving have made any other outcome untenable. It is now time to deal with the world as it is, not the world as we would have liked it to be. That is what Starmer is doing and given he would rightly be attacked for being totally delusional if he had said the opposite, it is unfair to criticise him for it.
Not at all. Starmer is an unprincipled opportunist. How else would anybody describe him?
Former Head of the CPS?
He was appointed - by whom? Friends and relations? - to occupy an important administrative post. OK, so far perhaps. How did he do there? Has there ever been a proper appraisal of his achievements? If I remember correctly, the latest incumbent has been showered with honours, despite reports that she was singularly useless.
The application of patronage,, I am afraid is the only way to ascend the greasy pole.
OK. So the fact that he occupied an important post is, of itself, no argument in favour of his further promotion.
Similarly, certain politician became mayor London. He didn`t achieve anything in the post. But PB Tories think that that was marvellous.
That Tony Benn? Total sell-out who served under neoliberal, union hating, warmonger, Wilson.
Wilson was no neoliberal and kept the UK out of the Vietnam War
I liked Harold too.
I was being sarcastic.
Harold was a man of much mystery. He could well have been as you described, and many of Benn's ilk would have held that view.
Wilson was the most intelligent of the democratic PMs and governed during the top nostalgia era for England in the postwar. They say Major's time on office was feelgood for England but 64-70 takes the biscuit and its enduring legacy probably forms a lot of the emotional case that Brexit is possible especially among the oldies.
Tehran have put an $80million bounty on Trump's head....only $80 million, bloody cheap arses.
Just to clarify - is that the money they will pay if he’s killed, or is that the money a Certain Person has said he will pay them if he can kill him and they take the blame?
Is there a precedent to suspend the 2020 Presidential Election in the event of Trump having set off a world war?
No. Nor could it be suspended as it is set in the Constitution. There was even a presidential election in 1864 during the civil war when around a third of states were still under Confederate control and could not hold a ballot.
Starmer finally comes clean on his own position, and sells out those who wanted to remain. He s no better than the rest of the Labour leadership.
Those who want to remain - as I did - have lost. Those who were foolish enough to try and prevent us leaving have made any other outcome untenable. It is now time to deal with the world as it is, not the world as we would have liked it to be. That is what Starmer is doing and given he would rightly be attacked for being totally delusional if he had said the opposite, it is unfair to criticise him for it.
Not at all. Starmer is an unprincipled opportunist. How else would anybody describe him?
Former Head of the CPS?
He was appointed - by whom? Friends and relations? - to occupy an important administrative post. OK, so far perhaps. How did he do there? Has there ever been a proper appraisal of his achievements? If I remember correctly, the latest incumbent has been showered with honours, despite reports that she was singularly useless.
The application of patronage,, I am afraid is the only way to ascend the greasy pole.
OK. So the fact that he occupied an important post is, of itself, no argument in favour of his further promotion.
Similarly, certain politician became mayor London. He didn`t achieve anything in the post. But PB Tories think that that was marvellous.
Not just PB Tories, it seems everyone!
Johnson has benefitted from patronage like few other top politicians. He has also been distasteful enough to hurl that patronage back in the faces of the doners, particularly at moments when his epicurean private life has caught up with him..
Is there a precedent to suspend the 2020 Presidential Election in the event of Trump having set off a world war?
No. Nor could it be suspended as it is set in the Constitution. There was even a presidential election in 1864 during the civil war when around a third of states were still under Confederate control and could not hold a ballot.
Is there a precedent to suspend the 2020 Presidential Election in the event of Trump having set off a world war?
No. Nor could it be suspended as it is set in the Constitution. There was even a presidential election in 1864 during the civil war when around a third of states were still under Confederate control and could not hold a ballot.
Starmer finally comes clean on his own position, and sells out those who wanted to remain. He s no better than the rest of the Labour leadership.
Those who want to remain - as I did - have lost. Those who were foolish enough to try and prevent us leaving have made any other outcome untenable. It is now time to deal with the world as it is, not the world as we would have liked it to be. That is what Starmer is doing and given he would rightly be attacked for being totally delusional if he had said the opposite, it is unfair to criticise him for it.
Not at all. Starmer is an unprincipled opportunist. How else would anybody describe him?
Former Head of the CPS?
He was appointed - by whom? Friends and relations? - to occupy an important administrative post. OK, so far perhaps. How did he do there? Has there ever been a proper appraisal of his achievements? If I remember correctly, the latest incumbent has been showered with honours, despite reports that she was singularly useless.
The application of patronage,, I am afraid is the only way to ascend the greasy pole.
OK. So the fact that he occupied an important post is, of itself, no argument in favour of his further promotion.
Similarly, certain politician became mayor London. He didn`t achieve anything in the post. But PB Tories think that that was marvellous.
Not just PB Tories, it seems everyone!
Johnson has benefitted from patronage like few other top politicians. He has also been distasteful enough to hurl that patronage back in the faces of the doners, particularly at moments when his epicurean private life has caught up with him..
Is there a precedent to suspend the 2020 Presidential Election in the event of Trump having set off a world war?
No. Nor could it be suspended as it is set in the Constitution. There was even a presidential election in 1864 during the civil war when around a third of states were still under Confederate control and could not hold a ballot.
To be exact, of the 37 states of the United States in 1860, 26 held elections that were put forward to the electoral college, as did one new state (West Virginia). Two southern states that had been overrun by Union forces - Tennessee and Louisiana - held elections but due to irregularities their votes were not counted. Nine states - Virginia, North and South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas and Texas - were either under the control of Richmond or in such a state of chaos no election could be organised.
But the election still went ahead and Lincoln still won all but two states.
Starmer finally comes clean on his own position, and sells out those who wanted to remain. He s no better than the rest of the Labour leadership.
Those who want to remain - as I did - have lost. Those who were foolish enough to try and prevent us leaving have made any other outcome untenable. It is now time to deal with the world as it is, not the world as we would have liked it to be. That is what Starmer is doing and given he would rightly be attacked for being totally delusional if he had said the opposite, it is unfair to criticise him for it.
Not at all. Starmer is an unprincipled opportunist. How else would anybody describe him?
Former Head of the CPS?
He was appointed - by whom? Friends and relations? - to occupy an important administrative post. OK, so far perhaps. How did he do there? Has there ever been a proper appraisal of his achievements? If I remember correctly, the latest incumbent has been showered with honours, despite reports that she was singularly useless.
The application of patronage,, I am afraid is the only way to ascend the greasy pole.
OK. So the fact that he occupied an important post is, of itself, no argument in favour of his further promotion.
Similarly, certain politician became mayor London. He didn`t achieve anything in the post. But PB Tories think that that was marvellous.
Not just PB Tories, it seems everyone!
Johnson has benefitted from patronage like few other top politicians. He has also been distasteful enough to hurl that patronage back in the faces of the doners, particularly at moments when his epicurean private life has caught up with him..
I think an impartial assessment shows the opposite.
Burnham, Kendal and Corbyn were SpAd, SpAd, lifelong backbencher. Against that you've got Starmer, Thornberry, RLB, Lewis. That's QC and director of public prosecutions, barrister, solicitor who also worked at a pawnbrokers and local journalist who was in the territorial army.
There's no comparison in terms of real world experience.
I think an impartial assessment shows the opposite.
Burnham, Kendal and Corbyn were SpAd, SpAd, lifelong backbencher. Against that you've got Starmer, Thornberry, RLB, Lewis. That's QC and director of public prosecutions, barrister, solicitor who also worked at a pawnbrokers and local journalist who was in the territorial army. There's no comparison in terms of real world experience.
Do you think that barristers and QCs really live in the real world? That is one of the problem with Labour.
Is there a precedent to suspend the 2020 Presidential Election in the event of Trump having set off a world war?
Trump can't set off a world war on his own - well he could if he attacked China and Russia - but I hardly think that's likely
Let us hope that Trump doesn't nuke anyone, but don't rule it out either. The butterfly effect of attacking Tehran with fire and fury could cause ripples almost anywhere on the planet.
If anyone has the capacity to destroy the world, Donald Trump is that man. His notoriety under such circumstances would survive until the end of mankind. He would quite like that.
I think an impartial assessment shows the opposite.
Burnham, Kendal and Corbyn were SpAd, SpAd, lifelong backbencher. Against that you've got Starmer, Thornberry, RLB, Lewis. That's QC and director of public prosecutions, barrister, solicitor who also worked at a pawnbrokers and local journalist who was in the territorial army. There's no comparison in terms of real world experience.
Do you think that barristers and QCs really live in the real world? That is one of the problem with Labour.
Jolyon thinks they do. They all have Ninja Training.
Who sent her child to private school, despite insisting everyone else use the state system.
It doesn't seem to have done him much good:
Diane Abbott's son was in court yesterday after being charged with a string of violent offences including allegedly beating up police, emergency workers and doctors as well as exposing himself in a hospital.
James Abbott-Thompson appeared before a judge at Thames Magistrates Court where he was accused of 11 crimes - most of them on NHS property.
He is alleged to have gone on the rampage attacking nine people including five emergency workers, two of whom were assaulted on the same day.
The 28-year-old faces nine charges of assault, a charge of of racially aggravated criminal damage and one of exposure over the past five months.
Comments
Similarly, certain politician became mayor London. He didn`t achieve anything in the post. But PB Tories think that that was marvellous.
Johnson has benefitted from patronage like few other top politicians. He has also been distasteful enough to hurl that patronage back in the faces of the doners, particularly at moments when his epicurean private life has caught up with him..
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/RL32471.pdf
But the election still went ahead and Lincoln still won all but two states.
Good night.
Burnham, Kendal and Corbyn were SpAd, SpAd, lifelong backbencher. Against that you've got Starmer, Thornberry, RLB, Lewis. That's QC and director of public prosecutions, barrister, solicitor who also worked at a pawnbrokers and local journalist who was in the territorial army.
There's no comparison in terms of real world experience.
If anyone has the capacity to destroy the world, Donald Trump is that man. His notoriety under such circumstances would survive until the end of mankind. He would quite like that.
Diane Abbott's son was in court yesterday after being charged with a string of violent offences including allegedly beating up police, emergency workers and doctors as well as exposing himself in a hospital.
James Abbott-Thompson appeared before a judge at Thames Magistrates Court where he was accused of 11 crimes - most of them on NHS property.
He is alleged to have gone on the rampage attacking nine people including five emergency workers, two of whom were assaulted on the same day.
The 28-year-old faces nine charges of assault, a charge of of racially aggravated criminal damage and one of exposure over the past five months.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7842415/Diane-Abbotts-privately-educated-son-28-charged-11-new-offences.html