politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Conference and its aftermath could be BoJo’s best chance of mo

YBarddCwsc said:

another_richard said:

nichomar said:

What suggestions do our resident tories have to beat JC next time, if they believe rubbishin his economics is all that's needed they will be dissapointed

Not a tory of any type but:

Increase home ownership.
Maximum wage in the public sector including the BBC and universities.

The Universities are not in the public sector.

They are independent entities.

Registered charities, IIRC (at least when it comes to being eligible for zero-rated VAT when ordering from suppliers).

Pong said:

Pong said:

RobD said:

It was 'just a bit of fun', apparently:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/27/labour-mp-mocked-prince-harrys-military-service-entitled-opinion/

"He tried to pass the helicopter exam about four times and he couldn't get through it at all so he always goes for the co-pilot. So he just sits there going 'vroom vroom'."

That is quite funny.

I do feel a bit sorry for the guy, though. His is a pointless life that should never have happened.

Damn missed the edit cutoff.

Anyway, I retract that last comment. It wasn't nice.

No it was dreadful - and I am not a follower of the Royals

Philip_Thompson said:

williamglenn said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Who could object?

The idea that Dan Hannan understands anything about trade negotiations (or any business other than self-promotion) doesn't have any evidence to support it.

You've not provided any evidence against just your own bile and hatred.

Do you object to opening our borders to free trade?

WilliamGlenn is a little Europeaner.

Pong said:

HYUFD said:

Pong said:

RobD said:

It was 'just a bit of fun', apparently:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/27/labour-mp-mocked-prince-harrys-military-service-entitled-opinion/

"He tried to pass the helicopter exam about four times and he couldn't get through it at all so he always goes for the co-pilot. So he just sits there going 'vroom vroom'."

That is quite funny.

I do feel a bit sorry for the guy, though. His is a pointless life that should never have happened.

Harry is a good looking multi millionaire with a Hollywood actress girlfriend, there are plenty more people more deserving of pity than him!

He has a horrible life.

Terrible, has to get up every morning at 6 and commute to work, worries how he pays the mortgage and has an all controling grandma that can tell him how to live his life. What a burden

Philip_Thompson said:

YellowSubmarine said:

@williamglenn " Ever closer union " is in the original Treaty of Rome. The choices of Iron, Steel and Nuclear power as things to put under supranational control was explicitly political in the light of WW2. The 1975 Referendum Ballot Paper asks about staying in " The European Community " with ' Common Market ' in brackets afterwards as an explainer.

The idea it wasn't an explicitly political project from the begining is one of the Europhobes biggest but sadly most effective lies.

Whether it was an explicitly political project or not we do not today want to be part of a politics project. So that's all that matters.

You don't want to how do you get to we?

YellowSubmarine said:

@another_richard I agree with that actually. The bitter lesson of the referendum is the Euronutters can't be satisfied and the European project can only be defended in it's own terms. Cameron got an opt out on Ever closer union and all the nutters who'd spent 40 years banging in about it still weren't satisfied.

Of course the full phrase is " ever closer union of peoples " not states. It's a rather smug evocation of " more perfect union " in the US constitution. It's a flowery and arguably pretentious piece of poetry but thats all.

There was no guarantee we would not be forced into an ever closer union with the EU. For example, if a European Public Prosecutor’s Office was established, the prosecutor could issue arrest warrants in the UK even if we did not join the public prosecutor.

Philip_Thompson said:

nichomar said:

Philip_Thompson said:

YellowSubmarine said:

@williamglenn " Ever closer union " is in the original Treaty of Rome. The choices of Iron, Steel and Nuclear power as things to put under supranational control was explicitly political in the light of WW2. The 1975 Referendum Ballot Paper asks about staying in " The European Community " with ' Common Market ' in brackets afterwards as an explainer.

The idea it wasn't an explicitly political project from the begining is one of the Europhobes biggest but sadly most effective lies.

Whether it was an explicitly political project or not we do not today want to be part of a politics project. So that's all that matters.

You don't want to how do you get to we?

Besides the 17.4 million votes?

I believe opinion polls all along have shown the political part of the EU to be what was most objectionable. If there was an option for the economics without the politics I suspect it could have won a landslide.

If more of us had believed what Cameron git was worthwhile and that the EU would not in spirit ignore it, which the vindictive attitude it's supporters want it to take, remain would have won.

FrancisUrquhart said:

Besides the 17.4 million votes?

I believe opinion polls all along have shown the political part of the EU to be what was most objectionable. If there was an option for the economics without the politics I suspect it could have won a landslide.

Yesterday Remainers had a frisson of excitement that Macron was about to "sort out the EU" and make us an offer we couldn't refuse. I see today that Macron's big plan is, can you guess it? More Europe!

glw said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Besides the 17.4 million votes?

I believe opinion polls all along have shown the political part of the EU to be what was most objectionable. If there was an option for the economics without the politics I suspect it could have won a landslide.

Yesterday Remainers had a frisson of excitement that Macron was about to "sort out the EU" and make us an offer we couldn't refuse. I see today that Macron's big plan is, can you guess it? More Europe!

Remainers have been squealing for months about Macron being their saviour. Turns out he wants a United States of Europe.

Ishmael_Z said:

AnneJGP said:

Ishmael_Z said:

AnneJGP said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Not quite current events, but I finished the Complete Works of Tacitus today, which is largely concerned with the political and military turmoil of the first century AD. Quite good, a broadsheet to Suetonius' tabloid, but he's not afraid of enormous sentences that can end up being a bit difficult to follow. Worth reading, but probably not as an early book for someone new to classical history.

Pedantically, complete surviving works of Tacitus, or possibly complete surviving works of Tacitus except the manuscripts in the Vatican library which the church suppresses because of the unflattering light they cast on the origins of Christianity. I was on a paleography course taught by the Vatican librarian a bit ago. I asked him about that - he stonewalled by saying that the mss. did not exist, but he would obv have to give me that answer even if they did.

Presumably they don't exist any longer. If 'the church' was that worried, they'd have destroyed them long ago, surely?

Well ... this is obviously all just a conspiracy theory anyway, but for the scholarly, destroying unique ancient mss is the worst sin imaginable, and the people in charge of the library are scholars, so a compromise whereby the ms is locked away but not actually burnt would not be completely inconceivable.

That's how we view ancient manuscripts now. How long have scholars bothered about that? They didn't see any problem about killing people with the wrong ideas, did they?

No, that is not right at all. You have had scholars as long as you have had writing, and to be a scholar is and always has been to be a manuscript geek. To destroy an unpublished manuscript is to destroy knowledge in the abstract as well as the physical thing. And the putative risk of not destroying it is virtually nil. Presumably you'd keep the thing in a safe with one key held by the Pope, because if it isn't locked away it could be surreptitiously copied, and any scenario where that level of security fails is one where the church has been obliterated anyway.

I can (mostly) accept that. But it is surely a rather optimistic view of the virtue of individual scholars and, perhaps more importantly, their masters.

I am no historian, but I have rather gathered that some of the leading church figures - even Popes -
were hardly what you'd call full of high-minded ethical principles.

England win the cricket...Great awareness by buttler and Ali, but shame didn't get to see it played out properly.

MP_SE2 said:

Remainers have been squealing for months about Macron being their saviour. Turns out he wants a United States of Europe.

Yeah I wondered what he was going to say, seriously rcs rated him FWTW, but it turns out that Macron and Juncker are signing from the same hymn sheet. Better luck next time.

williamglenn said:

Philip_Thompson said:

If there was an option for the economics without the politics I suspect it could have won a landslide.

In the same sense that an option for public spending without the taxes would win by a landslide. People want to have their cake and eat it.

In my mind politics and economics are always intertwined in that all ways of managing economics are political, in that they involve political decisions, even if the decision is to not interfere.

Was the 2008 GFC political or economic or both? the Third world debt crisis? the Cold War? The 1929 Wall St Crash? The Irish potato famine?

In reality they were all both, as both politics and economics are how we interact with our neighbours.

So the EEC was always political, indeed so was our forming EFTA as an attempted rival.

kle4 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

nichomar said:

Philip_Thompson said:

YellowSubmarine said:

@williamglenn " Ever closer union " is in the original Treaty of Rome. The choices of

Whether it was an explicitly political project or not we do not today want to be part of a politics project. So that's all that matters.

You don't want to how do you get to we?

Besides the 17.4 million votes?

I believe opinion polls all along have shown the political part of the EU to be what was most objectionable. If there was an option for the economics without the politics I suspect it could have won a landslide.

If more of us had believed what Cameron git was worthwhile and that the EU would not in spirit ignore it, which the vindictive attitude it's supporters want it to take, remain would have won.

Lets be controversial nere, 1 million voted to kick the establishment in the balls, 1 million wanted the asians removed from our towns and cities and a few thought that it would have no impact on them. Thats democracybut there is no obvious solution that we get majority support

HYUFD said:

Pong said:

HYUFD said:

Pong said:

RobD said:

It was 'just a bit of fun', apparently:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/27/labour-mp-mocked-prince-harrys-military-service-entitled-opinion/

"He tried to pass the helicopter exam about four times and he couldn't get through it at all so he always goes for the co-pilot. So he just sits there going 'vroom vroom'."

That is quite funny.

I do feel a bit sorry for the guy, though. His is a pointless life that should never have happened.

Harry is a good looking multi millionaire with a Hollywood actress girlfriend, there are plenty more people more deserving of pity than him!

He has a horrible life.

Someone who is homeless or in a 1 bedroom council flat without a job or lives in Syria in the middle of a bloody civil war has a pretty horrible life, Harry certainly does not.

He lost his mother aged 11. No amount of money and privilege in the world can help with that.

FrancisUrquhart said:

glw said:

MP_SE2 said:

Remainers have been squealing for months about Macron being their saviour. Turns out he wants a United States of Europe.

Yeah I wondered what he was going to say, seriously rcs rated him FWTW, but it turns out that Macron and Juncker are signing from the same hymn sheet. Better luck next time.

People seemed to overlook he was hollande's man only a couple of years ago.

Well yes, in which case it shouldn't surprise us. I think some people assumed that because Macron wants to liberalise France he might want a looser multi-speed EU, but his EU views are much in line with his old boss.

Kurds Back Independence by 92% in Referendum; Iraq May Send Troops https://nyti.ms/2yteOwG

bigjohnowls said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Regarding the very real anti-semitism problem in the Labour Party- you have to understand just how idiotic some of our members are.

They are pro Palestine and anti-Israel. Not anti-Netanyahu and his policies, but against it's existence as it's obviously imperialist colonialism. And therefore criticism of the entire state and it's occupants is ok, and the Zionist project that created it. And the people who like Zionism are connected in a great global conspiracy and also control money and the media.

When you point out that global Jewish conspiracy controlling all the money is what the Nazis used to write, they see it as proof that you are under the spell of this conspiracy and are therefore probably a Tory. And besudes which in calling out anti-Semitism you're siding with the Blairite who get paid by Lord Sainsbury who is big capital and that means part of the global conspiracy and that just proves you are a Tory and need to GET BEHIND OUR TWICE ELECTED LEADER.

Seriously. It's fucking crazy not in a funny way

Sounds bad.

I ca0n honestly say I have never come across any discussions of this nature but there are clearly too many instances being sighted for it to be a non issue.

How would you resolve it?

Its very difficult to deal with the politics of conspiracy.

YellowSubmarine said:

Kurds Back Independence by 92% in Referendum; Iraq May Send Troops https://nyti.ms/2yteOwG

And that's without the Kurds saying it's a unilateral declaration of independence.

FrancisUrquhart said:

Guardian impressed by chairman corbyn....

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/sep/27/the-guardian-view-on-corbyns-speech-his-best-yet

...but the whole week has had 'Sheffield rally' written all over it.

If Mr Johnson does indeed defenestrate Mrs May, and he has been on manoeuvres in the Czech Republic in the last 24 hours, a snap election will surely follow a Johnson coronation. Boris will be riding the crest of a wave and the landslide Mrs May failed to achieve will surely follow. If he is too tardy in calling an election his stock will surely fall as his vision of train-wreck Brexit becomes a reality.

Mexicanpete said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Guardian impressed by chairman corbyn....

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/sep/27/the-guardian-view-on-corbyns-speech-his-best-yet

...but the whole week has had 'Sheffield rally' written all over it.

If Mr Johnson does indeed defenestrate Mrs May, and he has been on manoeuvres in the Czech Republic in the last 24 hours, a snap election will surely follow a Johnson coronation. Boris will be riding the crest of a wave and the landslide Mrs May failed to achieve will surely follow. If he is too tardy in calling an election his stock will surely fall as his vision of train-wreck Brexit becomes a reality.

....and then you'll wake up.

Danny565 said:

Mexicanpete said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Guardian impressed by chairman corbyn....

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/sep/27/the-guardian-view-on-corbyns-speech-his-best-yet

...but the whole week has had 'Sheffield rally' written all over it.

If Mr Johnson does indeed defenestrate Mrs May, and he has been on manoeuvres in the Czech Republic in the last 24 hours, a snap election will surely follow a Johnson coronation. Boris will be riding the crest of a wave and the landslide Mrs May failed to achieve will surely follow. If he is too tardy in calling an election his stock will surely fall as his vision of train-wreck Brexit becomes a reality.

....and then you'll wake up.

...from the nightmare!

Mexicanpete said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Guardian impressed by chairman corbyn....

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/sep/27/the-guardian-view-on-corbyns-speech-his-best-yet

...but the whole week has had 'Sheffield rally' written all over it.

If Mr Johnson does indeed defenestrate Mrs May, and he has been on manoeuvres in the Czech Republic in the last 24 hours, a snap election will surely follow a Johnson coronation. Boris will be riding the crest of a wave and the landslide Mrs May failed to achieve will surely follow. If he is too tardy in calling an election his stock will surely fall as his vision of train-wreck Brexit becomes a reality.

So we have to wait for the, tory party to sort out their problemd problems before we sort out brexit, why, because it's more important

williamglenn said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Who could object?

The idea that Dan Hannan understands anything about trade negotiations (or any business other than self-promotion) doesn't have any evidence to support it.

Absolutely nobody is saying Daniel Hannan is an ill informed self promoting tart.

YellowSubmarine said:

@williamglenn Indeed William. And we start from a much higher base than the Europhobes did in 1975. Both in terms of popular vote and in terms of integration that can be defended and then used as a base to move forward. ' Resistance then Reunion ' should be our Cry and Creed.

Keep dreaming. It will never happen. Once we are out that will be it. We will never rejoin.

Recidivist said:

williamglenn said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Who could object?

The idea that Dan Hannan understands anything about trade negotiations (or any business other than self-promotion) doesn't have any evidence to support it.

Absolutely nobody is saying Daniel Hannan is an ill informed self promoting tart.

He certainly understands a hell of a lot more about democracy than either of you ever will.

glw said:

MP_SE2 said:

Remainers have been squealing for months about Macron being their saviour. Turns out he wants a United States of Europe.

Yeah I wondered what he was going to say, seriously rcs rated him FWTW, but it turns out that Macron and Juncker are signing from the same hymn sheet. Better luck next time.

I seem to recall calling him out as a lightweight but glossy investment banker

*buffs nails*

Richard_Tyndall said:

Recidivist said:

williamglenn said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Who could object?

The idea that Dan Hannan understands anything about trade negotiations (or any business other than self-promotion) doesn't have any evidence to support it.

Absolutely nobody is saying Daniel Hannan is an ill informed self promoting tart.

He certainly understands a hell of a lot more about democracy than either of you ever will.

No he doesn't.

African Americans deeply pessimistic about where country is heading, poll finds
http://wapo.st/2xsPSIV

YellowSubmarine said:

African Americans deeply pessimistic about where country is heading, poll finds
http://wapo.st/2xsPSIV

Totally understandable.

I feel the same about my country!

Richard_Tyndall said:

YellowSubmarine said:

@williamglenn Indeed William. And we start from a much higher base than the Europhobes did in 1975. Both in terms of popular vote and in terms of integration that can be defended and then used as a base to move forward. ' Resistance then Reunion ' should be our Cry and Creed.

Keep dreaming. It will never happen. Once we are out that will be it. We will never rejoin.

I think, like in 62 and 67 we will be vetoed when we initially re-apply.

Recidivist said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Recidivist said:

williamglenn said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Who could object?

The idea that Dan Hannan understands anything about trade negotiations (or any business other than self-promotion) doesn't have any evidence to support it.

Absolutely nobody is saying Daniel Hannan is an ill informed self promoting tart.

He certainly understands a hell of a lot more about democracy than either of you ever will.

No he doesn't.

Well you read some of his books on the subject and point me in the direction of some of yours and we can compare notes....

foxinsoxuk said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

YellowSubmarine said:

@williamglenn Indeed William. And we start from a much higher base than the Europhobes did in 1975. Both in terms of popular vote and in terms of integration that can be defended and then used as a base to move forward. ' Resistance then Reunion ' should be our Cry and Creed.

Keep dreaming. It will never happen. Once we are out that will be it. We will never rejoin.

I think, like in 62 and 67 we will be vetoed when we initially re-apply.

We won't reapply. The EU is moving in a direction unacceptable to the vast majority ofnpeople in this country including most Remainers. This will.only accelerate and become more obvious now. Those like Williamglenn who wish for a competely Federal EU including Euro membership are in a tiny minority in this country.

Richard_Tyndall said:

Recidivist said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Recidivist said:

williamglenn said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Who could object?

The idea that Dan Hannan understands anything about trade negotiations (or any business other than self-promotion) doesn't have any evidence to support it.

Absolutely nobody is saying Daniel Hannan is an ill informed self promoting tart.

He certainly understands a hell of a lot more about democracy than either of you ever will.

No he doesn't.

Well you read some of his books on the subject and point me in the direction of some of yours and we can compare notes....

Let's not. I've read enough of his stuff already. Mine is better.

Recidivist said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Recidivist said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Recidivist said:

williamglenn said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Who could object?

The idea that Dan Hannan understands anything about trade negotiations (or any business other than self-promotion) doesn't have any evidence to support it.

Absolutely nobody is saying Daniel Hannan is an ill informed self promoting tart.

He certainly understands a hell of a lot more about democracy than either of you ever will.

No he doesn't.

Well you read some of his books on the subject and point me in the direction of some of yours and we can compare notes....

Let's not. I've read enough of his stuff already. Mine is better.

I very much doubt that. Certainly not if your output on here is anything to go by

nichomar said:

nichomar said:

not_on_fire said:

HYUFD said:

Pong said:

HYUFD said:

Pong said:

RobD said:

It was 'just a bit of fun', apparently:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/27/labour-mp-mocked-prince-harrys-military-service-entitled-opinion/

"He tried to pass the helicopter exam about four times and he couldn't get through it at all so he always goes for the co-pilot. So he just sits there going 'vroom vroom'."

That is quite funny.

I do feel a bit sorry for the guy, though. His is a pointless life that should never have happened.

Harry is a good looking multi millionaire with a Hollywood actress girlfriend, there are plenty more people more deserving of pity than him!

He has a horrible life.

Someone who is homeless or in a 1 bedroom council flat without a job or lives in Syria in the middle of a bloody civil war has a pretty horrible life, Harry certainly does not.

He lost his mother aged 11. No amount of money and privilege in the world can help with that.

Not unique in that, sympphy yes but get on with it

I have seen other views expressed that the invectus games only help those that are ablle to aspire. Ignoring the majority who are neglected and ignored but i don't know the truth

Harry has rather grown on me over the years. Initially he seemed to be just another Hooray Henry, but he has become much more than just that. He genuinely seems to have found some purpose in life via his army service, and now is using that service and his fame to support a number of good causes. These games matter a lot to those involved, even if not my cup of tea, as soldiering is a physical and competitive pursuit. If it gives those wounded men back some purpose and pride, then fine by me.

I also think that his frankness about his own dark days, and willingness to discuss mental health a great role model. His relationship and possible marriage to Meghan is also very revealing about his views on racial matters. Considering that royalty is based on bloodline, this is a prosaic yet very important matter. We may have a non-white Royal very shortly, and possibly the Queen some non-white great grandchildren. The symbolic importance of that in 21st century Briton should not be understated.

Top bloke, and majestic in spirit as well as title. True nobility, and I write as a republican sympathiser.

Richard_Tyndall said:

Recidivist said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Recidivist said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Recidivist said:

williamglenn said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Who could object?

The idea that Dan Hannan understands anything about trade negotiations (or any business other than self-promotion) doesn't have any evidence to support it.

Absolutely nobody is saying Daniel Hannan is an ill informed self promoting tart.

He certainly understands a hell of a lot more about democracy than either of you ever will.

No he doesn't.

Well you read some of his books on the subject and point me in the direction of some of yours and we can compare notes....

Let's not. I've read enough of his stuff already. Mine is better.

I very much doubt that. Certainly not if your output on here is anything to go by

Well you don't know as I haven't told you which books I have written.

Anybody heard from seanT recently?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-4925096/Man-47-fractures-PENIS-sex-partner.html

Recidivist said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Recidivist said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Recidivist said:

williamglenn said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Who could object?

The idea that Dan Hannan understands anything about trade negotiations (or any business other than self-promotion) doesn't have any evidence to support it.

Absolutely nobody is saying Daniel Hannan is an ill informed self promoting tart.

He certainly understands a hell of a lot more about democracy than either of you ever will.

No he doesn't.

Well you read some of his books on the subject and point me in the direction of some of yours and we can compare notes....

Let's not. I've read enough of his stuff already. Mine is better.

@Recidivist

Earlier today we had a short conversation. I suggested that a parallel you had drawn between Thatcher and Corbyn was invalid. I backed this with examples and asked if you had any counter points, emphasising that the one I most often heard was not accurate so not to waste time dealing with that. You replied 'you make my point for me.' I was puzzled by this as I certainly hadn't, and asked for clarification. You then made a pretty abusive post in reply - which was liked by the egregious Nick Palmer, whose visceral loathing of me for calling him out on some of his more embarrassing past mis-statements is well known and with whom I do not deal directly any more because I consider slanging matches with him to be pointless - saying that I accuse anyone I disagree with of being wrong and therefore I was an unpleasant person and in your words 'you wouldn't want me in your cabinet.'

Leaving aside the non sequitur, and fact that obviously I would not disagree with somebody if I thought they were right, I am still at something at a loss to know why you behaved as you did. You made an inaccurate parallel followed by a strange comment and then got personal. I just wondered why you had done this. And indeed whether you wanted to apologise for it.

It's not a problem either way - your opinion is frankly a matter of indifference to me. However this site has been getting quite spiteful at times lately and it would be a shame if you were to join in.

Benpointer said:

Danny565 said:

The_Apocalypse said:

The article posted by Southam by Rafael Behr makes an interesting early point on the way Ed Miliband was depicted. It didn't help that those on the very right of Labour also participated in characterising Miliband's beliefs in a similar way the right wing press did. The reality is Ed was never a full on hard leftie like Corbyn, but that didn't stop some people acting as if his premiership would spell the great doom of Britain and how he was to bring back full on socialism. In failing to engage with the Soft Left at a more appropriate level, those on the right of Labour especially only enabled the alienation and weakness they now feel within Labour. I feel had the Labour right worked with the Soft Left they would be in a much more stronger position now. Likewise, the Right (Conservatives) silly characterisations of the Soft Left have now left them in a situation where their valid criticisms of Corbyn do not reach the audience it really needs to.

I still can't believe the Tories (and their media cheerleaders) genuinely believed Miliband's Labour was a "lurch to the left" and "quasi-Marxism" just because he said energy companies should charge more reasonable rates.

Isn't it the case that the Tories and their rightwing press always portray any potential Labour government as the-end-of-civilisation-as-we-know-it? Remember the 'New Labour, New Danger' ads showing Tony Blair with devil eyes?

They have cried wolf far too often and diminished their message as a result.

Its the mirror of 'vote Conservative and the NHS will be closed down'.

I imagine it keeps the cheerleaders happy.

another_richard said:

Benpointer said:

Danny565 said:

The_Apocalypse said:

The article posted by Southam by Rafael Behr makes an interesting early point on the way Ed Miliband was depicted. It didn't help that those on the very right of Labour also participated in characterising Miliband's beliefs in a similar way the right wing press did. The reality is Ed was never a full on hard leftie like Corbyn, but that didn't stop some people acting as if his premiership would spell the great doom of Britain and how he was to bring back full on socialism. In failing to engage with the Soft Left at a more appropriate level, those on the right of Labour especially only enabled the alienation and weakness they now feel within Labour. I feel had the Labour right worked with the Soft Left they would be in a much more stronger position now. Likewise, the Right (Conservatives) silly characterisations of the Soft Left have now left them in a situation where their valid criticisms of Corbyn do not reach the audience it really needs to.

I still can't believe the Tories (and their media cheerleaders) genuinely believed Miliband's Labour was a "lurch to the left" and "quasi-Marxism" just because he said energy companies should charge more reasonable rates.

Isn't it the case that the Tories and their rightwing press always portray any potential Labour government as the-end-of-civilisation-as-we-know-it? Remember the 'New Labour, New Danger' ads showing Tony Blair with devil eyes?

They have cried wolf far too often and diminished their message as a result.

Its the mirror of 'vote Conservative and the NHS will be closed down'.

I imagine it keeps the cheerleaders happy.

Yes, but when a real threat and danger like Corbyn comes along the attack lines don't work so well...

https://twitter.com/gdnpolitics/status/913128122219773952

ydoethur said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Anybody heard from seanT recently?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-4925096/Man-47-fractures-PENIS-sex-partner.html

That appears to have been a cock up in every way.

I'll get my coat...

Is that better or worse than a balls up?

Pulpstar said:

another_richard said:

Benpointer said:

Danny565 said:

The_Apocalypse said:

The article posted by Southam by Rafael Behr makes an interesting early point on the way Ed Miliband was depicted. It didn't help that those on the very right of Labour also participated in characterising Miliband's beliefs in a similar way the right wing press did. The reality is Ed was never a full on hard leftie like Corbyn, but that didn't stop some people acting as if his premiership would spell the great doom of Britain and how he was to bring back full on socialism. In failing to engage with the Soft Left at a more appropriate level, those on the right of Labour especially only enabled the alienation and weakness they now feel within Labour. I feel had the Labour right worked with the Soft Left they would be in a much more stronger position now. Likewise, the Right (Conservatives) silly characterisations of the Soft Left have now left them in a situation where their valid criticisms of Corbyn do not reach the audience it really needs to.

I still can't believe the Tories (and their media cheerleaders) genuinely believed Miliband's Labour was a "lurch to the left" and "quasi-Marxism" just because he said energy companies should charge more reasonable rates.

Isn't it the case that the Tories and their rightwing press always portray any potential Labour government as the-end-of-civilisation-as-we-know-it? Remember the 'New Labour, New Danger' ads showing Tony Blair with devil eyes?

They have cried wolf far too often and diminished their message as a result.

Its the mirror of 'vote Conservative and the NHS will be closed down'.

I imagine it keeps the cheerleaders happy.

Yes, but when a real threat and danger like Corbyn comes along the attack lines don't work so well...

Our politicians deal in bribes and fear rather than rational discussion based on knowledge.

Bad politics drives out the good.

another_richard said:

Pulpstar said:

another_richard said:

Benpointer said:

Danny565 said:

The_Apocalypse said:

The article posted by Southam by Rafael Behr makes an interesting early point on the way Ed Miliband was depicted. It didn't help that those on the very right of Labour also participated in characterising Miliband's beliefs in a similar way the right wing press did. The reality is Ed was never a full on hard leftie like Corbyn, but that didn't stop some people acting as if his premiership would spell the great doom of Britain and how he was to bring back full on socialism. In failing to engage with the Soft Left at a more appropriate level, those on the right of Labour especially only enabled the alienation and weakness they now feel within Labour. I feel had the Labour right worked with the Soft Left they would be in a much more stronger position now. Likewise, the Right (Conservatives) silly characterisations of the Soft Left have now left them in a situation where their valid criticisms of Corbyn do not reach the audience it really needs to.

I still can't believe the Tories (and their media cheerleaders) genuinely believed Miliband's Labour was a "lurch to the left" and "quasi-Marxism" just because he said energy companies should charge more reasonable rates.

Isn't it the case that the Tories and their rightwing press always portray any potential Labour government as the-end-of-civilisation-as-we-know-it? Remember the 'New Labour, New Danger' ads showing Tony Blair with devil eyes?

They have cried wolf far too often and diminished their message as a result.

Its the mirror of 'vote Conservative and the NHS will be closed down'.

I imagine it keeps the cheerleaders happy.

Yes, but when a real threat and danger like Corbyn comes along the attack lines don't work so well...

Our politicians deal in bribes and fear rather than rational discussion based on knowledge.

Bad politics drives out the good.

Agreed.