politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » After last week’s shock YouGov 4% CON lead LAB edges back ahea

NickPalmer said:

Spy stuff - lol. On the polls, the one significant development is that UKIP's vote share is undeniably collapsing, and nobody is benefiting very noticeably. There was a time when the Conservatives expected to be the main beneficiaries - people posted here would regularly add their poll scores together to make a prediction. And it did seem logical, but probably UKLIP's vote was in reality mostly fed-up left-behind voters angry at everyone rather than dedicated right-wingers. I suspect that most were previous non-voters who are now going to return to that state.

UKIP already collapsed at the last election, it benefited the Conservatives considerably

Foxy said:

malcolmg said:

Foxy said:

TGOHF said:

stevef said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

stevef said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

stevef said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

rcs1000 said:

stevef said:

The

You keep posting this same point.

Here's the thing:

1. We're not exactly mid-term, so comparing a peak opposition lead three years into a parliament with the current one, eight months in, is disingenuous.

2. The Labour Party is led by Jeremy Corbyn.

And:

3. Brexit is so uncertain and such a complete disruption that any read-across from the past has to be treated with even more scepticism than usual.

Is this the Brexit that Jeremy Corbyn voted for for 30 years, the Brexit that he failed to campaign against in the referendum, and the Brexit which he isnt opposing now?

It is. So far young Labour voters haven't quite cottoned on to that, but maybe they will, tilting voting intentions towards the Conservatives. Or maybe Brexit will increasingly be seen as a disaster and the Tories will get the blame, tilting voting intentions towards Labour.

It's very easy to construct plausible scenarios which range from a good Conservative majority under a new leader to a small Labour majority with the Tories even more split than they are now.

Who knows? It's more uncertain than any time I can remember.

Young people do not decide general elections -there is not enough of them.

It appears to be more uncertain than at any time -but if you look carefully enough you can see all the signs for the Labour defeat to come

On balance I agree with you that a poor Labour result (substantially worse than GE2017) is likely, for the reasons you've given. However I don't share your certainty; there are many unknowns, not least how much blood will be spilt in the civil war in the Conservative Party.

or whether Labour will have a different leader. An Emily Thornberry leadership would be a gamechanger

She'd need to lose weight - can't see a corpulent PM being elected.

I suspect her BMI is not far off British average.

So you are saying she is obese

I think the averageafemalefBMIain the UK is "overweight" with a substantial minority (!!) "obese".

Interesting? A discussion about Brexit has morphed into one about Lady Nugee's weight.

Richard_Nabavi said:

NickPalmer said:

Spy stuff - lol.

He wouldn't be the first:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stonehouse

Does Corbyn swim?

MarqueeMark said:

rottenborough said:

MarqueeMark said:

So....Corbyn falls under a Czech bus, the Labour Party has a blood-bath election for a new leader, which a non-Momentum candidate wins....a devoutly Remainer non-Momentum candidate. And sets about promptly and properly buggering Brexit.

Now, I wonder whose interest it is in for Brexit's bessy mate to be locked in the Tower?

/CynicalMode......

How does the non-Momentum candidate win? MI5 are rubbing out the pencil votes from labour members?

Just playing Fantasy Politics for a moment - if Corbyn had to step down because it turns out he was in the pay of a foreign security service (which has been vehemently denied, so that is what would do for him), but his successor comes from the Corbyn faction and carries on regardless, then surely that would be the point at which Labour has mass defections of MPs to some new party? So to prevent that, Momentum backs off - and Chuka gets a go as leader.....

Can't see it in a million years at the moment. Momentum backing off?

Chuka would though throw Brexit under its own £350m bus at the first opportunity, so yeh would be very interesting development.

https://twitter.com/brianklaas/status/964564515529601024

https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/964560620338188289

Foxy said:

ReggieCide said:

Foxy said:

malcolmg said:

Foxy said:

TGOHF said:

stevef said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

stevef said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

stevef said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

rcs1000 said:

stevef said:

The

You keep posting this same point.

Here's the thing:

1. We're not exactly mid-term, so comparing a peak opposition lead three years into a parliament with the current one, eight months in, is disingenuous.

2. The Labour Party is led by Jeremy Corbyn.

And:

3. Brexit is so uncertain and such a complete disruption that any read-across from the past has to be treated with even more scepticism than usual.

Is this the Brexit that Jeremy Corbyn voted for for 30 years, the Brexit that he failed to campaign against in the referendum, and the Brexit which he isnt opposing now?

It is. So far young Labour voters

It's very easy to construct plausible scenarios which range from a good Conservative majority under a new leader to a small Labour majority with the Tories even more split than they are now.

Who knows? It's more uncertain than any time I can remember.

Young people do not decide general elections -there is not enough of them.

It appears to be more uncertain than at any time -but if you look carefully enough you can see all the signs for the Labour defeat to come

On balance I agree with you that a poor Labour result (substantially worse than GE2017) is likely, for the reasons you've given. However I don't share your certainty; there are many unknowns, not least how much blood will be spilt in the civil war in the Conservative Party.

or whether Labour will have a different leader. An Emily Thornberry leadership would be a gamechanger

She'd need to lose weight - can't see a corpulent PM being elected.

I suspect her BMI is not far off British average.

So you are saying she is obese

I think the averageafemalefBMIain the UK is "overweight" with a substantial minority (!!) "obese".

Interesting? A discussion about Brexit has morphed into one about Lady Nugee's weight.

Not much more to be said over Brexit after Boris's speech on our innovative organic carrots. It jumped the shark at that point.

With my diabetes hat on, I am concerned at Britain's lardiness. On the other hand you cannot trust thin people...

Thin people get diabetes too. I guess that leaves you where you are.

Foxy said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Foxy said:

stevef said:

MarqueeMark said:

Gardenwalker said:

Can anyone confirm whether we are supposed to take this new seriously?

The culture war jumped the shark with Trump, but surely if he took money from Czech security services, he must resign from the House (and, of course, the Leadership).

If only the Czechs had piped up in, say, August 2015......

I dont know why the Sun bothers with such ridiculous stories which are unproveable even if they contained a modicum of truth. This sort of thing only helps Corbyn.

Corbyn should be attacked by both his Labour and Tory opponents by showing him up for what he actually is rather than daft stories about spies.

Yep, much more concerning is current Russian interference in our elections and referendums than historic allegations.

Really? You don't think a story of the Leader of the Opposition and potential future PM taking money from an enemy of Britain would (if substantiated) be a big story?

It's a view, I suppose.

Of course, the 'if substantiated' is a very big 'if'.

Well, lets see some evidence.

I wouldn't be surprised at contact, after all Jezza has never hidden his anti Trident, anti NATO position, and famously went on his biker tour of East Germany.

He has never struck me as someone interested in money though, so it would seem out of character. Its not as if he had access to any secrets anyway.

could be/ is a "useful idiot"?

ReggieCide said:

Foxy said:

stevef said:

MarqueeMark said:

Gardenwalker said:

Can anyone confirm whether we are supposed to take this new seriously?

The culture war jumped the shark with Trump, but surely if he took money from Czech security services, he must resign from the House (and, of course, the Leadership).

If only the Czechs had piped up in, say, August 2015......

I dont know why the Sun bothers with such ridiculous stories which are unproveable even if they contained a modicum of truth. This sort of thing only helps Corbyn.

Corbyn should be attacked by both his Labour and Tory opponents by showing him up for what he actually is rather than daft stories about spies.

Yep, much more concerning is current Russian interference in our elections and referendums than historic allegations.

I don't understand all this fuss about international interference. It's what sovereign states do. I can't think of a single exception. Can anyone?

But what is novel is the idea that somebody who wants to be leader of Country A takes money from Country B....to fuck over Country A. Awkward.....

I

Foxy said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Foxy said:

stevef said:

MarqueeMark said:

Gardenwalker said:

Can anyone confirm whether we are supposed to take this new seriously?

The culture war jumped the shark with Trump, but surely if he took money from Czech security services, he must resign from the House (and, of course, the Leadership).

If only the Czechs had piped up in, say, August 2015......

I dont know why the Sun bothers with such ridiculous stories which are unproveable even if they contained a modicum of truth. This sort of thing only helps Corbyn.

Corbyn should be attacked by both his Labour and Tory opponents by showing him up for what he actually is rather than daft stories about spies.

Yep, much more concerning is current Russian interference in our elections and referendums than historic allegations.

Really? You don't think a story of the Leader of the Opposition and potential future PM taking money from an enemy of Britain would (if substantiated) be a big story?

It's a view, I suppose.

Of course, the 'if substantiated' is a very big 'if'.

Well, lets see some evidence.

I wouldn't be surprised at contact, after all Jezza has never hidden his anti Trident, anti NATO position, and famously went on his biker tour of East Germany.

He has never struck me as someone interested in money though, so it would seem out of character. Its not as if he had access to any secrets anyway.

Yes, if it was just a contact, it won't have any impact. Everyone over 40 knows he had an idiotic admiration of the brutal Soviet regime, so that wouldn't be news.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Foxy said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Foxy said:

stevef said:

MarqueeMark said:

Gardenwalker said:

Can anyone confirm whether we are supposed to take this new seriously?

The culture war jumped the shark with Trump, but surely if he took money from Czech security services, he must resign from the House (and, of course, the Leadership).

If only the Czechs had piped up in, say, August 2015......

I dont know why the Sun bothers with such ridiculous stories which are unproveable even if they contained a modicum of truth. This sort of thing only helps Corbyn.

Corbyn should be attacked by both his Labour and Tory opponents by showing him up for what he actually is rather than daft stories about spies.

Yep, much more concerning is current Russian interference in our elections and referendums than historic allegations.

Really? You don't think a story of the Leader of the Opposition and potential future PM taking money from an enemy of Britain would (if substantiated) be a big story?

It's a view, I suppose.

Of course, the 'if substantiated' is a very big 'if'.

Well, lets see some evidence.

I wouldn't be surprised at contact, after all Jezza has never hidden his anti Trident, anti NATO position, and famously went on his biker tour of East Germany.

He has never struck me as someone interested in money though, so it would seem out of character. Its not as if he had access to any secrets anyway.

If the allegations are proven, and it is a big if, his career would hit the buffers

Would it though? The cult doesn't listen. It is all fake news from Murdoch etc etc. And they are the ones who decide his fate.

Were they all at it?
Jack Jones, Soviet spy: Special investigation reveals how union boss sold secrets to the KGB for 45 years
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1218922/JACK-THE-TRAITOR-Special-investigation-reveals-Union-boss-sold-secrets-KGB-45-years.html#ixzz57IUzMqlg

Anyway, I am off out to meet my Russian handler the pub.

Play nicely.

MarqueeMark said:

ReggieCide said:

Foxy said:

stevef said:

MarqueeMark said:

Gardenwalker said:

Can anyone confirm whether we are supposed to take this new seriously?

The culture war jumped the shark with Trump, but surely if he took money from Czech security services, he must resign from the House (and, of course, the Leadership).

If only the Czechs had piped up in, say, August 2015......

I dont know why the Sun bothers with such ridiculous stories which are unproveable even if they contained a modicum of truth. This sort of thing only helps Corbyn.

Corbyn should be attacked by both his Labour and Tory opponents by showing him up for what he actually is rather than daft stories about spies.

Yep, much more concerning is current Russian interference in our elections and referendums than historic allegations.

I don't understand all this fuss about international interference. It's what sovereign states do. I can't think of a single exception. Can anyone?

But what is novel is the idea that somebody who wants to be leader of Country A takes money from Country B....to fuck over Country A. Awkward.....

I

Being found out on any kind of interference is awkward and always has been because it is most likely detrimental to the desired objective of the interference. But the risk is unavoidable and doesn't deter.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Foxy said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Foxy said:

stevef said:

MarqueeMark said:

Gardenwalker said:

Can anyone confirm whether we are supposed to take this new seriously?

The culture war jumped the shark with Trump, but surely if he took money from Czech security services, he must resign from the House (and, of course, the Leadership).

If only the Czechs had piped up in, say, August 2015......

I dont know why the Sun bothers with such ridiculous stories which are unproveable even if they contained a modicum of truth. This sort of thing only helps Corbyn.

Corbyn should be attacked by both his Labour and Tory opponents by showing him up for what he actually is rather than daft stories about spies.

Yep, much more concerning is current Russian interference in our elections and referendums than historic allegations.

Really? You don't think a story of the Leader of the Opposition and potential future PM taking money from an enemy of Britain would (if substantiated) be a big story?

It's a view, I suppose.

Of course, the 'if substantiated' is a very big 'if'.

Well, lets see some evidence.

I wouldn't be surprised at contact, after all Jezza has never hidden his anti Trident, anti NATO position, and famously went on his biker tour of East Germany.

He has never struck me as someone interested in money though, so it would seem out of character. Its not as if he had access to any secrets anyway.

If the allegations are proven, and it is a big if, his career would hit the buffers

Maybe the Czech handlers have pictures of him engaged in disturbing activities? It might not involve glass tables but it could be something very embarrassing.

SNP winning Bonnybridge seems pretty big. Pre 2017 that kind of first round numbers meant one of Labour or Cons won via transfers.

It feels to me like the Sun have something on Corbyn that isn't newsworthy in itself, but that will be if he's asked the right question and denies something or other in parliament. Or perhaps they're simply hoping that someone will come forwards with something or other.

Just a hunch mind.

Given how mad the guy is I think its frankly amazing that the Labour party have managed to keep his secrets buried. I'm completely sure he's not always had our nation's best interests at heart (and although that's not good, these things were some while ago), but can't really see treasonous goings on.

Overall I imagine that the KGB and others would have viewed absolutely all of the current Labour leadership as completely worthless potential targets.

Politicians that seem to be magically richer than their background suggests are of more current interest in my view (and before you ask the answer is no).

geoffw said:

Were they all at it?
Jack Jones, Soviet spy: Special investigation reveals how union boss sold secrets to the KGB for 45 years
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1218922/JACK-THE-TRAITOR-Special-investigation-reveals-Union-boss-sold-secrets-KGB-45-years.html#ixzz57IUzMqlg

Back in the day it was almost de rigueur for Labour movers and shakers to be "supporters" of the USSR.

ReggieCide said:

geoffw said:

Agent COB:
“When the Sunday Times falsely accused Michael Foot of being a Soviet ‘agent of influence’ he sued, won, and bought a new kitchen,” said Paul Richards, who served as a special adviser to Hazel Blears and Patricia Hewitt.

“I assume Corbyn will now do the same with the Sun?”
https://www.totalpolitics.com/articles/diary/labour-adviser-counsels-jeremy-corbyn-over-commie-spy-smear

I'd be surprised if Corbyn would want this story hanging around, which suing the Sun might well achieve.

If I were Corbyn, I'd sue like Foot did, and win. Damage the Sun and get a new kitchen.

rcs1000 said:

Foxy said:

Sure, but Britains obesity epidemic is behind the doubling of the number with diabetes in the UK to 4 million over the last 20 years. It is likely to double again in the next 20.

At the current rate of increase, more than 200% of the population will have diabetes by 2100.

Already the rate is more than 50% in some populations, such as adult males in Saudi, your jest may come true...

MarqueeMark said:

Foxy said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Foxy said:

stevef said:

MarqueeMark said:

Gardenwalker said:

Can anyone confirm whether we are supposed to take this new seriously?

The culture war jumped the shark with Trump, but surely if he took money from Czech security services, he must resign from the House (and, of course, the Leadership).

If only the Czechs had piped up in, say, August 2015......

I dont know why the Sun bothers with such ridiculous stories which are unproveable even if they contained a modicum of truth. This sort of thing only helps Corbyn.

Corbyn should be attacked by both his Labour and Tory opponents by showing him up for what he actually is rather than daft stories about spies.

Yep, much more concerning is current Russian interference in our elections and referendums than historic allegations.

Really? You don't think a story of the Leader of the Opposition and potential future PM taking money from an enemy of Britain would (if substantiated) be a big story?

It's a view, I suppose.

Of course, the 'if substantiated' is a very big 'if'.

Well, lets see some evidence.

I wouldn't be surprised at contact, after all Jezza has never hidden his anti Trident, anti NATO position, and famously went on his biker tour of East Germany.

He has never struck me as someone interested in money though, so it would seem out of character. Its not as if he had access to any secrets anyway.

The £20,000 he took from Iranian TV would kinda hole your "out of character" defence below the waterline.....

Did he ever try to conceal it?

The_Taxman said:

Mexicanpete said:

stevef said:

Foxy said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Foxy said:

stevef said:

MarqueeMark said:

Gardenwalker said:

Can anyone confirm whether we are supposed to take this new seriously?

The culture war jumped the shark with Trump, but surely if he took money from Czech security services, he must resign from the House (and, of course, the Leadership).

If only the Czechs had piped up in, say, August 2015......

I dont know why the Sun bothers with such ridiculous stories which are unproveable even if they contained a modicum of truth. This sort of thing only helps Corbyn.

Corbyn should be attacked by both his Labour and Tory opponents by showing him up for what he actually is rather than daft stories about spies.

Yep, much more concerning is current Russian interference in our elections and referendums than historic allegations.

Really? You don't think a story of the Leader of the Opposition and potential future PM taking money from an enemy of Britain would (if substantiated) be a big story?

It's a view, I suppose.

Of course, the 'if substantiated' is a very big 'if'.

Well, lets see some evidence.

I wouldn't be surprised at contact, after all Jezza has never hidden his anti Trident, anti NATO position, and famously went on his biker tour of East Germany.

He has never struck me as someone interested in money though, so it would seem out of character. Its not as if he had access to any secrets anyway.

The problem is that its impossible to prove. Unless there were a money transaction "smoking gun" which seems unlikely.

You will notice that the BBC isnt running with the story. The news channels are scared of saying anything critical of Corbyn.....

Interesting that you haven't joined in the PB Tory w***fest over this story. I assume you consider this is already priced in for Corbyn.

Corbyn is a useless Soviet stooge isn't a remarkable revelation. If agents were compromised through his duplicity would be a different, if surprising issue.

Yes, but if he did something kinky and the security forces have film of it this might cause Corbyn a lot of problems as he would have been compromised. Whether he took any money or not is difficult to prove. If I was going after the Labour Leader I would seek to exploit any sexual activity that is in essence non mainstream.

Corbynistas really must get out of this silly tendency of accusing anyone who is against Corbyn of being a Tory. It makes them look ridiculous and as the very narrow religious cult that they are.

The free trading Anglosphere...
https://twitter.com/sdonnan/status/964566437116497922

Despite desperate appeals from the Eastern Bloc,Mr Corbyn never gave away his secret recipe for his blackberry and apple jam.

williamglenn said:

The free trading Anglosphere...
https://twitter.com/sdonnan/status/964566437116497922

Not great news for American car makers. Although I'm guessing they'll be next in line, and using this as an excuse for their own tariffs.

This is what happened last time major trading nations started imposing tariffs.



It did not do the working man much good then.

SouthamObserver said:

The Tories not being able to handsomely defeat an opposition being led by someone who spied for the Soviet Union would be quite something.

Not the USSR, just the Czechoslovakians.

The USSR only went for the cream of the crop, movers and shakers ..... eg Jack Jones.

SouthamObserver said:

The Tories not being able to handsomely defeat an opposition being led by someone who spied for the Soviet Union would be quite something.

However, I find it hard to believe that the Soviets were so imcompetent they recruited someone who would not be in apposition to supply them with any info relating tot he British state. I guess what he may have been able to provide is insights into the tortuous relationships and enmities that characterised the far left back in the day (as they do now, too, of course). Having some insight into who was up and who was down might have been worthwhile in some small way - especially given the far left's control of some councils, especially in London.

If you play the video here, they've got the original Czech documents which explain what they were interested in (mainly internal Labour Party stuff plus info about anti-communist organisations):

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5597516/jeremy-corbyn-paid-communist-spy-czech-republic-labour/

Doesn't look like much of a money trail, TBH, so I think he'll get away with it. Even so, it's the kind of drip-drip which won't help Labour at the next election, even if it's hardly news to anyone who knows anything that he was a communist stooge (which to be fair he didn't conceal).

I think the real reason this Corbyn story has no traction is because even if it is true it doesn't tell us anything really new.

It would tell us he is a liar. It would tell us he is an admirer of totalitarian regimes. It would tell us he is unscrupulous. It would tell us he is treacherous. It would tell us he is a security risk.

But even the most cursory glance at his behaviour and public statements over Iran, Venezuela, the DDR, Hamas and the IRA would have told anyone with half a brain that already.

Yet despite that being a central theme of the Tory campaign it didn't make any impression on his admirers and indeed seemed to increase his vote because people believed - wrongly - that it was a smear campaign. So it seems to me unlikely this story will have any impact either.

It comes to something when my immediate reaction accusations that the Leader of the Opposition is a traitor is 'meh' - even when the accusations are in the Sun - but that's what it amounts to.

ydoethur said:

I think the real reason this Corbyn story has no traction is because even if it is true it doesn't tell us anything really new.

It would tell us he is a liar. It would tell us he is an admirer of totalitarian regimes. It would tell us he is unscrupulous. It would tell us he is treacherous. It would tell us he is a security risk.

But even the most cursory glance at his behaviour and public statements over Iran, Venezuela, the DDR, Hamas and the IRA would have told anyone with half a brain that already.

Yet despite that being a central theme of the Tory campaign it didn't make any impression on his admirers and indeed seemed to increase his vote because people believed - wrongly - that it was a smear campaign. So it seems to me unlikely this story will have any impact either.

It comes to something when my immediate reaction accusations that the Leader of the Opposition is a traitor is 'meh' - even when the accusations are in the Sun - but that's what it amounts to.

I always thought you were a Corbyn supporter.

Richard_Nabavi said:

SouthamObserver said:

The Tories not being able to handsomely defeat an opposition being led by someone who spied for the Soviet Union would be quite something.

However, I find it hard to believe that the Soviets were so imcompetent they recruited someone who would not be in apposition to supply them with any info relating tot he British state. I guess what he may have been able to provide is insights into the tortuous relationships and enmities that characterised the far left back in the day (as they do now, too, of course). Having some insight into who was up and who was down might have been worthwhile in some small way - especially given the far left's control of some councils, especially in London.

If you play the video here, they've got the original Czech documents which explain what they were interested in (mainly internal Labour Party stuff plus info about anti-communist organisations):

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5597516/jeremy-corbyn-paid-communist-spy-czech-republic-labour/

Doesn't look like much of a money trail, TBH, so I think he'll get away with it. Even so, it's the kind of drip-drip which won't help Labour at the next election, even if it's hardly news to anyone who knows anything that he was a communist stooge (which to be fair he didn't conceal).

All this is why the Tories can bank 40% or so already for the next GE. Corbyn has always hated the British state and always will - that is enough for millions of voters to do all they can to prevent him becoming PM. If the Tories could find their way to a next generation leader from the centre with no serious Brexit associations they would be looking at a huge majority next time around.

SouthamObserver said:

The Tories not being able to handsomely defeat an opposition being led by someone who spied for the Soviet Union would be quite something.

However, I find it hard to believe that the Soviets were so imcompetent they recruited someone who would not be in apposition to supply them with any info relating tot he British state. I guess what he may have been able to provide is insights into the tortuous relationships and enmities that characterised the far left back in the day (as they do now, too, of course). Having some insight into who was up and who was down might have been worthwhile in some small way - especially given the far left's control of some councils, especially in London.

You have to be 27 to have even been born at the time of the Soviet Union and 47 to have any real memory of the Berlin Wall coming down, coincidentally the age you were more likely to be a Tory than Labour voter at the last general election

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

SouthamObserver said:

The Tories not being able to handsomely defeat an opposition being led by someone who spied for the Soviet Union would be quite something.

However, I find it hard to believe that the Soviets were so imcompetent they recruited someone who would not be in apposition to supply them with any info relating tot he British state. I guess what he may have been able to provide is insights into the tortuous relationships and enmities that characterised the far left back in the day (as they do now, too, of course). Having some insight into who was up and who was down might have been worthwhile in some small way - especially given the far left's control of some councils, especially in London.

If you play the video here, they've got the original Czech documents which explain what they were interested in (mainly internal Labour Party stuff plus info about anti-communist organisations):

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5597516/jeremy-corbyn-paid-communist-spy-czech-republic-labour/

Doesn't look like much of a money trail, TBH, so I think he'll get away with it. Even so, it's the kind of drip-drip which won't help Labour at the next election, even if it's hardly news to anyone who knows anything that he was a communist stooge (which to be fair he didn't conceal).

All this is why the Tories can bank 40% or so already for the next GE. Corbyn has always hated the British state and always will - that is enough for millions of voters ot fo all they can to prevent him becoming PM. If the Tories could find their way to a next generation leader from the centre with no serious Brexit associations they would be looking at a huge majority next time around.

Not huge, Corbyn also has 40% banked and the Tories have only won a 4th term once in the last century and that was with a majority of just 21

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

The Tories not being able to handsomely defeat an opposition being led by someone who spied for the Soviet Union would be quite something.

However, I find it hard to believe that the Soviets were so imcompetent they recruited someone who would not be in apposition to supply them with any info relating tot he British state. I guess what he may have been able to provide is insights into the tortuous relationships and enmities that characterised the far left back in the day (as they do now, too, of course). Having some insight into who was up and who was down might have been worthwhile in some small way - especially given the far left's control of some councils, especially in London.

You have to be 27 to have even been born at the time of the Soviet Union and 47 to have any real memory of the Berlin Wall coming down, coincidentally the age you were more likely to be a Tory than Labour voter at the last general election

I'm 43 and I remember the Berlin wall coming down.

The May - Merkel conference today was quite encouraging. It is clear neither leader wants a hard Brexit and the commentators were more complimentary.

The lesson I took from their respective body languages was that they quite like each other and there is a deal to be done.

I expect others will be less kind but this is my homest opinion

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

SouthamObserver said:

The Tories not being able to handsomely defeat an opposition being led by someone who spied for the Soviet Union would be quite something.

However, I find it hard to believe that the Soviets were so imcompetent they recruited someone who would not be in apposition to supply them with any info relating tot he British state. I guess what he may have been able to provide is insights into the tortuous relationships and enmities that characterised the far left back in the day (as they do now, too, of course). Having some insight into who was up and who was down might have been worthwhile in some small way - especially given the far left's control of some councils, especially in London.

If you play the video here, they've got the original Czech documents which explain what they were interested in (mainly internal Labour Party stuff plus info about anti-communist organisations):

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5597516/jeremy-corbyn-paid-communist-spy-czech-republic-labour/

Doesn't look like much of a money trail, TBH, so I think he'll get away with it. Even so, it's the kind of drip-drip which won't help Labour at the next election, even if it's hardly news to anyone who knows anything that he was a communist stooge (which to be fair he didn't conceal).

All this is why the Tories can bank 40% or so already for the next GE. Corbyn has always hated the British state and always will - that is enough for millions of voters ot fo all they can to prevent him becoming PM. If the Tories could find their way to a next generation leader from the centre with no serious Brexit associations they would be looking at a huge majority next time around.

Not huge, Corbyn also has 40% banked and the Tories have only won a 4th term once in the last century and that was with a majority of just 21

No. Corbyn doesnt have 40% banked. This is the big mistake of Corbynista lap of honour runners since last June. Many of those 40% voted Labour believing Jeremy Corbyn would not be prime minister. Many of them voted Labour on that basis. Many voted Labour to stop Theresa may getting a landslide for a no deal Brexit. The Labour 40% is exeptionally soft and liable to crumble.

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

SouthamObserver said:

The Tories not being able to handsomely defeat an opposition being led by someone who spied for the Soviet Union would be quite something.

However, I find it hard to believe that the Soviets were so imcompetent they recruited someone who would not be in apposition to supply them with any info relating tot he British state. I guess what he may have been able to provide is insights into the tortuous relationships and enmities that characterised the far left back in the day (as they do now, too, of course). Having some insight into who was up and who was down might have been worthwhile in some small way - especially given the far left's control of some councils, especially in London.

If you play the video here, they've got the original Czech documents which explain what they were interested in (mainly internal Labour Party stuff plus info about anti-communist organisations):

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5597516/jeremy-corbyn-paid-communist-spy-czech-republic-labour/

Doesn't look like much of a money trail, TBH, so I think he'll get away with it. Even so, it's the kind of drip-drip which won't help Labour at the next election, even if it's hardly news to anyone who knows anything that he was a communist stooge (which to be fair he didn't conceal).

All this is why the Tories can bank 40% or so already for the next GE. Corbyn has always hated the British state and always will - that is enough for millions of voters ot fo all they can to prevent him becoming PM. If the Tories could find their way to a next generation leader from the centre with no serious Brexit associations they would be looking at a huge majority next time around.

Not huge, Corbyn also has 40% banked and the Tories have only won a 4th term once in the last century and that was with a majority of just 21

Post-Brexit, with a conciliatory centrist in charge of the Tories and the loons back on the fringes where they belong, that Labour coalition would be very fragile. Make Johnson or Rees Mogg leader and I agree it would be rock solid.

SouthamObserver said:

The Tories not being able to handsomely defeat an opposition being led by someone who spied for the Soviet Union would be quite something.

However, I find it hard to believe that the Soviets were so imcompetent they recruited someone who would not be in apposition to supply them with any info relating tot he British state. I guess what he may have been able to provide is insights into the tortuous relationships and enmities that characterised the far left back in the day (as they do now, too, of course). Having some insight into who was up and who was down might have been worthwhile in some small way - especially given the far left's control of some councils, especially in London.

I wouldn't be too hard on the Tories.

The electorate are increasingly incompetent. Me too! In the past it would be blindingly obvious to everyone that today's politicians were not fit to hold office. That would be because everyone read a newspaper and newspapers even at their very worst are actually good. There is an increasing list of subjects where what is actually discussed is nothing to do at all with the reality - for example economics, education and immigration. Oh and defence.

Let's take Defence. We spend fortunes on this, and yet it's really quite hard to see any results. The Army nips in, and the first thing they do is backtrack. More equipment please. The Navy has sinking ships, and in the slightest of hostile environments surrenders. The men and women of the armed services I don't doubt for one moment want to live up to the astonishingly high standards that we've come to ask from them, but they're not actually put in a position to do so.

Reverting back to politics though, we need the electorate to have some real understanding of the issues, and this whole nonsense whereby government funded institutions (IFS) somehow rubberstamp nonsense has to stop.

We as a nation are in a massive economic hole. We have a hopeless plan for our own defence. Our nation's health system is failing - the poor and the old see it as a limitless crutch. The education of our populace is increasingly bad. All of these problems are exacerbated by the influx of even less helpful people than our own.

Things will be fine though. The market is wiser than I am, and solutions will shine through. What we can't do is forever believe that this get-out-of-jail scheme will work though. Shooting with pea-shooters that fire 300-ton peas (preferably many times over) all of the members of the IFS seems like a start to me.

ydoethur said:

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

SouthamObserver said:

The Tories not being able to handsomely defeat an opposition being led by someone who spied for the Soviet Union would be quite something.

However, I find it hard to believe that the Soviets were so imcompetent they recruited someone who would not be in apposition to supply them with any info relating tot he British state. I guess what he may have been able to provide is insights into the tortuous relationships and enmities that characterised the far left back in the day (as they do now, too, of course). Having some insight into who was up and who was down might have been worthwhile in some small way - especially given the far left's control of some councils, especially in London.

If you play the video here, they've got the original Czech documents which explain what they were interested in (mainly internal Labour Party stuff plus info about anti-communist organisations):

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5597516/jeremy-corbyn-paid-communist-spy-czech-republic-labour/

Doesn't look like much of a money trail, TBH, so I think he'll get away with it. Even so, it's the kind of drip-drip which won't help Labour at the next election, even if it's hardly news to anyone who knows anything that he was a communist stooge (which to be fair he didn't conceal).

All this is why the Tories can bank 40% or so already for the next GE. Corbyn has always hated the British state and always will - that is enough for millions of voters ot fo all they can to prevent him becoming PM. If the Tories could find their way to a next generation leader from the centre with no serious Brexit associations they would be looking at a huge majority next time around.

Not huge, Corbyn also has 40% banked and the Tories have only won a 4th term once in the last century and that was with a majority of just 21

On the other hand that was after 13 years of solo rule. This would be after 12 years, 7 not including the coalition. Even in 1992 on a uniform swing they would have had a majority of 77.

I agree though that a large majority seems highly unlikely.

For most voters 2010 to 2015 was a Tory led government

ydoethur said:

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

SouthamObserver said:

The Tories not being able to handsomely defeat an opposition being led by someone who spied for the Soviet Union would be quite something.

However, I find it hard to believe that the Soviets were so imcompetent they recruited someone who would not be in apposition to supply them with any info relating tot he British state. I guess what he may have been able to provide is insights into the tortuous relationships and enmities that characterised the far left back in the day (as they do now, too, of course). Having some insight into who was up and who was down might have been worthwhile in some small way - especially given the far left's control of some councils, especially in London.

If you play the video here, they've got the original Czech documents which explain what they were interested in (mainly internal Labour Party stuff plus info about anti-communist organisations):

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5597516/jeremy-corbyn-paid-communist-spy-czech-republic-labour/

Doesn't look like much of a money trail, TBH, so I think he'll get away with it. Even so, it's the kind of drip-drip which won't help Labour at the next election, even if it's hardly news to anyone who knows anything that he was a communist stooge (which to be fair he didn't conceal).

All this is why the Tories can bank 40% or so already for the next GE. Corbyn has always hated the British state and always will - that is enough for millions of voters ot fo all they can to prevent him becoming PM. If the Tories could find their way to a next generation leader from the centre with no serious Brexit associations they would be looking at a huge majority next time around.

Not huge, Corbyn also has 40% banked and the Tories have only won a 4th term once in the last century and that was with a majority of just 21

On the other hand that was after 13 years of solo rule. This would be after 12 years, 7 not including the coalition. Even in 1992 on a uniform swing they would have had a majority of 77.

I agree though that a large majority seems highly unlikely.

Any majority for the Tories, even a majority of 1, and Corbyn is gone. He would have lost two elections, he will be 73, and he will be gone. And that means McDonnell and Abbott gone too. Labour will have a chance to be mainstream again -after the showdown with Momentum.

stevef said:

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

SouthamObserver said:

The Tories not being able to handsomely defeat an opposition being led by someone who spied for the Soviet Union would be quite something.

However, I find it hard to believe that the Soviets were so imcompetent they recruited someone who would not be in apposition to supply them with any info relating tot he British state. I guess what he may have been able to provide is insights into the tortuous relationships and enmities that characterised the far left back in the day (as they do now, too, of course). Having some insight into who was up and who was down might have been worthwhile in some small way - especially given the far left's control of some councils, especially in London.

If you play the video here, they've got the original Czech documents which explain what they were interested in (mainly internal Labour Party stuff plus info about anti-communist organisations):

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5597516/jeremy-corbyn-paid-communist-spy-czech-republic-labour/

Doesn't look like much of a money trail, TBH, so I think he'll get away with it. Even so, it's the kind of drip-drip which won't help Labour at the next election, even if it's hardly news to anyone who knows anything that he was a communist stooge (which to be fair he didn't conceal).

All this is why the Tories can bank 40% or so already for the next GE. Corbyn has always hated the British state and always will - that is enough for millions of voters ot fo all they can to prevent him becoming PM. If the Tories could find their way to a next generation leader from the centre with no serious Brexit associations they would be looking at a huge majority next time around.

Not huge, Corbyn also has 40% banked and the Tories have only won a 4th term once in the last century and that was with a majority of just 21

No. Corbyn doesnt have 40% banked. This is the big mistake of Corbynista lap of honour runners since last June. Many of those 40% voted Labour believing Jeremy Corbyn would not be prime minister. Many of them voted Labour on that basis. Many voted Labour to stop Theresa may getting a landslide for a no deal Brexit. The Labour 40% is exeptionally soft and liable to crumble.

I can see very few if any of those 2017 Labour voters going Tory next time, a handful might go LD if Corbyn is not seen as pro soft Brexit and pro single market enough which admittedly might be enough to give the Tories a small majority by itself

Big_G_NorthWales said:

ydoethur said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

The May - Merkel conference today was quite encouraging. It is clear neither leader wants a hard Brexit and the commentators were more complimentary.

The lesson I took from their respective body languages was that they quite like each other and there is a deal to be done.

I expect others will be less kind but this is my homest opinion

It's not the will that's lacking, it's the time factor that worries me. I don't think anyone wants a major recession throughout the EU and UK triggered by a hard Brexit but we're rapidly running out of time for anything else.

I can see a longer transistion in the end

I have said that for a long time.

Yorkcity said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

ydoethur said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

The May - Merkel conference today was quite encouraging. It is clear neither leader wants a hard Brexit and the commentators were more complimentary.

The lesson I took from their respective body languages was that they quite like each other and there is a deal to be done.

I expect others will be less kind but this is my homest opinion

It's not the will that's lacking, it's the time factor that worries me. I don't think anyone wants a major recession throughout the EU and UK triggered by a hard Brexit but we're rapidly running out of time for anything else.

I can see a longer transistion in the end

I have said that for a long time.

Yes you have and it seems more likely day by day

ydoethur said:

HYUFD said:

ydoethur said:

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

The Tories not being able to handsomely defeat an opposition being led by someone who spied for the Soviet Union would be quite something.

However, I find it hard to believe that the Soviets were so imcompetent they recruited someone who would not be in apposition to supply them with any info relating tot he British state. I guess what he may have been able to provide is insights into the tortuous relationships and enmities that characterised the far left back in the day (as they do now, too, of course). Having some insight into who was up and who was down might have been worthwhile in some small way - especially given the far left's control of some councils, especially in London.

You have to be 27 to have even been born at the time of the Soviet Union and 47 to have any real memory of the Berlin Wall coming down, coincidentally the age you were more likely to be a Tory than Labour voter at the last general election

I am a year older than you and I assure you I remember the fall of the Berlin Wall and the kidnapping of Gorbachev.

You are a history teacher and even you are well into your 30s

I wasn't a history teacher at age 6!

Though I presume you had a well above average interest in it for your age

HYUFD said:

ydoethur said:

HYUFD said:

ydoethur said:

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

The Tories not being able to handsomely defeat an opposition being led by someone who spied for the Soviet Union would be quite something.

However, I find it hard to believe that the Soviets were so imcompetent they recruited someone who would not be in apposition to supply them with any info relating tot he British state. I guess what he may have been able to provide is insights into the tortuous relationships and enmities that characterised the far left back in the day (as they do now, too, of course). Having some insight into who was up and who was down might have been worthwhile in some small way - especially given the far left's control of some councils, especially in London.

You have to be 27 to have even been born at the time of the Soviet Union and 47 to have any real memory of the Berlin Wall coming down, coincidentally the age you were more likely to be a Tory than Labour voter at the last general election

I am a year older than you and I assure you I remember the fall of the Berlin Wall and the kidnapping of Gorbachev.

You are a history teacher and even you are well into your 30s

I wasn't a history teacher at age 6!

Though I presume you had a well above average interest in it for your age

You would presume wrongly. Literature rather than history was my passion until I was 17.

HYUFD said:

ydoethur said:

HYUFD said:

ydoethur said:

HYUFD said:

ydoethur said:

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

The Tories not being able to handsomely defeat an opposition being led by someone who spied for the Soviet Union would be quite something.

However, I find it hard to believe that the Soviets were so imcompetent they recruited someone who would not be in apposition to supply them with any info relating tot he British state. I guess what he may have been able to provide is insights into the tortuous relationships and enmities that characterised the far left back in the day (as they do now, too, of course). Having some insight into who was up and who was down might have been worthwhile in some small way - especially given the far left's control of some councils, especially in London.

You have to be 27 to have even been born at the time of the Soviet Union and 47 to have any real memory of the Berlin Wall coming down, coincidentally the age you were more likely to be a Tory than Labour voter at the last general election

I am a year older than you and I assure you I remember the fall of the Berlin Wall and the kidnapping of Gorbachev.

You are a history teacher and even you are well into your 30s

I wasn't a history teacher at age 6!

Though I presume you had a well above average interest in it for your age

You would presume wrongly. Literature rather than history was my passion until I was 17.

I expect you still had well above average historical knowledge, an interest in literature is not far removed from an interest in history and most 6 year olds do not have a great knowledge of either

As conversations go this one is becoming faintly surreal.

ydoethur said:

HYUFD said:

ydoethur said:

HYUFD said:

ydoethur said:

HYUFD said:

ydoethur said:

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

The Tories not being able to handsomely defeat an opposition being led by someone who spied for the Soviet Union would be quite something.

However, I find it hard to believe that the Soviets were so imcompetent they recruited someone who would not be in apposition to supply them with any info relating tot he British state. I guess what he may have been able to provide is insights into the tortuous relationships and enmities that characterised the far left back in the day (as they do now, too, of course). Having some insight into who was up and who was down might have been worthwhile in some small way - especially given the far left's control of some councils, especially in London.

You have to be 27 to have even been born at the time of the Soviet Union and 47 to have any real memory of the Berlin Wall coming down, coincidentally the age you were more likely to be a Tory than Labour voter at the last general election

I am a year older than you and I assure you I remember the fall of the Berlin Wall and the kidnapping of Gorbachev.

You are a history teacher and even you are well into your 30s

I wasn't a history teacher at age 6!

Though I presume you had a well above average interest in it for your age

You would presume wrongly. Literature rather than history was my passion until I was 17.

I expect you still had well above average historical knowledge, an interest in literature is not far removed from an interest in history and most 6 year olds do not have a great knowledge of either

As conversations go this one is becoming faintly surreal.

Euripides eat your heart out.

Omnium said:

ydoethur said:

Omnium said:

Let's take Defence. We spend fortunes on this, and yet it's really quite hard to see any results. The Army nips in, and the first thing they do is backtrack. More equipment please. The Navy has sinking ships, and in the slightest of hostile environments surrenders. The men and women of the armed services I don't doubt for one moment want to live up to the astonishingly high standards that we've come to ask from them, but they're not actually put in a position to do so.

You may enjoy this quotation from Shepperd Frere's Britannia, published in 1967. It refers to the weakening of Roman authority over Britannia allowing the Saxon incursions:

'The plight of a prosperous people dependent for their defence on a foreign power whose strategic interests were in the last analysis centred elsewhere is not without interest today.'

I do indeed enjoy that quotation, and I'd not read it before. What did he conclude?

We though are not really "dependent for their defence on a foreign power". At least not in principle. Our first, last and best defence will always just be the people of this nation. The defence that will actually defend in the first instance is the one we train and pay for. They need to do far better. (All of them.)

It was part of a wider conclusion that as Britannia was peripheral to Roman interests it was one of the first places to be formally let go as central authority weakened. (That said, it spent a lot of time letting itself go as divers governors tried to build little kingdoms of their own or struck at the Imperial crown.) The throwaway line was really for his own ironic amusement as much as anything I think.

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

The Tories not being able to handsomely defeat an opposition being led by someone who spied for the Soviet Union would be quite something.

However, I find it hard to believe that the Soviets were so imcompetent they recruited someone who would not be in apposition to supply them with any info relating tot he British state. I guess what he may have been able to provide is insights into the tortuous relationships and enmities that characterised the far left back in the day (as they do now, too, of course). Having some insight into who was up and who was down might have been worthwhile in some small way - especially given the far left's control of some councils, especially in London.

You have to be 27 to have even been born at the time of the Soviet Union and 47 to have any real memory of the Berlin Wall coming down, coincidentally the age you were more likely to be a Tory than Labour voter at the last general election

I'm 43 and I remember the Berlin wall coming down.

We recently passed the point where the Berlin Wall has been down longer than it was up.....

NickPalmer said:

Sign of the times - Opinium has started asking in its intro questions: "Are you male, female, or other?" I wonder what the "Other" cross-tab will show?

Just wait for the 2021 Census.

stevef said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

stevef said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

stevef said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

rcs1000 said:

stevef said:

The

I suspect her BMI is not far off British average.

So you are saying she is obese

I think the averageafemalefBMIain the UK is "overweight" with a substantial minority (!!) "obese".

Interesting? A discussion about Brexit has morphed into one about Lady Nugee's weight.

Not much more to be said over Brexit after Boris's speech on our innovative organic carrots. It jumped the shark at that point.

With my diabetes hat on, I am concerned at Britain's lardiness. On the other hand you cannot trust thin people...

Thin people get diabetes too. I guess that leaves you where you are.

Sure, but Britains obesity epidemic is behind the doubling of the number with diabetes in the UK to 4 million over the last 20 years. It is likely to double again in the next 20.

I am diabetic too and your "data" completely ignores the probability that there are millions of Brits with diabetes, walking around undiagnosed. There are also causes of diabetes other than obesity (although it is undoubtedly a significant factor in the increase in type 2 diabetes) e.g. obesity is very rarely a factor in type 1 diabetes and Afro-Asians are generically more susceptible to type 2 diabetes. As a diabetic it behoves you to take a more discerning approach to diabetes than the popular meeja. It is a complicated disease and containing the spread of obesity would I'm sure help contain the spread of diabetes. Dabbling with broad brush personal observations dressed up as fact, doesn't help.