politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Corbyn wrecks McDonnell’s economic credibility plans
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Corbyn wrecks McDonnell’s economic credibility plans
For someone who insisted for years that Twitter wouldn’t catch on I’m pathetically pleased these days when one of my tweets get’s liked.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The women's 100m breaststroke final sees Russian Yulia Efimova go for gold just weeks after being cleared to compete at all. The 24-year-old was banned between 2013 and 2015 for taking steroids, and tested positive for meldonium in March of this year.
And in the men's 200m freestyle final, Sun Yang of China is a real force. Sun was banned in 2014 after he tested positive for the banned stimulant trimetazidine, while he has also spent time in jail for crashing a car that he had driven without a licence.
Latimer, a former speechwriter for George W Bush, argues that Pence could do a Brutus and get backing from establishment figures such as Paul Ryan, from Ted Cruz, and even from much of the Trump faction; take over as the presidential candidate himself; and choose a running-mate who would broaden the ticket. He concludes that the "future of America" is in Mike Pence's hands.
- foreigners cheat, often backed by their corrupt governments
- British athletes sometimes test positive for banned substances they didn't know were contained in their cough mixtures, painkillers, etc.
There should be no half measures, but IOC corruption is allowing them to prosper.
If you think that chinese sport officials are incorruptable...
This is not to say that all British atheletes are paragons of virtue, but any cheating is simply not on the same scale. orders of magnitude different
Did I say anything like that?
His words on the economy have been just that - words. He doesn't believe them. His instincts are those that Corbyn articulates (or at least tries to)
He is better at appearing reasonable. He can handle the media far better than Corbyn.
But at heart, the two share the same ideals - and none of them include financial responsibility.
If McDonnell was a fiscal realist, he would never have let Corbyn make those unfunded (and unfundable) pledges.
It is all an act. Quite a clever one. But the McDonnell veneer of being reasonable would vanish the minute he got a sniff of real power. Which we can all hope will never happen. Otherwise Venezuela might just be a taste of what was to hit the UK economy...
Apologies if I misunderstood your meaning
Personally I think that would be unfair to a young man who has worked hard and put in the effort with a dedication that is inspiring. But with the current air of suspicion hanging over all sport, those questions will be asked.
Similarly Hosszu, the Hungarian swmmer, is showing massive, massive improvements in her performances. Now they are almost certainly due to her work ethic, talent and influence of her husband. But questions are being asked about her.
Sometimes records are set because of talent, training and the right conditions. Sometimes they are achieved due to the influence of drugs.
The IOC have blighted these games by allowing any Russians to participate. The IPC got it absolutely right.
I would remove all Russian athletes and teams from all sports for a minimum of 5 years to show how seriously this is being taken. I would also remove all international sport from Russian soil for that period - including the World Cup.
Is that unfair on clean Russian sportsmen and women? Absolutely. Is it necessary to show that doping on that scale is unacceptable? Absolutely.
Russian sport needs to be punished - and the IOC's refusal to act has ruined Rio by not taking a harsh line. The crowds know this - and are booing known drugs cheats. It is blighting the Olympics.
English football was banned from European competition for an extended period as a result of the behaviour of so-called fans.
We should be demanding Russia be removed from all sport for a minimum period. We should also be demanding that anyone who is caught doping is banned from sport forever. One strike and you are out.
http://dai.ly/x27roto?start=570
Enver Hoxha had at least five different officially-documented dates of birth, according to Blendi Fevziu's book.
Some of the episodes of "Bagpuss" could plausibly be argued to be full of insidious reactionary bourgeois propaganda and hierarchicalist attitudes.
I hadn't thought of the Zika angle as an excuse. there were a few cyclists who droppped out citing that too..
most of tennis seems to be there though?
I think Tennis has the Olympics in the international tour schedule, so there's no other tournaments on this week. Not so in golf.
So it is likely to be used. By anyone.
Anyone who thinks the Olympics is clean has got to be naive. And UK participants include at least one regular test misser..
As for Corbyn/McDonnell ' economics, if in Government they might be faced with hard spending choices. All the evidence so far is they would not make them.. So a disaster in waiting.
And if a Party cannot run a competent and professional Leadership election, and no credible Opposition, it has NO chance of running a Government. Period.
No chance of running any sort of Government : let alone a competent one.
Labour make UKIP appear competent.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/mass-murder-of-christians-is-the-new-isis-plot-2jmkspvfb
Here's the latest edition for the curious http://heavy.com/news/2016/07/isis-islamic-state-dabiq-1437-shawwal-15-issue-edition-orlando-nice-ansbach-france-germany-pdf/2/
I suspect that McDonnell will answer with the politically wily but still unconvincing "In certain areas" - without ever admitting what those areas might have been.
Corbyn will merrily volunteer that it didn't spend anywhere near enough.
Labour - glug, glug, glug......
Tennis have done a better job than golf, of getting the higher ranked players to Rio - although why either sport is played by professionals at the Olympics I don't really understand.
http://tinyurl.com/zfd23ma
The Party offered to the voters will look nothing like that offered to them in 2015.
The names voters know will likely have decamped to the Co-operative Labour Party. But I doubt they'll get any divi from the voters. LibDems gain Bootle? Maybe - if they had chosen Lamb....
As it is, partially clean in some sports is likely what we have.
Gene doping is unlikely because it doesn't really work at present, as far as I know.
Armistead has been a poor show. Suspect Antidoping had no choice but to allow her in after CAS verdict. They should probably change the rules to make a time limit to challenge missed tests. At least she didn't win a medal, I suppose
By contrast, MacDonnell cannot ride the two horses that he's trying to. You cannot be 'anti-austerity' unless you either reject economic reality altogether or plan swinging tax rises. It's one or the other: the spending has to be paid for somehow. It's easy to talk of 'boosting private industry' but what does that mean - and how can it be done without ultimately imposing more taxes and regulation either directly or indirectly on business or people? If there's one thing Labour's good at, it's adding to paperwork and regulation and on that score at least, Corbyn and MacDonnell are right out of Labour's tradition.
As an aside, the Tories will be delighted to fight the election on boosting private industry, when millions of jobs have been created in the private sector since 2010, contrary to the predictions of at least some of those who make up Labour's "impressive Economic Advisory Committee".
Don is right that MacDonnell is at least nominally trying to put forward a credible alternative but he will always be caught by the contradictions of the Momentum movement; the desire to have cake and eat it. Corbyn, by contrast, is not undermining the policy; he's simply lifting the veil on it.
No-one can take Trump down because he *is* the elected nominee and will remain so for as long as he wants to be, subject to legal or health intervention, neither of which look likely. There is simply no mechanism to remove a candidate who doesn't want to go. If the establishment wanted to block Trump, the time to do so was the convention. Expecting him to fall on his sword seems optimistic in the extreme.
One side is trusted with the finances, the other isn't. Corbyn and McDonnell aren't doing much to change this perception.
But it emerged last night that Kelmendi refused to give a urine sample in an unannounced, out-of-competition test sprung by the French Anti-Doping Agency two months ago
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/olympics/2016/08/08/rio-olympics-2016-kosovas-history-making-judoka-suspended-after/
"Corbyn will win the election. Everyone knows that. We all support him therefore everyone does, and because we all went to cheer him he's obviously popular. His policies are popular cos we have supported them for ages. You can't believe what you read in the MSM it's all Tory and the polls too did you know a Tory founded one of them? It's so biased why not read the Canary instead or look at our Facebook page it's got so many likes. Blair didn't do Facebook because he was a Tory it's all you need to stop having our message distorted by those Tories elected as Labour MPs "
As we get closer to an election and the polls show we're going to get reamed the shrieking of bias will continue. By then they will have ousted all the people who do the actual work and replaced them with Momentum rally based politics so whatever voter ID data we have will be old. An election campaign will be some mega rallies ("we're alright!") And a new stragedy of arguing with voters who may be Tory, once voted for Tony Blair (Tory), thinks Corbyn is mad (Tory) or worries about their interests (Tory). Won't be on the doorstep as campaigning is so Tory but see them picketing outside Starbucks instead.
Then the election which gives a landslide to the Tories. Its all the fault of the MSM and Murdoch and Tories and the PLP and the old MPs being replaced by Tories doesn't matter as ours were Tory anyway and being elected by Tory voters doesn't matter as we can do so much more by being true to our beliefs and having another rally to show the Tories and the MSM that they can't buy our views.
I watched in wonder as the LibDems repeatedly punched themselves in their knackers until they all but disappeared. Had no idea the Labour Party were so inspired by this that we would do the same
Corbyn rambled through a history of trade unions, political causes and legislation from the 1960s and 70s, throws in references to neoliberalism, privatisation, Blair & Iraq. He claims his children & grandchildren won't have access to university education because of fees. Makes uncosted, calls for wider free access. Chucks in token reference to mental health care, giving it parity of esteem or some such rubbish, after Abbott had had her say on her mum's work as a mental health nurse in Yorkshire.
If Jezza is the answer the question is why do young cardinals back old dopes?
.......or ASDA for short
Interesting piece, Mr. Brind.
https://twitter.com/gareth_snell/status/762899525644251136
"Jeremy Corbyn's allies plot to oust Labour's General Secretary after accusing party's ruling body of trying to rig leadership election"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/08/jeremy-corbyn-given-huge-boost-after-130000-members-win-right-to/
publicIslington opinion?Either there'll be a split, or the PLP will meekly trot along to the political guillotine.
Of course, if it were true it would simply put him in the same category as the rest of the shadow cabinet.
The silence from the sane wing of the party is deafening. Have they really decided that they are so out of step with the membership that their assistance would be counter-productive? What is it going to take for them to realise that unless they can win this argument they really need to find a different party? It's sad.
Maybe they will split once Corbyn is re-elected with a larger majority than before? If they're sensible (yes, I know!) then they're looking at moderate unions and financial backers over the summer, as others have suggested maybe the existing Co-Operative Party brand works better for the MPs than a new SDP2 structure.
What's clear to me is that if they wait until the deselections start it will be too late, the split needs to happen from a position of power and in such numbers to make them the official Opposition in Parliament. I remember the night James Purnell resigned in 2009, it was expected that David Miliband and others would follow him out, but he got hung out to dry on his own by a spineless cabinet.
I'm generally supportive of the government, but the Opposition plays an important role in democracy - they need to look and act like a government in waiting, Corbyn and his mob are no such thing.
The sensible left need to decide whether they love the word Labour so much they'll line up behind Corbyn, or whether they place greater worth on their values and seeing those enacted in government.
Owen Smith may be a damp unpleasant squib, but he's trying to do something. Where's Yvette Cooper, or Dan Jarvis, or Stella Creasey etc etc... They appear to have given up.
I don't particularly blame them. The split is already there.
We need to stop asking "will the Labour party split?". It has split. The question now is what happens next.
Briefly, though, most Labour MPs don't especially disagree with the direction of the Corbyn agenda; they are simply doubtful if he can win. They act when they think that action will produce a better chance of winning (as they thought the no-conidence letter seemed to), but neither the Smith candidacy nor splitting into a sub-SDP looks likely to produce that nor fronting a failed rebellion, so they don't see any point in championing any of these.
As for the Labour membership more widely, PB is still dominated by supporters of the "what counts most is winning" school of thought, which is a minority view in Labour. The "first you have to work out what you stand for" school is currently dominant, and unless that's understood, people will keep making the wrong bets.
Owen Smith's main campaign strand seemed to be based on ... Jezza is a bad leader because he refused to campaign vigorously on a policy he disagreed with.
That may be true, but it's hardly a damning indictment.
Sorry, Owen, but you need to tell the truth to get your message across. He's a 60/70s throwback and has not moved on. Wolfie Smith was a comedy. Jezza and his acolytes are a scheming bunch of schoolboy fanatics whose main characteristic is hatred of the UK.
Dissembling makes you look oily and the worst kind of politician.
When it comes to funding, as well as getting a couple of unions on side, they need to look back through those who donated to Blair - most will be horrified at what's become of the Labour Party, and will be prepared to support a new opposition to the Tories.
What it all boils down to is the MPs though. A dozen or two walking out just doesn't work, it needs to be all 172 of them to kick Corbyn to the back benches. I don't think they've got the balls to do it.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/08/labour-has-been-left-by-the-grown-ups-to-the-corbynites---and-th/
Jezza's economics aren't the turn-off for many. The multiplier system or whatever the magic money tree is called has attractions. But his foreign policy is based on hatred and a guilt complex for being born in the UK.
That will be ruthlessly exposed in a GE campaign. Owen Smith would have a chance. Even you might, but Jezza would have none - he can't rely on middle class, virtue signallers to spread the message. They may as well elect Emily Thornberry as his successor.
Until the Labour party returns to it's true values they will remain an irrelevance and fail the people they were set up to help.
Actually making the country more how you'd like it involves being the party of power, a process that involves appealing to the wider electorate and inevitably some compromises along the way.
Do you think the Labour MPs are happy to see an ever reducing number of them in perpetual opposition to the Tories, or will they eventually break out of their shells and regroup to appeal to those who voted Conservative last year?
PS I did say on here last night I'd have voted for you rather the sourpuss Soubry.
Let's call it the 20% strategy.
Labour MPs will be aware that:
1. Even if they tried to patch it up, many of their seats would be at risk in 2020 or earlier.
2. Their chances of finding a seat to contest under the new boundaries will hang on the whim of the Corbynites, and many of them will lose out anyway.
3. Even if they managed to be re-elected in 2020, another five years in opposition is nailed on and they'll be going through the motions for a third parliament in a row.
4. A split is clearly going to happen anyway, further damaging the party's chances and their own prospects of holding their seats. Even it were limited just to defections it would be highly damaging. So it's more a case of in for a penny, in for a pound.
Nor is there any real chance that with the hard left having captured the party, it can be won back post 2020.
It does beg the question though, if they do not see the Smith candidacy as being likely to produce a better chance of winning, why did they give him their support at the nomination stage and why could they not have come up with a candidate who they thought WOULD produce a better chance of winning?
"For some reason, we think it’s OK for an athletic child like Adam Peaty to be singled out, drilled relentlessly and pushed to the very limit of his capability, and that specialness is then a cause for national celebration. (What else are these Olympic Games if not a triumphant endorsement of such natural selection, the survival and the garlanding of the world’s fittest?)
By contrast, if you’re a brainy British kid who could seriously do with being plucked from their background, selection is a dirty word. Mums who drive their future Olympians to daily sports training are unsung heroines. Mums who drive their kids to tutoring are “pushy”. Grammar schools may turn out gold medallists of the mind who enrich our society a thousandfold, they may still hold an astonishing eleven places in the Top 20 schools, but they make the people who don’t get into them feel bad so, sorry, we can’t build any more of them."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/07/why-cheer-elite-athletes-but-not-top-students-bring-back-grammar/
In terms of your career / earning potential, if you can't compete at the Olympics it is a massive blow.
Also I am glad to see the crowd booing known drugs cheats. It's isn't really Olympic spirit but when the authorities are ducjing this issue, public shaming is all that is left.
To get each one of the 28 EU countries to agree to whatever deal we cobble together; to get Scotland and Northern Ireland to sign up to an arrangement that opposes their interests and which they voted against; to protect pensioners and the WWC from the consequences of their Leave votes; to keep banks, farmers, car manufacturers and other industries operating in the UK.
Fiscal responsibility is just so pre 24/6. Corbyn taps into the new era.
Kinder, gentler politics part 94.