Skip to content
Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Today could be the day that Corbyn’s Labour Party finally spli

SystemSystem Posts: 12,588
edited February 2019 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Today could be the day that Corbyn’s Labour Party finally splits

Solidarity ?? pic.twitter.com/lggiXOFRhX

Read the full story here


«134567…11

Comments

  • PClippPClipp Posts: 2,138
    First.....
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    I bet nothing happens. The splitters now have perfect cover for inaction, in that no one wants to trigger a big fight the day after one of their colleagues passes away.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,625
    Another Douglas!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,625
    RIP Flynn.
  • Matrix15Matrix15 Posts: 2
    Endillion said:

    I bet nothing happens. The splitters now have perfect cover for inaction, in that no one wants to trigger a big fight the day after one of their colleagues passes away.

    I imagine you're correct, not much point artificially inflating lib Dems ranks for no obvious gain.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,067
    I’ll believe all the talk of a new party when it actually happens, and they put up a candidate in the Newport by-election.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679
    Well I hope it doesn't happen. We need a strong Labour Party.

    But I have just heard Stephen Kinnock on the radio saying that he is sticking with Labour. That has to encourage people to leave it.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,848
    Damn, RIP Paul Flynn.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,848
    Endillion said:

    I bet nothing happens. The splitters now have perfect cover for inaction, in that no one wants to trigger a big fight the day after one of their colleagues passes away.

    Yep, there would have been inactivity regardless though
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,067
    Occasionally funny, occasionally wrong and occasionally sweary. Comedian John Oliver on Brexit, to a mainly American audience.
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hs1s7mK-yH8
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    Endillion said:

    I bet nothing happens. The splitters now have perfect cover for inaction, in that no one wants to trigger a big fight the day after one of their colleagues passes away.

    One can easily see there always being an excuse for putting off action to a tomorrow that never quite comes. I know there are already six ex-Labour independents in the Commons, but I'm pretty sure they are all suspended, deselected and jumped-before-they-were-pushed cases. Dugher has gone of his own volition but he, of course, is already an ex-MP.

    In other words, like most people (I would imagine,) I'll believe a split if and when I see it. And, unless the defectors are going to set up a new party and try to take Labour down, how would it be anything other than a completely futile gesture anyway?

    Of course, if the split does actually occur then it would have one upside for the Labour leadership. There'd be no shortage of vacant Parliamentary candidate slots for them to parachute Shameless Shamima into when she gets back from Syria.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,408
    Sorry to hear the news about Paul Flynn. Didn't agree with him, didn't much like him, but he was a devoted servant of Newport and it badly needs every friend it can get.

    But I think we all knew this was imminent when he was too ill to be even carried to the Withdrawal Agreement Vote.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,497
    After 32 years as an MP, you'd imagine that Paul Flynn must have had a chunk of his 5k majority as a personal vote.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,067
    ydoethur said:

    Sorry to hear the news about Paul Flynn. Didn't agree with him, didn't much like him, but he was a devoted servant of Newport and it badly needs every friend it can get.

    But I think we all knew this was imminent when he was too ill to be even carried to the Withdrawal Agreement Vote.

    Well said. RIP, condolences to his family.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,408
    On topic, if there is a 'schism' and Leslie and Ummuna walk, can we call them the Wee Frees?
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    If there is a split it’s not enough for the new party to be anti-stuff. It has to be for things as well. The UK needs radical change in just about every way you can imagine. That has to be the focus. Beyond that, a new party is up against FPTP, so is likely to fail. I suspect that will end up dictating how most Labour MPs respond to its launch. Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,408
    MarqueeMark said:

    After 32 years as an MP, you'd imagine that Paul Flynn must have had a chunk of his 5k majority as a personal vote.

    I would have thought that would have been more than balanced by those dubious about voting for a man in his 80s in case he suffered a serious illness (as unfortunately happened).

    I cannot see Newport West going blue in a by-election. A general election it wouldn't be out of the question but it would still be unlikely.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,408
    SouthamObserver said:

    Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

    Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

    Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

    Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

    Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.

    Then they will drive more and more MPs and voters to the new party. Either way it’s a win for the sane, non-racist, internationalist left.

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,497
    SouthamObserver said:

    Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

    No - it will be easier to paint them as grotesques. They are prepared to remain and be complicit in anti-semitism, because they thought overturning the Brexit referendum result was more important.

    What strength.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    This sounds familiar, doesn’t it?

    https://twitter.com/shashj/status/1097243529955426309?s=21
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,408
    SouthamObserver said:

    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

    Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

    Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.
    Then they will drive more and more MPs and voters to the new party. Either way it’s a win for the sane, non-racist, internationalist left.
    The crucial figure is 130, because at that moment the party would become the Opposition. If they get to that figure, then the Left will indeed have won a crucial victory.

    And Percy the Pig will be on his second loop the loop.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    MarqueeMark said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

    No - it will be easier to paint them as grotesques. They are prepared to remain and be complicit in anti-semitism, because they thought overturning the Brexit referendum result was more important.

    What strength.

    I suspect a lot of those who stay will do so specifically because they do not want to overturn the referendum result.

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,424
    Dugher isn't an MP
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,958
    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

    Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

    Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.
    Then they will drive more and more MPs and voters to the new party. Either way it’s a win for the sane, non-racist, internationalist left.
    The crucial figure is 130, because at that moment the party would become the Opposition. If they get to that figure, then the Left will indeed have won a crucial victory.

    And Percy the Pig will be on his second loop the loop.
    40 (including the odd Conservative and there are plenty odd Conservatives to choose from) would not be an insignificant number because they would replace the SNP as the third party gaining profile, positions on committees, Qs at PMQs etc. . Any less than that and this would be such an obviously futile gesture as to make one question the sanity of those willing to support it.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited February 2019
    Today could be 26th March 1981 again. Wasn't Making Your Mind Up number one at the time?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 63,771
    SouthamObserver said:

    If there is a split it’s not enough for the new party to be anti-stuff. It has to be for things as well. The UK needs radical change in just about every way you can imagine. That has to be the focus. Beyond that, a new party is up against FPTP, so is likely to fail. I suspect that will end up dictating how most Labour MPs respond to its launch. Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

    The UK doesn’t need radical change. I think everyone is a bit fed up with radical change, the hobby horse of the political obsessives.

    They want a few things fixed and some sensible steady reforms put in place. Otherwise, leave people alone.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,748
    SouthamObserver said:

    This sounds familiar, doesn’t it?

    https://twitter.com/shashj/status/1097243529955426309?s=21

    This is why I don't think they'll let No Deal happen. The resulting clusterfuck will be maybe 90% the inevitable result of what you're doing, 10% bad implementation. But it's not in anybody's interests to say that. Everybody not in the cabinet, regardless of party or faction, will be blaming everything that goes wrong on the incompetence of the people in the cabinet.

    And there will be stuff going wrong, and getting blamed on the current ministers in charge, across every single government department. It doesn't matter what you're responsible for, if you're responsible for something when No Deal Brexit happens, it's going to be chaotic, and the chaos is going to somehow be your fault.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,940
    Chukka will bottle it...
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,705
    Next election will be fun!

    Con, Lab, Libdems, SNP, PC, DUP, SF, Green all fighting with existing elected MPs.
    New Labour split Party, new Farage party, UKIP all taking part too.

    Could be more difficult to predict the outcome.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 63,771
    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    Sorry to hear the news about Paul Flynn. Didn't agree with him, didn't much like him, but he was a devoted servant of Newport and it badly needs every friend it can get.

    But I think we all knew this was imminent when he was too ill to be even carried to the Withdrawal Agreement Vote.

    Well said. RIP, condolences to his family.
    RIP.

    Paul was a consummate politician so I’m sure he wouldn’t have minded me asking this so early: Newport West changeable?

    I’d have thought the Tories would miss it but there’s a chance of anything on a low-ish turnout and split Labour vote. Then again, Farage could come along and muddy the waters with his new Brexit party too.

    Close-ish Labour hold with reduced majority.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,848
    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

    Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

    Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.
    Then they will drive more and more MPs and voters to the new party. Either way it’s a win for the sane, non-racist, internationalist left.
    The crucial figure is 130, because at that moment the party would become the Opposition. If they get to that figure, then the Left will indeed have won a crucial victory.

    And Percy the Pig will be on his second loop the loop.
    4 max today,
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

    Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

    Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.
    Labour's manifesto was a damn sight more costed than the Conservatives', where, as John McDonnell said, the only numbers were the page numbers. It did not even include costs for the Conservatives' flagship policy, Brexit. Your main beef, iirc, was that Labour had unrealistically accounted for your own fantasy version of its proposed National Care Service.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

    Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

    Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.
    Then they will drive more and more MPs and voters to the new party. Either way it’s a win for the sane, non-racist, internationalist left.
    The crucial figure is 130, because at that moment the party would become the Opposition. If they get to that figure, then the Left will indeed have won a crucial victory.

    And Percy the Pig will be on his second loop the loop.
    40 (including the odd Conservative and there are plenty odd Conservatives to choose from) would not be an insignificant number because they would replace the SNP as the third party gaining profile, positions on committees, Qs at PMQs etc. . Any less than that and this would be such an obviously futile gesture as to make one question the sanity of those willing to support it.

    Some MPs know they have absolutely no future inside Labour. Others are at the end if their tether. A split is inevitable, but will be small and ineffective. It will definitively end the careers of all those who do split, so is ultimately a pretty brave thing to do.

  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    Who would be the leader of this new party, anything equivalent to the two David's would be disastrous. Who in the Labour Party has enough respect?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,848
    Amy's running ! Great visuals announcing in the Eau Clair snow.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    IanB2 said:

    Dugher isn't an MP

    Thanks. I have deleted that


  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Are we at war with Spain yet? Has Gavin Williamson recalled the Royal Navy's gunboats from the Yangtze?
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/02/17/spanish-warship-orders-gibraltar-boats-leave-british-waters/
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    Casino_Royale said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    If there is a split it’s not enough for the new party to be anti-stuff. It has to be for things as well. The UK needs radical change in just about every way you can imagine. That has to be the focus. Beyond that, a new party is up against FPTP, so is likely to fail. I suspect that will end up dictating how most Labour MPs respond to its launch. Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

    The UK doesn’t need radical change. I think everyone is a bit fed up with radical change, the hobby horse of the political obsessives.

    They want a few things fixed and some sensible steady reforms put in place. Otherwise, leave people alone.

    Yep, this is the split in British politics we should be focused on: the one between those who believe everything’s basically OK and those who believe it’s not. Sadly, too much other stuff is getting in the way - and will do so for years to come. That will create ever-greater discontent, of course.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,958
    SouthamObserver said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

    Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

    Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.
    Then they will drive more and more MPs and voters to the new party. Either way it’s a win for the sane, non-racist, internationalist left.
    The crucial figure is 130, because at that moment the party would become the Opposition. If they get to that figure, then the Left will indeed have won a crucial victory.

    And Percy the Pig will be on his second loop the loop.
    40 (including the odd Conservative and there are plenty odd Conservatives to choose from) would not be an insignificant number because they would replace the SNP as the third party gaining profile, positions on committees, Qs at PMQs etc. . Any less than that and this would be such an obviously futile gesture as to make one question the sanity of those willing to support it.

    Some MPs know they have absolutely no future inside Labour. Others are at the end if their tether. A split is inevitable, but will be small and ineffective. It will definitively end the careers of all those who do split, so is ultimately a pretty brave thing to do.

    Corbyn had no future inside Labour for the best part of 20 years. And Labour is bereft enough of talent for any future government without losing what they have. This is crazy and I don't think it will happen on anything other than a trivial scale.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,067
    AndyJS said:

    Today could be 26th March 1981 again. Wasn't Making Your Mind Up number one at the time?

    Ahhh, Cheryl Baker losing her skirt...
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pACePi441ds
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,408
    edited February 2019
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

    Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

    Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.
    Labour's manifesto was a damn sight more costed than the Conservatives', where, as John McDonnell said, the only numbers were the page numbers. It did not even include costs for the Conservatives' flagship policy, Brexit. Your main beef, iirc, was that Labour had unrealistically accounted for your own fantasy version of its proposed National Care Service.
    Huh? I never even mentioned Labour's plans for social care! My main beef was its numbers on education, which were clearly a pack of lies that would if implemented have bankrupted first the private and then the state education system (although in fairness reforms to the TPS from next year that Corbyn has nothing to do with are likely to have much the same effect).

    It didn't help the numbers on borrowing, water nationalisation and pensions were clearly plucked out of thin air (or smoke-filled air, the smoke being cannabis smoke) but that was the main concern.

    Moreover, since I have never denied that the Tory manifesto was uncosted too and have repeatedly criticised them for it, I'm not sure why you're getting at me over that. It doesn't alter the fact that Labour's manifesto was uncosted and every time that bunch of third rate smug posh drunken Nazis (and that's not by any means the worst I could say of one of them, but out of respect for OGH I never have) claimed it was they were lying.

    Take the blinkers off, please. You are clearly intelligent and an interesting poster but defending Labour's manifesto is like saying Trump's Wall plan had its merits and was well thought through.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 63,771
    SouthamObserver said:

    This sounds familiar, doesn’t it?

    https://twitter.com/shashj/status/1097243529955426309?s=21

    Abe and May agreed in principle to carry over the Japan-EU trade deal to the UK last year. Japan has since decided to play it by the book and the UK have their specialists elsewhere as the expectation was that this would be largely carbon-copied over, keeping it quick and simple.

    So I imagine there’s now frustrations on both sides.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 63,771
    edited February 2019
    SouthamObserver said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    If there is a split it’s not enough for the new party to be anti-stuff. It has to be for things as well. The UK needs radical change in just about every way you can imagine. That has to be the focus. Beyond that, a new party is up against FPTP, so is likely to fail. I suspect that will end up dictating how most Labour MPs respond to its launch. Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

    The UK doesn’t need radical change. I think everyone is a bit fed up with radical change, the hobby horse of the political obsessives.

    They want a few things fixed and some sensible steady reforms put in place. Otherwise, leave people alone.

    Yep, this is the split in British politics we should be focused on: the one between those who believe everything’s basically OK and those who believe it’s not. Sadly, too much other stuff is getting in the way - and will do so for years to come. That will create ever-greater discontent, of course.

    I’m not complacent, there’s a lot that does need fixing, but I’d prefer to go for gradual reform rather than radical change. The latter can often end up being ideological, very disruptive and take on a momentum of its own that actually ends up negatively impacting more than it helps. Do lots of it at once in a number of areas and it really stresses people out and can damage the economy.

    I guess that’s why I’m a Conservative.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Can we bet on whether the number of Labour MPs defecting is more or less than Conservative MPs deselected?
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/02/17/two-senior-tory-mps-facing-deselection-votes-annual-meetings/
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,408
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Are we at war with Spain yet? Has Gavin Williamson recalled the Royal Navy's gunboats from the Yangtze?
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/02/17/spanish-warship-orders-gibraltar-boats-leave-british-waters/

    Anyone would think there was an election in Spain or something. I do hope that they don't have a nasty accident by firing a gun by mistake in Gibraltar's waters. That would cause endless trouble.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    DavidL said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

    Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

    Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.
    Then they will drive more and more MPs and voters to the new party. Either way it’s a win for the sane, non-racist, internationalist left.
    The crucial figure is 130, because at that moment the party would become the Opposition. If they get to that figure, then the Left will indeed have won a crucial victory.

    And Percy the Pig will be on his second loop the loop.
    40 (including the odd Conservative and there are plenty odd Conservatives to choose from) would not be an insignificant number because they would replace the SNP as the third party gaining profile, positions on committees, Qs at PMQs etc. . Any less than that and this would be such an obviously futile gesture as to make one question the sanity of those willing to support it.

    Some MPs know they have absolutely no future inside Labour. Others are at the end if their tether. A split is inevitable, but will be small and ineffective. It will definitively end the careers of all those who do split, so is ultimately a pretty brave thing to do.

    Corbyn had no future inside Labour for the best part of 20 years. And Labour is bereft enough of talent for any future government without losing what they have. This is crazy and I don't think it will happen on anything other than a trivial scale.

    The talent problem is universal, as the current government is demonstrating. I expect the split to be very small.

  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,749
    SouthamObserver said:



    Some MPs know they have absolutely no future inside Labour. Others are at the end if their tether. A split is inevitable, but will be small and ineffective. It will definitively end the careers of all those who do split, so is ultimately a pretty brave thing to do.

    The two favourites to take over from Corbyn are Thornberry and Starmer. I don't think any of the rumoured breakaway lot would have a problem serving under either. Indeed probably not the other frontrunners except McDonnell and RLB (who shouldnt be a front runner anyway).
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    ydoethur said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

    Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

    Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.
    Labour's manifesto was a damn sight more costed than the Conservatives', where, as John McDonnell said, the only numbers were the page numbers. It did not even include costs for the Conservatives' flagship policy, Brexit. Your main beef, iirc, was that Labour had unrealistically accounted for your own fantasy version of its proposed National Care Service.
    Huh? I never even mentioned Labour's plans for social care! My main beef was its numbers on education, which were clearly a pack of lies that would if implemented have bankrupted first the private and then the state education system (although in fairness reforms to the TPS from next year that Corbyn has nothing to do with are likely to have much the same effect).

    It didn't help the numbers on borrowing, water nationalisation and pensions were clearly plucked out of thin air (or smoke-filled air, the smoke being cannabis smoke) but that was the main concern.

    Moreover, since I have never denied that the Tory manifesto was uncosted too and have repeatedly criticised them for it, I'm not sure why you're getting at me over that. It doesn't alter the fact that Labour's manifesto was uncosted and every time that bunch of third rate smug posh drunken Nazis (and that's not by any means the worst I could say of one of them, but out of respect for OGH I never have) claimed it was they were lying.

    Take the blinkers off, please. You are clearly intelligent and an interesting poster but defending Labour's manifesto is like saying Trump's Wall plan had its merits and was well thought through.
    Yes, I did wonder if the TPS changes might lose the Conservatives the next election if they are not careful. If public schools are forced to jack up their fees by 25 per cent or even a fraction of that, it might be the last straw for the JAMs.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 63,771
    SouthamObserver said:

    DavidL said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

    Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

    Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.
    Then they will drive more and more MPs and voters to the new party. Either way it’s a win for the sane, non-racist, internationalist left.
    The crucial figure is 130, because at that moment the party would become the Opposition. If they get to that figure, then the Left will indeed have won a crucial victory.

    And Percy the Pig will be on his second loop the loop.
    40 (including the odd Conservative and there are plenty odd Conservatives to choose from) would not be an insignificant number because they would replace the SNP as the third party gaining profile, positions on committees, Qs at PMQs etc. . Any less than that and this would be such an obviously futile gesture as to make one question the sanity of those willing to support it.

    Some MPs know they have absolutely no future inside Labour. Others are at the end if their tether. A split is inevitable, but will be small and ineffective. It will definitively end the careers of all those who do split, so is ultimately a pretty brave thing to do.

    Corbyn had no future inside Labour for the best part of 20 years. And Labour is bereft enough of talent for any future government without losing what they have. This is crazy and I don't think it will happen on anything other than a trivial scale.

    The talent problem is universal, as the current government is demonstrating. I expect the split to be very small.

    Fancy it yourself??
  • daodaodaodao Posts: 821
    Casino_Royale said:

    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    Sorry to hear the news about Paul Flynn. Didn't agree with him, didn't much like him, but he was a devoted servant of Newport and it badly needs every friend it can get.

    But I think we all knew this was imminent when he was too ill to be even carried to the Withdrawal Agreement Vote.

    Well said. RIP, condolences to his family.
    RIP.

    Paul was a consummate politician so I’m sure he wouldn’t have minded me asking this so early: Newport West changeable?

    I’d have thought the Tories would miss it but there’s a chance of anything on a low-ish turnout and split Labour vote. Then again, Farage could come along and muddy the waters with his new Brexit party too.

    Close-ish Labour hold with reduced majority.
    Newport West was Tory-held 1983-7. When working at the Royal Gwent Hospital, I recall almost literally bumping into Michael Heseltine on Corporation Street one spring morning in 1987, when he was campaigning (unsuccessfully - Paul Flynn won) to retain the seat for Mark Robinson. So although unlikely, this seat could change hands again.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,318
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Can we bet on whether the number of Labour MPs defecting is more or less than Conservative MPs deselected?
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/02/17/two-senior-tory-mps-facing-deselection-votes-annual-meetings/

    Good morning, everyone. I wonder, could Sarah Wollaston hold her seat as an Independent if deselected. Or would she switch to the LD's? Historically they've been strong in that area.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 52,260
    Casino_Royale said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    If there is a split it’s not enough for the new party to be anti-stuff. It has to be for things as well. The UK needs radical change in just about every way you can imagine. That has to be the focus. Beyond that, a new party is up against FPTP, so is likely to fail. I suspect that will end up dictating how most Labour MPs respond to its launch. Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

    The UK doesn’t need radical change. I think everyone is a bit fed up with radical change, the hobby horse of the political obsessives.

    They want a few things fixed and some sensible steady reforms put in place. Otherwise, leave people alone.

    Yep, this is the split in British politics we should be focused on: the one between those who believe everything’s basically OK and those who believe it’s not. Sadly, too much other stuff is getting in the way - and will do so for years to come. That will create ever-greater discontent, of course.

    I’m not complacent, there’s a lot that does need fixing, but I’d prefer to go for gradual reform rather than radical change. The latter can often end up being ideological, very disruptive and take on a momentum of its own that actually ends up negatively impacting more than it helps. Do lots of it at once in a number of areas and it really stresses people out and can damage the economy.

    Sounds a pretty accurate description of Brexit!
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,756
    edited February 2019
    Good morning, everyone.

    RIP Paul Flynn.

    I'll believe this new party when I see it.

    King Cole, if there is a new party, Wollaston might like it.

    Edited extra bit: and F1 testing starts today. Williams won't be there for the first day.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    edited February 2019
    Casino_Royale said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    DavidL said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

    Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

    Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.
    Then they will drive more and more MPs and voters to the new party. Either way it’s a win for the sane, non-racist, internationalist left.
    The crucial figure is 130, because at that moment the party would become the Opposition. If they get to that figure, then the Left will indeed have won a crucial victory.

    And Percy the Pig will be on his second loop the loop.
    40 (including the odd Conservative and there are plenty odd Conservatives to choose from) would not be an insignificant number because they would replace the SNP as the third party gaining profile, positions on committees, Qs at PMQs etc. . Any less than that and this would be such an obviously futile gesture as to make one question the sanity of those willing to support it.

    Some MPs know they have absolutely no future inside Labour. Others are at the end if their tether. A split is inevitable, but will be small and ineffective. It will definitively end the careers of all those who do split, so is ultimately a pretty brave thing to do.

    Corbyn had no future inside Labour for the best part of 20 years. And Labour is bereft enough of talent for any future government without losing what they have. This is crazy and I don't think it will happen on anything other than a trivial scale.

    The talent problem is universal, as the current government is demonstrating. I expect the split to be very small.

    Fancy it yourself??

    I have got to the point where I need to be for stuff, not just against. I will wait and see.

  • JonWCJonWC Posts: 289
    OldKingCole said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Can we bet on whether the number of Labour MPs defecting is more or less than Conservative MPs deselected?
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/02/17/two-senior-tory-mps-facing-deselection-votes-annual-meetings/

    Good morning, everyone. I wonder, could Sarah Wollaston hold her seat as an Independent if deselected. Or would she switch to the LD's? Historically they've been strong in that area.
    Very unlikely I'd say. Her vote would split in all directions but the real Tories would get most of it. Brixham in particular is not going to vote for a fanatical remainer any time soon.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,408
    edited February 2019
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Yes, I did wonder if the TPS changes might lose the Conservatives the next election if they are not careful. If public schools are forced to jack up their fees by 25 per cent or even a fraction of that, it might be the last straw for the JAMs.

    That won't happen. What will happen is that private schools will pull out of the TPS - this has already started. And while they account for 7% of workers, it accounts for 10% of contributions. On top of that, while funding is provided for state schools, there is no additional funding for FE colleges or universities. As FE colleges and many universities are already under huge financial pressure as well, they will pull out.

    There is a non-trivial possibility that this time next year the TPS will be declared insolvent and the government have to find a way to rescue it. While that need not be politically fatal it would undoubtedly be highly embarrassing and cause a great deal of trouble for them.

    More here: https://www.tes.com/news/exclusive-private-school-pension-pull-out-would-leave-ps800m-hole

    (Edit - incidentally it would be about a 5% increase in costs, for this. Corbyn was the one proposing a 20% hike in fees.)
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    rkrkrk said:

    SouthamObserver said:



    Some MPs know they have absolutely no future inside Labour. Others are at the end if their tether. A split is inevitable, but will be small and ineffective. It will definitively end the careers of all those who do split, so is ultimately a pretty brave thing to do.

    The two favourites to take over from Corbyn are Thornberry and Starmer. I don't think any of the rumoured breakaway lot would have a problem serving under either. Indeed probably not the other frontrunners except McDonnell and RLB (who shouldnt be a front runner anyway).

    Yep, what’s keeping a lot of people inside Labour is a belief that much of Corbyn’s support is personal, not ideological.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,958
    SouthamObserver said:

    DavidL said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

    Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

    Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.
    Then they will drive more and more MPs and voters to the new party. Either way it’s a win for the sane, non-racist, internationalist left.
    The crucial figure is 130, because at that moment the party would become the Opposition. If they get to that figure, then the Left will indeed have won a crucial victory.

    And Percy the Pig will be on his second loop the loop.
    40 (including the odd Conservative and there are plenty odd Conservatives to choose from) would not be an insignificant number because they would replace the SNP as the third party gaining profile, positions on committees, Qs at PMQs etc. . Any less than that and this would be such an obviously futile gesture as to make one question the sanity of those willing to support it.

    Some MPs know they have absolutely no future inside Labour. Others are at the end if their tether. A split is inevitable, but will be small and ineffective. It will definitively end the careers of all those who do split, so is ultimately a pretty brave thing to do.

    Corbyn had no future inside Labour for the best part of 20 years. And Labour is bereft enough of talent for any future government without losing what they have. This is crazy and I don't think it will happen on anything other than a trivial scale.

    The talent problem is universal, as the current government is demonstrating. I expect the split to be very small.

    Don't dispute that. Even Portillo has called Grayling the most incompetent minister of all time: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-47254136/ex-transport-minister-michael-portillo-on-chris-grayling

    In a government with talent he would have reached PPS level for a few months and then been encouraged to take his undoubted abilities elsewhere.

    On the split would you be tempted to give them your support?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,497
    Assuming the split does happen at some point in the next few days, all the public are going to hear for days in the media is:

    - Labour is an anti-semitic party, that refuses to get treatment for this cancer

    - Labour is allowing Brexit to happen

    - Labour is split

    Be interesting to see what impact that has on the polling.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,424
    Sandpit said:

    Occasionally funny, occasionally wrong and occasionally sweary. Comedian John Oliver on Brexit, to a mainly American audience.
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hs1s7mK-yH8

    But on this occasion, close to the money
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,424
    JonWC said:

    OldKingCole said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Can we bet on whether the number of Labour MPs defecting is more or less than Conservative MPs deselected?
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/02/17/two-senior-tory-mps-facing-deselection-votes-annual-meetings/

    Good morning, everyone. I wonder, could Sarah Wollaston hold her seat as an Independent if deselected. Or would she switch to the LD's? Historically they've been strong in that area.
    Very unlikely I'd say. Her vote would split in all directions but the real Tories would get most of it. Brixham in particular is not going to vote for a fanatical remainer any time soon.
    Unless the fact that the fishing industry is going be shafted rather than saved by Brexit has started to dawn on people.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    DavidL said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    DavidL said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

    Oh come on. It was impossible to claim with a straight face that Labour's manifesto was fully costed, that Jeremy Corbyn isn't a supporter of terrorism or that Jenny Formby was appointed GenSec on merit. But that didn't stop them.

    Corbynistas deal in convenient fantasies, not facts. Unless you are actively licking the Dear Leader's arse, they will find some reason to accuse you of disloyalty.
    Then they will drive more and more MPs and voters to the new party. Either way it’s a win for the sane, non-racist, internationalist left.
    The crucial figure is 130, because at that moment the party would become the Opposition. If they get to that figure, then the Left will indeed have won a crucial victory.

    And Percy the Pig will be on his second loop the loop.
    40 (including the odd Conservative and there are plenty odd Conservatives to choose from) would not be an insignificant number because they would replace the SNP as the third party gaining profile, positions on committees, Qs at PMQs etc. . Any less than that and this would be such an obviously futile gesture as to make one question the sanity of those willing to support it.

    Some MPs know they have absolutely no future inside Labour. Others are at the end if their tether. A split is inevitable, but will be small and ineffective. It will definitively end the careers of all those who do split, so is ultimately a pretty brave thing to do.

    Corbyn had no future inside Labour for the best part of 20 years. And Labour is bereft enough of talent for any future government without losing what they have. This is crazy and I don't think it will happen on anything other than a trivial scale.

    The talent problem is universal, as the current government is demonstrating. I expect the split to be very small.

    Don't dispute that. Even Portillo has called Grayling the most incompetent minister of all time: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-47254136/ex-transport-minister-michael-portillo-on-chris-grayling

    In a government with talent he would have reached PPS level for a few months and then been encouraged to take his undoubted abilities elsewhere.

    On the split would you be tempted to give them your support?

    If I could do it for positive reasons, for sure. Why not? Labour is impossible to support currently. But I won’t waste time on a gesture.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    https://twitter.com/polhomeeditor/status/1097400852590051329?s=21
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,958
    SouthamObserver said:

    https://twitter.com/polhomeeditor/status/1097400852590051329?s=21

    The inability to spell is indeed depressing. Extream?
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,180
    Am I the only one appalled by the RLB tweet above. I know she is not the sharpest pencil in the box but that degree of blind loyalty is so dangerous as well as being mind numbingly stupid. Yet she has been touted as a potential future leader.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,749
    SouthamObserver said:

    rkrkrk said:

    SouthamObserver said:



    Some MPs know they have absolutely no future inside Labour. Others are at the end if their tether. A split is inevitable, but will be small and ineffective. It will definitively end the careers of all those who do split, so is ultimately a pretty brave thing to do.

    The two favourites to take over from Corbyn are Thornberry and Starmer. I don't think any of the rumoured breakaway lot would have a problem serving under either. Indeed probably not the other frontrunners except McDonnell and RLB (who shouldnt be a front runner anyway).

    Yep, what’s keeping a lot of people inside Labour is a belief that much of Corbyn’s support is personal, not ideological.

    IMO its a mixture. We are not going back to a world where Labour leaders are trying to outdo the Tories on welfare cuts. But some of the more radical ideas like compulsory employee ownership could easily fall by the wayside under a new leader.

    And I think those who want to lead Labour would probably do well to learn from Corbyn's previous leadership campaigns.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    O/T

    Letter published in the Guardian on 1st Dec 2007 on the subject of Venezuela:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/dec/01/venezuela.leadersandreply
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 63,771
    edited February 2019
    SouthamObserver said:

    https://twitter.com/polhomeeditor/status/1097400852590051329?s=21

    Not that I’m excusing it but isn’t it unsurprising that several terrorist attacks done in the name of Islam in 2017 have made people very worried about aspects of Islam and its values?

    People are scared. That’s natural. They need reassurance.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,958
    SouthamObserver said:

    DavidL said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    DavidL said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    40 (including the odd Conservative and there are plenty odd Conservatives to choose from) would not be an insignificant number because they would replace the SNP as the third party gaining profile, positions on committees, Qs at PMQs etc. . Any less than that and this would be such an obviously futile gesture as to make one question the sanity of those willing to support it.

    Some MPs know they have absolutely no future inside Labour. Others are at the end if their tether. A split is inevitable, but will be small and ineffective. It will definitively end the careers of all those who do split, so is ultimately a pretty brave thing to do.

    Corbyn had no future inside Labour for the best part of 20 years. And Labour is bereft enough of talent for any future government without losing what they have. This is crazy and I don't think it will happen on anything other than a trivial scale.

    The talent problem is universal, as the current government is demonstrating. I expect the split to be very small.

    Don't dispute that. Even Portillo has called Grayling the most incompetent minister of all time: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-47254136/ex-transport-minister-michael-portillo-on-chris-grayling

    In a government with talent he would have reached PPS level for a few months and then been encouraged to take his undoubted abilities elsewhere.

    On the split would you be tempted to give them your support?

    If I could do it for positive reasons, for sure. Why not? Labour is impossible to support currently. But I won’t waste time on a gesture.

    The problem I see is that if you fast forward two or three years to a Thornberry led Labour party what are the critical differences that would justify splitting the vote and losing the opportunity to implement policy? Even if you could find one on Brexit will that not be even more of a minority interest by then?

    Corbyn really needs to go but I don't see splits being the answer.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 63,771
    Foxy said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    If there is a split it’s not enough for the new party to be anti-stuff. It has to be for things as well. The UK needs radical change in just about every way you can imagine. That has to be the focus. Beyond that, a new party is up against FPTP, so is likely to fail. I suspect that will end up dictating how most Labour MPs respond to its launch. Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.

    The UK doesn’t need radical change. I think everyone is a bit fed up with radical change, the hobby horse of the political obsessives.

    They want a few things fixed and some sensible steady reforms put in place. Otherwise, leave people alone.

    Yep, this is the split in British politics we should be focused on: the one between those who believe everything’s basically OK and those who believe it’s not. Sadly, too much other stuff is getting in the way - and will do so for years to come. That will create ever-greater discontent, of course.

    I’m not complacent, there’s a lot that does need fixing, but I’d prefer to go for gradual reform rather than radical change. The latter can often end up being ideological, very disruptive and take on a momentum of its own that actually ends up negatively impacting more than it helps. Do lots of it at once in a number of areas and it really stresses people out and can damage the economy.

    Sounds a pretty accurate description of Brexit!
    Yes, I thought I’d get that as soon as I pressed “post comment”.

    That’s why I’ve always favoured a practical Brexit and the WA with a slow transition. Alas, I might not get it, and recent weeks have given me cause to doubt the EU’s sincerity on the backstop.

    I think it also works the other way: the EU is proposing and advocating pretty radical change with further federalisation, eurozone chancellors/ministers, tax-raising powers and military integration. And mass immigration is another former of rapid change.

    Sometimes these things can be heads you win, tails I lose.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1097405369582866434
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 63,771
    SouthamObserver said:

    rkrkrk said:

    SouthamObserver said:



    Some MPs know they have absolutely no future inside Labour. Others are at the end if their tether. A split is inevitable, but will be small and ineffective. It will definitively end the careers of all those who do split, so is ultimately a pretty brave thing to do.

    The two favourites to take over from Corbyn are Thornberry and Starmer. I don't think any of the rumoured breakaway lot would have a problem serving under either. Indeed probably not the other frontrunners except McDonnell and RLB (who shouldnt be a front runner anyway).

    Yep, what’s keeping a lot of people inside Labour is a belief that much of Corbyn’s support is personal, not ideological.

    Younger people under 35 do need to be given more of a stake and capital in our economy.

    Or they’ll blow it up.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    DavidL said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    DavidL said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    DavidL said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    40 (including the odd Conservative and there are plenty odd Conservatives to choose from) would not be an insignificant number because they would replace the SNP as the third party gaining profile, positions on committees, Qs at PMQs etc. . Any less than that and this would be such an obviously futile gesture as to make one question the sanity of those willing to support it.

    Some MPs know they have absolutely no future inside Labour. Others are at the end if their tether. A split is inevitable, but will be small and ineffective. It will definitively end the careers of all those who do split, so is ultimately a pretty brave thing to do.

    Corbyn had no future inside Labour for the best part of 20 years. And Labour is bereft enough of talent for any future government without losing what they have. This is crazy and I don't think it will happen on anything other than a trivial scale.

    The talent problem is universal, as the current government is demonstrating. I expect the split to be very small.

    Don't dispute that. Even Portillo has called Grayling the most incompetent minister of all time: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-47254136/ex-transport-minister-michael-portillo-on-chris-grayling

    In a government with talent he would have reached PPS level for a few months and then been encouraged to take his undoubted abilities elsewhere.

    On the split would you be tempted to give them your support?

    If I could do it for positive reasons, for sure. Why not? Labour is impossible to support currently. But I won’t waste time on a gesture.

    The problem I see is that if you fast forward two or three years to a Thornberry led Labour party what are the critical differences that would justify splitting the vote and losing the opportunity to implement policy? Even if you could find one on Brexit will that not be even more of a minority interest by then?

    Corbyn really needs to go but I don't see splits being the answer.
    If 50 or so leave Labour, Corbyn is automatically castrated, politically speaking.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,497
    edited February 2019
    SouthamObserver said:

    https://twitter.com/polhomeeditor/status/1097400852590051329?s=21

    Terror attacks undertaken in the name of their religion by British Muslims on the wider British public of the UK are hardly going to engender a positive attitude towards people of that religion. Too right there is a lasting negative impact. Who are these incredulous people? It's like being surprised at a finding that "The Blitz has had a lasting negative impact on attiudes towards Nazis".

    It is a shit blatantly party-political point by Hope Not Hate. Otherwise we would have polling on the % impact of other parties' voters. What % of Labour voters had a lasting negative impact, eh?

    They clearly have an agenda, to equate Tory = anti-Islam to mitigate Labour = anti-semitic. "Oh well, all parties have their problems." Bullshit in the general, bullshit in the specifics.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    https://twitter.com/iainjwatson/status/1097275935668269057
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,800
    AndyJS said:

    https://twitter.com/iainjwatson/status/1097275935668269057

    the new 'gang of four'....
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,800
    Happy Labour meltdown day today!
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 44,070
    edmundintokyo said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    This sounds familiar, doesn’t it?

    https://twitter.com/shashj/status/1097243529955426309?s=21

    This is why I don't think they'll let No Deal happen. The resulting clusterfuck will be maybe 90% the inevitable result of what you're doing, 10% bad implementation. But it's not in anybody's interests to say that. Everybody not in the cabinet, regardless of party or faction, will be blaming everything that goes wrong on the incompetence of the people in the cabinet.

    And there will be stuff going wrong, and getting blamed on the current ministers in charge, across every single government department. It doesn't matter what you're responsible for, if you're responsible for something when No Deal Brexit happens, it's going to be chaotic, and the chaos is going to somehow be your fault.
    What’s the local take on it?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/rosskempsell/status/1097406795444903936

    https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1097406852390944768
  • DonTsInferno_DonTsInferno_ Posts: 108
    MarqueeMark said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    https://twitter.com/polhomeeditor/status/1097400852590051329?s=21

    Terror attacks undertaken in the name of their religion by British Muslims on the wider British public of the UK are hardly going to engender a positive attitude towards people of that religion. Too right there is a lasting negative impact. Who are these incredulous people? It's like being surprised at a finding that "The Blitz has had a lasting negative impact on attiudes towards Nazis".

    It is a shit blatantly party-political point by Hope Not Hate. Otherwise we would have polling on the % impact of other parties' voters. What % of Labour voters had a lasting negative impact, eh?

    They clearly have an agenda, to equate Tory = anti-Islam to mitigate Labour = anti-semitic. "Oh well, all parties have their problems." Bullshit in the general, bullshit in the specifics.
    Yes. Wouldn’t surprise me if the spelling mistake was a deliberate distraction.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 12,071
    MarqueeMark said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    https://twitter.com/polhomeeditor/status/1097400852590051329?s=21

    Terror attacks undertaken in the name of their religion by British Muslims on the wider British public of the UK are hardly going to engender a positive attitude towards people of that religion. Too right there is a lasting negative impact. Who are these incredulous people? It's like being surprised at a finding that "The Blitz has had a lasting negative impact on attiudes towards Nazis".
    What you're implying, presumably, is that if there had been terrorist attacks by Jewish extremists, anti-semitism would be fine, just like prejudice against Muslims.
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 4,969
    MarqueeMark said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    https://twitter.com/polhomeeditor/status/1097400852590051329?s=21

    Terror attacks undertaken in the name of their religion by British Muslims on the wider British public of the UK are hardly going to engender a positive attitude towards people of that religion. Too right there is a lasting negative impact. Who are these incredulous people? It's like being surprised at a finding that "The Blitz has had a lasting negative impact on attiudes towards Nazis".
    ...
    Just spat my morning cuppa all over my monitor at that one.

    Absolutely brill.

    +1
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 20,746
    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/rosskempsell/status/1097406795444903936

    https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1097406852390944768

    Finally! My credit card is ready.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/iainjwatson/status/1097407602420600832

    https://twitter.com/iainjwatson/status/1097407604404482048
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1097407794179960834
  • DonTsInferno_DonTsInferno_ Posts: 108
    SouthamObserver said:

    If there is a split it’s not enough for the new party to be anti-stuff. It has to be for things as well. The UK needs radical change in just about every way you can imagine. That has to be the focus. Beyond that, a new party is up against FPTP, so is likely to fail. I suspect that will end up dictating how most Labour MPs respond to its launch. Those that stay will actually be strengthened because it will be harder to accuse them of disloyalty.


    A majority of voters sought radical change by voting Leave in 2016, but it seems the politicians think that’s too much like hard work and prefer to gerrymander us into the status quo forever.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 12,071
    AndyJS said:

    https://twitter.com/iainjwatson/status/1097275935668269057

    Just about enough for a gang.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,800
    Gallowgate said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/rosskempsell/status/1097406795444903936

    https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1097406852390944768

    Finally! My credit card is ready.
    I'd be tempted to sign up. I'm TBH more interested on what they say about things other than Brexit.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,046
    5 or so MPs is not really a split, more an inconvenience for Labour.

    What will be interesting is whether they form a new SDP style party or become independents
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 66,255
    Sky saying an event is to take place with 4 or 5 labour mps today
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 14,646
    Casino_Royale said:



    The latter can often end up being ideological, very disruptive and take on a momentum of its own that actually ends up negatively impacting more than it helps. Do lots of it at once in a number of areas and it really stresses people out and can damage the economy.

    This is a very accurate description of something.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    In 1981 one Tory joined 26 Labour MPs when the SDP was launched, Christopher Brocklebank-Fowler. Could the same thing happen today? Anna Soubry would be the obvious candidate.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,067
    So, it actually looks like the new party might be on.

    First question for the defectors, will they be following the Carswell precident and allowing the people to reconfirm their positions as Parliamentarians?
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    felix said:

    Am I the only one appalled by the RLB tweet above. I know she is not the sharpest pencil in the box but that degree of blind loyalty is so dangerous as well as being mind numbingly stupid. Yet she has been touted as a potential future leader.

    Au contraire, it’s very smart of her. If she’s going to be leader, she’s going to need blind loyalty.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,144
    Endillion said:

    I bet nothing happens. The splitters now have perfect cover for inaction, in that no one wants to trigger a big fight the day after one of their colleagues passes away.

    The timing would be odd too, since as frustrated as they are at various matters nothing has changed yet.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,800
    edited February 2019
    HYUFD said:

    5 or so MPs is not really a split, more an inconvenience for Labour.

    What will be interesting is whether they form a new SDP style party or become independents

    The more telling thing is who other the coming days and months flock to them, Ex-MPs, Ex PMs? etc...

    edit; and also if they start making a dent in opinion polls.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    DonTsInferno_ said:

    A majority of voters sought radical change by voting Leave in 2016

    The Leave campaign did not offer radical change. It went out of its way to claim all the stuff people liked would remain, and only "bad" things would change
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/nickeardleybbc/status/1097408945801580544
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,748
    TOPPING said:

    edmundintokyo said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    This sounds familiar, doesn’t it?

    https://twitter.com/shashj/status/1097243529955426309?s=21

    This is why I don't think they'll let No Deal happen. The resulting clusterfuck will be maybe 90% the inevitable result of what you're doing, 10% bad implementation. But it's not in anybody's interests to say that. Everybody not in the cabinet, regardless of party or faction, will be blaming everything that goes wrong on the incompetence of the people in the cabinet.

    And there will be stuff going wrong, and getting blamed on the current ministers in charge, across every single government department. It doesn't matter what you're responsible for, if you're responsible for something when No Deal Brexit happens, it's going to be chaotic, and the chaos is going to somehow be your fault.
    What’s the local take on it?
    Haven't heard any opinions on the trade deal specifically but the general vibe is
    https://twitter.com/Matt_Alt/status/1097065583873482753
This discussion has been closed.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2025