@ChrisMasonBBC: Former Communities Secretary Eric Pickles is to be given a knighthood, Downing Street has announced.
Pickles has been conspicuous by is absence - is he ok?
He was just sacked, that'd be reason to be less conspicuous I'd have thought? Getting a knighthood in compensation though.
I forget what he did, but there were a couple of monumental blunders: one over the floods and there was another one about 9 months ago. Osborne never forgets.
BTW - does anyone else reckon the Tory clean sweep increases the chances of rail improvement in the SW ("see, vote for us and you get sweeties")
Some might go so far as to suggest George Osborne is something of a genius...
I criticised him for not cutting quickly enough, but now the tories have won, goodness me.
Imagine the tax cuts for ordinary people he'll have the cash for before 2020.
The Tories never stopped cutting the structural spending.
Result: 3rd. world country with gated communities and wide screen TVs but unable to afford an acceptable health service (e.g., like France or Sweden's, they both spend several percent more of GDP). Existing infrastructure, like roads and railways, falling apart.
You might want to compare the recent accident rate on UK's railways with those of continental Europe.
@ChrisMasonBBC: Former Communities Secretary Eric Pickles is to be given a knighthood, Downing Street has announced.
Pickles has been conspicuous by is absence - is he ok?
He was just sacked, that'd be reason to be less conspicuous I'd have thought? Getting a knighthood in compensation though.
Yeah but like some of the old duffers still around he could have stayed in post for another couple of years and then shipped off. He was a pretty good minister by all accounts. Must be something else
Can anyone explain to me the point in, or appeal of, Yvette Cooper.
She's not the lefty candidate (Burnham) She's not the Blairite candidate (Kendall) She's not the only woman in the field She's very closely linked to the ancien regime
Is she the Lib Dems of the Labour Leadership contest?
I had assumed she would be an easy frontrunner with Burnham, but seeing it laid out like that I am not so sure. The actual positions of the various candidates is not necessarily as important as how they end up being labelled, and by accident or design both Burnham and Kendall seem to have adopted the label they will be using (in Kendall's case much more proactively I think, by necessity of being less well known - I had not realised she was one of the new 2010 intake), but I'm not clear what Cooper's pitch is beyond the 'safety' approach others have suggested.
A fight between Kendall and Burnham as the main frontrunners also makes the contest look more significant than one in wihch Burnham and Cooper are the main players, as currently that looks tone wise to be a fight with more to distinguish the pair.
@ChrisMasonBBC: Former Communities Secretary Eric Pickles is to be given a knighthood, Downing Street has announced.
Pickles has been conspicuous by is absence - is he ok?
He was just sacked, that'd be reason to be less conspicuous I'd have thought? Getting a knighthood in compensation though.
Yeah but like some of the old duffers still around he could have stayed in post for another couple of years and then shipped off. He was a pretty good minister by all accounts. Must be something else
Maybe. He wasn't very popular with local government, but he cut well and made some big impacts, and it seemed odd that he got nothing of any significance in the reshuffle.
Can anyone explain to me the point in, or appeal of, Yvette Cooper.
She's not the lefty candidate (Burnham) She's not the Blairite candidate (Kendall) She's not the only woman in the field She's very closely linked to the ancien regime
Is she the Lib Dems of the Labour Leadership contest?
I guess she's the safest choice - she's experienced, doesn't gaffe, and is relentlessly on-message.
And under AV she could easily win. She might well beat either of the others head-to-head, so the question is whether she can survive the penultimate round of voting. And if she doesn't, where do her votes go?
''The fact unions seem to constantly be uniting [ahem] into an ever smaller number of increasingly large super-unions will only increase the power of the unions by concentrating funding support in a smaller number of hands.''
I thought last night's QT was instructive on unions and labour generally. Hilary DeVey's comments in particular.
Creasey went a whiter shade of pale when Hilary suggested unions aren't needed any more!
Indeed I thought either Creasey or Owen Jones looked like they could spontaneously combust at that point.
But its true. There's a reason the union membership numbers are collapsing and the actions of those at the top of the unions aren't going to reverse the trend.
The purpose of a union was supposed to be to help its members, not help Len McCluskey spread his own personal pet ideology. What does Len understand about how modern workers are working? He's as remote as any politician.
Superunions may be good at getting influence within Labour, they're not necessarily that great at helping individual workers. Which is why individuals are by and large ignoring them.
Can anyone explain to me the point in, or appeal of, Yvette Cooper.
She's not the lefty candidate (Burnham) She's not the Blairite candidate (Kendall) She's not the only woman in the field She's very closely linked to the ancien regime
Is she the Lib Dems of the Labour Leadership contest?
I had assumed she would be an easy frontrunner with Burnham, but seeing it laid out like that I am not so sure. The actual positions of the various candidates is not necessarily as important as how they end up being labelled, and by accident or design both Burnham and Kendall seem to have adopted the label they will be using (in Kendall's case much more proactively I think, by necessity of being less well known - I had not realised she was one of the new 2010 intake), but I'm not clear what Cooper's pitch is beyond the 'safety' approach others have suggested.
A fight between Kendall and Burnham as the main frontrunners also makes the contest look more significant than one in wihch Burnham and Cooper are the main players, as currently that looks tone wise to be a fight with more to distinguish the pair.
Indeed - I think someone said that they could easily see Cooper being the Condorcet winner of the 3 (ie beats both in a head to head), but come bottom of the AV ballot (of the 3) and so gets eliminated before either of them. In which case determining the winner depends on who Cooper voters would choose between Burnham and Kendall?
Can anyone explain to me the point in, or appeal of, Yvette Cooper.
She's not the lefty candidate (Burnham) She's not the Blairite candidate (Kendall) She's not the only woman in the field She's very closely linked to the ancien regime
Is she the Lib Dems of the Labour Leadership contest?
I had assumed she would be an easy frontrunner with Burnham, but seeing it laid out like that I am not so sure. The actual positions of the various candidates is not necessarily as important as how they end up being labelled, and by accident or design both Burnham and Kendall seem to have adopted the label they will be using (in Kendall's case much more proactively I think, by necessity of being less well known - I had not realised she was one of the new 2010 intake), but I'm not clear what Cooper's pitch is beyond the 'safety' approach others have suggested.
A fight between Kendall and Burnham as the main frontrunners also makes the contest look more significant than one in wihch Burnham and Cooper are the main players, as currently that looks tone wise to be a fight with more to distinguish the pair.
Indeed - I think someone said that they could easily see Cooper being the Condorcet winner of the 3 (ie beats both in a head to head), but come bottom of the AV ballot (of the 3) and so gets eliminated before either of them. In which case determining the winner depends on who Cooper voters would choose between Burnham and Kendall?
And under AV she could easily win. She might well beat either of the others head-to-head, so the question is whether she can survive the penultimate round of voting. And if she doesn't, where do her votes go?
It's guesswork at this stage, but my hunch is that her votes would probably split fairly evenly between Andy B and Liz. People who want to put experience first or are put off by Liz's embracing of reality go towards Andy, the sisterhood and those who (rightly in my view) think that Andy is Ed Miliband Mk 2 in terms of electability, towards Liz.
Some might go so far as to suggest George Osborne is something of a genius...
I criticised him for not cutting quickly enough, but now the tories have won, goodness me.
Imagine the tax cuts for ordinary people he'll have the cash for before 2020.
The Tories never stopped cutting the structural spending.
Result: 3rd. world country with gated communities and wide screen TVs but unable to afford an acceptable health service (e.g., like France or Sweden's, they both spend several percent more of GDP). Existing infrastructure, like roads and railways, falling apart.
You might want to compare the recent accident rate on UK's railways with those of continental Europe.
The railways in the UK are miles better than they were 5, 10, 20 years ago. Investment poured into them by the trainload has been responsible for that.
Can anyone explain to me the point in, or appeal of, Yvette Cooper.
She's not the lefty candidate (Burnham) She's not the Blairite candidate (Kendall) She's not the only woman in the field She's very closely linked to the ancien regime
Is she the Lib Dems of the Labour Leadership contest?
She's got gravitas: it's not hard to see her representing us well at an international summit. Cameron's appeal is a comfortable squire, relaxed in Number 10 - people quite like it but they don't really credit him with huge seriousness. Yvette's TV personality doesn't do credit to her private sense of humour, but the upside of that is that she looks properly intent on the job - potentially she's our Theresa May/Angela Merkel.
I think it would do some Labourites of the under 40 generation a great deal of good to watch some documentary footage of the Winter of Discontent.
Like several other PBers - I'm vintage enough to have lived it, and stood in queues for bread and sugar. And the lights going out and and and all through the 70s.
It threw a VERY long shadow over my opinions of Labour HMG for very many years. Only Tony persuaded me to give them a go - and OMG where did that end...
I won't vote Labour again after the old adage - Fool Me Once, Shame On You...Fool Me Twice - Shame On Me.
Sort of. The drugs reference was not my intention, the popular culture formulation of the white rabbit as one's guide/ticket to a world of adventure and intrigue was the plan.
"Superunions may be good at getting influence within Labour, they're not necessarily that great at helping individual workers. Which is why individuals are by and large ignoring them."
As an ex-union rep, I'd say the major reason for joining a union is as an insurance policy against individual victimisation.
Can anyone explain to me the point in, or appeal of, Yvette Cooper.
She's not the lefty candidate (Burnham) She's not the Blairite candidate (Kendall) She's not the only woman in the field She's very closely linked to the ancien regime
Is she the Lib Dems of the Labour Leadership contest?
She's got gravitas: it's not hard to see her representing us well at an international summit. Cameron's appeal is a comfortable squire, relaxed in Number 10 - people quite like it but they don't really credit him with huge seriousness. Yvette's TV personality doesn't do credit to her private sense of humour, but the upside of that is that she looks properly intent on the job - potentially she's our Theresa May/Angela Merkel.
I agree, but I think there's an issue in that she literally looks lightweight.
Can anyone explain to me the point in, or appeal of, Yvette Cooper.
She's not the lefty candidate (Burnham) She's not the Blairite candidate (Kendall) She's not the only woman in the field She's very closely linked to the ancien regime
Is she the Lib Dems of the Labour Leadership contest?
She's got gravitas: it's not hard to see her representing us well at an international summit. Cameron's appeal is a comfortable squire, relaxed in Number 10 - people quite like it but they don't really credit him with huge seriousness. Yvette's TV personality doesn't do credit to her private sense of humour, but the upside of that is that she looks properly intent on the job - potentially she's our Theresa May/Angela Merkel.
Yes, I feel like she's the only candidate who the public could imagine going to all the international summits and "standing up to Putin".
I'm undecided whether it's enough to overcome her other deficiencies, though.
The interview with Crosby in the Telegraph last weekend was revealing, he claims to have been far more confident than Cameron based on extensive private polling. The Tory message was simple: vote labour or ukip and you'll get Ed and SNP, very negative but it worked, the thought terrified people. Regardless of resources I just can't see what unified message labour will have come 2020, Burnham, from the working class North has already mentioned immigration, the likes of Toynbee and Jones will recoil from that.
I wouldn't take two Guardian journalists as being representative of very much at all. What is striking about the Labour leadership contest is that there is no left wing candidate. Whoever wins, Labour will swing rightwards. The only issue is by how far. It's also going to be a very England-focused vote: one MP and a few thousand members means there'll be no Scottish influence of note.
southam,if you mean swinging rightwards by been tough on immigration,then your wrong.
The most leftwing labour governments of the past at least controlled immigration (except for new labour) controlling immigration is not leftwing or rightwing,it's just right.
Sort of. The drugs reference was not my intention, the popular culture formulation of the white rabbit as one's guide/ticket to a world of adventure and intrigue was the plan.
I was kind of hoping that you were differentiating yourself from all the Mad Hatters on here.
Can anyone explain to me the point in, or appeal of, Yvette Cooper.
She's not the lefty candidate (Burnham) She's not the Blairite candidate (Kendall) She's not the only woman in the field She's very closely linked to the ancien regime
Is she the Lib Dems of the Labour Leadership contest?
She's got gravitas: it's not hard to see her representing us well at an international summit. Cameron's appeal is a comfortable squire, relaxed in Number 10 - people quite like it but they don't really credit him with huge seriousness. Yvette's TV personality doesn't do credit to her private sense of humour, but the upside of that is that she looks properly intent on the job - potentially she's our Theresa May/Angela Merkel.
I agree, but I think there's an issue in that she literally looks lightweight.
Her voice (and general tone) can all too often sound condescending. Which is rarely an attractive feature.
If she ever came close to power, I would imagine that opponents would start talking up her health issues with ME
Plus she comes with Balls attached. And that is a huge, huge drag.
Good grief, Cooper has been virtually silent over the past five years and the only thing of note from her time in Gordon Brown’s government was the HIPS disaster – now she’s being touted as a Theresa May, Angela Merkel and Hilary Clinton rolled into one! – Personally I don’t see it, but hey ho.
Can anyone explain to me the point in, or appeal of, Yvette Cooper.
She's not the lefty candidate (Burnham) She's not the Blairite candidate (Kendall) She's not the only woman in the field She's very closely linked to the ancien regime
Is she the Lib Dems of the Labour Leadership contest?
She's got gravitas: it's not hard to see her representing us well at an international summit. Cameron's appeal is a comfortable squire, relaxed in Number 10 - people quite like it but they don't really credit him with huge seriousness. Yvette's TV personality doesn't do credit to her private sense of humour, but the upside of that is that she looks properly intent on the job - potentially she's our Theresa May/Angela Merkel.
Comparing her to the Empress of Europe, now that's putting pressure on her!
Can anyone explain to me the point in, or appeal of, Yvette Cooper.
She's not the lefty candidate (Burnham) She's not the Blairite candidate (Kendall) She's not the only woman in the field She's very closely linked to the ancien regime
Is she the Lib Dems of the Labour Leadership contest?
She's got gravitas: it's not hard to see her representing us well at an international summit. Cameron's appeal is a comfortable squire, relaxed in Number 10 - people quite like it but they don't really credit him with huge seriousness. Yvette's TV personality doesn't do credit to her private sense of humour, but the upside of that is that she looks properly intent on the job - potentially she's our Theresa May/Angela Merkel.
Can anyone explain to me the point in, or appeal of, Yvette Cooper.
She's not the lefty candidate (Burnham) She's not the Blairite candidate (Kendall) She's not the only woman in the field She's very closely linked to the ancien regime
Is she the Lib Dems of the Labour Leadership contest?
She's got gravitas: it's not hard to see her representing us well at an international summit. Cameron's appeal is a comfortable squire, relaxed in Number 10 - people quite like it but they don't really credit him with huge seriousness. Yvette's TV personality doesn't do credit to her private sense of humour, but the upside of that is that she looks properly intent on the job - potentially she's our Theresa May/Angela Merkel.
Good grief, Cooper has been virtually silent over the past five years and the only thing of note from her time in Gordon Brown’s government was the HIPS disaster – now she’s being touted as a Theresa May, Angela Merkel and Hilary Clinton rolled into one! – Personally I don’t see it, but hey ho.
The looks of Angela Merkel. The incorruptibility of Hillary Clinton. And as popular with the police as Theresa May.
Sort of. The drugs reference was not my intention, the popular culture formulation of the white rabbit as one's guide/ticket to a world of adventure and intrigue was the plan.
I was kind of hoping that you were differentiating yourself from all the Mad Hatters on here.
From the 1951 film:
White Rabbit: I'm so late! I'm so very late Mad Hatter: [snatching the White Rabbit's Watch] Well, no wonder you're late! Why this clock is exactly two days slow!
It's such low rent class war that makes me discount most of NPXXMP's views.
I didn't like his attempts to undermine Ms Soubry on here within weeks of winning, and emailed her to alert her to his claims that she wasn't doing her job.
And find his claims that it was all a v late swing disingenuous.
I think it would do some Labourites of the under 40 generation a great deal of good to watch some documentary footage of the Winter of Discontent.
Let them also experience the rough edges of the Tory years. Not just Wham, the pinstripes and the brick phones. The 1970s equipment in the NHS. A Euro equivalent being worth more than a pound. The humiliation of Black Weds. The 15% interest rate. Not having a job...
Can anyone explain to me the point in, or appeal of, Yvette Cooper.
She's not the lefty candidate (Burnham) She's not the Blairite candidate (Kendall) She's not the only woman in the field She's very closely linked to the ancien regime
Is she the Lib Dems of the Labour Leadership contest?
She's got gravitas: it's not hard to see her representing us well at an international summit. Cameron's appeal is a comfortable squire, relaxed in Number 10 - people quite like it but they don't really credit him with huge seriousness. Yvette's TV personality doesn't do credit to her private sense of humour, but the upside of that is that she looks properly intent on the job - potentially she's our Theresa May/Angela Merkel.
Can anyone explain to me the point in, or appeal of, Yvette Cooper.
She's not the lefty candidate (Burnham) She's not the Blairite candidate (Kendall) She's not the only woman in the field She's very closely linked to the ancien regime
Is she the Lib Dems of the Labour Leadership contest?
She's got gravitas: it's not hard to see her representing us well at an international summit. Cameron's appeal is a comfortable squire, relaxed in Number 10 - people quite like it but they don't really credit him with huge seriousness. Yvette's TV personality doesn't do credit to her private sense of humour, but the upside of that is that she looks properly intent on the job - potentially she's our Theresa May/Angela Merkel.
Is this another spoof in the same vein as 'Soubry's given up'?
It's really no wonder that you got thumped at the polls.
Can anyone explain to me the point in, or appeal of, Yvette Cooper.
She's not the lefty candidate (Burnham) She's not the Blairite candidate (Kendall) She's not the only woman in the field She's very closely linked to the ancien regime
Is she the Lib Dems of the Labour Leadership contest?
She's got gravitas: it's not hard to see her representing us well at an international summit. Cameron's appeal is a comfortable squire, relaxed in Number 10 - people quite like it but they don't really credit him with huge seriousness. Yvette's TV personality doesn't do credit to her private sense of humour, but the upside of that is that she looks properly intent on the job - potentially she's our Theresa May/Angela Merkel.
Comparing her to the Empress of Europe, now that's putting pressure on her!
All this stuff about her appeal misses the point of Labour party machine politics. At the nomination stage her USP is: Ed Balls knows where you live.
Cameron's appeal is a comfortable squire, relaxed in Number 10 - people quite like it but they don't really credit him with huge seriousness.
Hilarious stuff Nick. Keep it coming.
I think it's a fair comment to be honest. It ties in to what people on the right who have doubts about Cameron have said for years - he has a natural look and sound of a PM which does work with people, but there's been concerns about his attention to detail, whether he has a vision for government, that sort of thing.
Alternatively, in this at least, I agree with Nick.
The interview with Crosby in the Telegraph last weekend was revealing, he claims to have been far more confident than Cameron based on extensive private polling. The Tory message was simple: vote labour or ukip and you'll get Ed and SNP, very negative but it worked, the thought terrified people. Regardless of resources I just can't see what unified message labour will have come 2020, Burnham, from the working class North has already mentioned immigration, the likes of Toynbee and Jones will recoil from that.
I wouldn't take two Guardian journalists as being representative of very much at all. What is striking about the Labour leadership contest is that there is no left wing candidate. Whoever wins, Labour will swing rightwards. The only issue is by how far. It's also going to be a very England-focused vote: one MP and a few thousand members means there'll be no Scottish influence of note.
southam,if you mean swinging rightwards by been tough on immigration,then your wrong.
The most leftwing labour governments of the past at least controlled immigration (except for new labour) controlling immigration is not leftwing or rightwing,it's just right.
When are you thinking of? The UK had basically open door to anyone until WW1, then basically open door to people from the Commonwealth until the 1960s, then joined the EU in the early 1970s which started letting in relatively poor countries in the early 1980s.
So much for Whataboutery. My point was that for a certain age group [that vote in droves] - Labour were appalling when in HMG. And it's stuck for decades.
Not addressing this is their Achilles Heel. Tony tried it and then Gordon busted the bank literally.
The Tories Black Wednesday took the Blue Team two decades to recover from. And a Coalition. Until Labour gets credible on economics - they're stuffed and denying it, blaming Evil Tories blah blah doesn't make it go away.
I think it would do some Labourites of the under 40 generation a great deal of good to watch some documentary footage of the Winter of Discontent.
Let them also experience the rough edges of the Tory years. Not just Wham, the pinstripes and the brick phones. The 1970s equipment in the NHS. A Euro equivalent being worth more than a pound. The humiliation of Black Weds. The 15% interest rate. Not having a job...
Good grief, Cooper has been virtually silent over the past five years and the only thing of note from her time in Gordon Brown’s government was the HIPS disaster – now she’s being touted as a Theresa May, Angela Merkel and Hilary Clinton rolled into one! – Personally I don’t see it, but hey ho.
The looks of Angela Merkel. The incorruptibility of Hillary Clinton. And as popular with the police as Theresa May.
Yvette Cooper was also Chief Secretary to the Treasury in 2008/2009. Lets hope she didn't write any notes...
Interesting that Burnham was the Chief Sec just before her; between that and Health he seems to have an awkward history of being at departments where things are going wrong.
Good grief, Cooper has been virtually silent over the past five years and the only thing of note from her time in Gordon Brown’s government was the HIPS disaster – now she’s being touted as a Theresa May, Angela Merkel and Hilary Clinton rolled into one! – Personally I don’t see it, but hey ho.
So much for Whataboutery. My point was that for a certain age group - Labour were appalling when in HMG. And it's stuck for decades.
Not addressing this is their Achilles Heel. Tony tried it and then Gordon busted the bank literally.
The Tories Black Wednesday took the Blue Team two decades to recover from. And a Coalition. Until Labour gets credible on economics - they're stuffed and denying it, blaming Evil Tories blah blah doesn't make it go away.
I think it would do some Labourites of the under 40 generation a great deal of good to watch some documentary footage of the Winter of Discontent.
Let them also experience the rough edges of the Tory years. Not just Wham, the pinstripes and the brick phones. The 1970s equipment in the NHS. A Euro equivalent being worth more than a pound. The humiliation of Black Weds. The 15% interest rate. Not having a job...
Who said anything about Evil Tories. Just saying that there are downsides with all govts. Well certainly the ones I have experienced. My worst personal experiences of govt was late 80s early 90s.
It's such low rent class war that makes me discount most of NPXXMP's views.
I didn't like his attempts to undermine Ms Soubry on here within weeks of winning, and emailed her to alert her to his claims that she wasn't doing her job.
And find his claims that it was all a v late swing disingenuous.
Cameron's appeal is a comfortable squire, relaxed in Number 10 - people quite like it but they don't really credit him with huge seriousness.
Hilarious stuff Nick. Keep it coming.
In a way his posts are oddly cheering. He epitomises the deranged but helpful Labour view that they won the argument, and somehow, only by some voters' error, lost the election. Even Anna Soubry agreed with him; she failed to turn up to hustings and gave up, you see.
NPXXMP has even argued that the polls were right and it was the election result that was wrong. The pollsters, you see, were polling people who weren't all registered to vote. So what the punters actually wanted was a draw, but unfortunately a lot of the Labour ones who wanted that just couldn't be arsed to equip themselves with a vote.
It's this combination of denial and complacency about the Tories not being very good that more than anything else makes me think 2020 is nailed on. Labour are convinced they weren't wrong, weren't hated and distrusted, and if only the stupid bastard voters had paid attention they'd have seen sense, voted Labour and put them back in charge.
So in 2020 they'll be busily reiterating the messages of 2015 to the idiot bloody voters who didn't get it last time.
Meanwhile the Tories will be moving ahead. I wouldn't be that surprised if the Tories pulled off something stunning, like getting Labour decisively distrusted on the NHS. Electing Butcher Burnham of the Mid Staffs Massacre will be an important first step.
Can anyone explain to me the point in, or appeal of, Yvette Cooper.
She's not the lefty candidate (Burnham) She's not the Blairite candidate (Kendall) She's not the only woman in the field She's very closely linked to the ancien regime
Is she the Lib Dems of the Labour Leadership contest?
She's got gravitas: it's not hard to see her representing us well at an international summit. Cameron's appeal is a comfortable squire, relaxed in Number 10 - people quite like it but they don't really credit him with huge seriousness. Yvette's TV personality doesn't do credit to her private sense of humour, but the upside of that is that she looks properly intent on the job - potentially she's our Theresa May/Angela Merkel.
She is the UK's Hilary.
That makes Ed Balls a very much more colourful character than I gave him credit for.
Might be a decent guide to how the (non-union) party membership will vote. Looks an uphill task for Cooper to be in contention.
Yes, although one needs to be careful with self-select voodoo polls.
I think we can, however, already conclude two things:
1) Bye-bye Mary. It was nice meeting you.
2) No other candidates are likely to enter the race - amongst the 'Other' category that people were offered, no one name stands out (except maybe one E. Miliband!)
It's such low rent class war that makes me discount most of NPXXMP's views.
I didn't like his attempts to undermine Ms Soubry on here within weeks of winning, and emailed her to alert her to his claims that she wasn't doing her job.
And find his claims that it was all a v late swing disingenuous.
Cameron's appeal is a comfortable squire, relaxed in Number 10 - people quite like it but they don't really credit him with huge seriousness.
Hilarious stuff Nick. Keep it coming.
In a way his posts are oddly cheering. He epitomises the deranged but helpful Labour view that they won the argument, and somehow, only by some voters' error, lost the election. Even Anna Soubry agreed with him; she failed to turn up to hustings and gave up, you see.
NPXXMP has even argued that the polls were right and it was the election result that was wrong. The pollsters, you see, were polling people who weren't all registered to vote. So what the punters actually wanted was a draw, but unfortunately a lot of the Labour ones who wanted that just couldn't be arsed to equip themselves with a vote.
It's this combination of denial and complacency about the Tories not being very good that more than anything else makes me think 2020 is nailed on. Labour are convinced they weren't wrong, weren't hated and distrusted, and if only the stupid bastard voters had paid attention they'd have seen sense, voted Labour and put them back in charge.
So in 2020 they'll be busily reiterating the messages of 2015 to the idiot bloody voters who didn't get it last time.
Meanwhile the Tories will be moving ahead. I wouldn't be that surprised if the Tories pulled off something stunning, like getting Labour decisively distrusted on the NHS. Electing Butcher Burnham of the Mid Staffs Massacre will be an important first step.
I think you'd need demonstable improvement in the NHS to acheive that. That is nigh on impossible without reform, and reform is nigh on impossible whilst the public still cleaves to the idea that nothing must change or we will all DIE TOMORROW. So it's a bit of a vicious circle.
Can anyone explain to me the point in, or appeal of, Yvette Cooper.
She's not the lefty candidate (Burnham) She's not the Blairite candidate (Kendall) She's not the only woman in the field She's very closely linked to the ancien regime
Is she the Lib Dems of the Labour Leadership contest?
She's got gravitas: it's not hard to see her representing us well at an international summit. Cameron's appeal is a comfortable squire, relaxed in Number 10 - people quite like it but they don't really credit him with huge seriousness. Yvette's TV personality doesn't do credit to her private sense of humour, but the upside of that is that she looks properly intent on the job - potentially she's our Theresa May/Angela Merkel.
Can anyone explain to me the point in, or appeal of, Yvette Cooper.
She's not the lefty candidate (Burnham) She's not the Blairite candidate (Kendall) She's not the only woman in the field She's very closely linked to the ancien regime
Is she the Lib Dems of the Labour Leadership contest?
She's got gravitas: it's not hard to see her representing us well at an international summit. Cameron's appeal is a comfortable squire, relaxed in Number 10 - people quite like it but they don't really credit him with huge seriousness. Yvette's TV personality doesn't do credit to her private sense of humour, but the upside of that is that she looks properly intent on the job - potentially she's our Theresa May/Angela Merkel.
Good grief, Cooper has been virtually silent over the past five years and the only thing of note from her time in Gordon Brown’s government was the HIPS disaster – now she’s being touted as a Theresa May, Angela Merkel and Hilary Clinton rolled into one! – Personally I don’t see it, but hey ho.
The looks of Angela Merkel. The incorruptibility of Hillary Clinton. And as popular with the police as Theresa May.
Can anyone explain to me the point in, or appeal of, Yvette Cooper.
She's not the lefty candidate (Burnham) She's not the Blairite candidate (Kendall) She's not the only woman in the field She's very closely linked to the ancien regime
Is she the Lib Dems of the Labour Leadership contest?
She's got gravitas: it's not hard to see her representing us well at an international summit. Cameron's appeal is a comfortable squire, relaxed in Number 10 - people quite like it but they don't really credit him with huge seriousness. Yvette's TV personality doesn't do credit to her private sense of humour, but the upside of that is that she looks properly intent on the job - potentially she's our Theresa May/Angela Merkel.
She is the UK's Hilary.
She isn't even the UK's Hilary Benn....
She's got a mountain to climb, but she's no Edmund Hillary....
I think you'd need demonstable improvement in the NHS to acheive that. That is nigh on impossible without reform, and reform is nigh on impossible whilst the public still cleaves to the idea that nothing must change or we will all DIE TOMORROW. So it's a bit of a vicious circle.
I'm not so sure. The Tories have overcome bigger challenges before.
Basically, they'd need to show that Labour demonstrably squandered billions to line the pockets of PFI companies and NHS staff, managers, and Labour placemen. None of this improved the NHS; it buggered it up, to the point where old ladies drank their flower water from their vases while starving to death in their own poo.
Labour basically brought back the Dickensian workhouse. In so doing it returned the NHS to levels of squalor not seen in modern times. And in the person of Butcher, Labour then tried to cover up the Mid Staffs Massacre - to protect the producer interest.
It will essentially require people to understand that Labour is Dickens' Mr. Bumble the Beadle, applauding himself for his good nature while making a lot of money; and that we are all Oliver Twist, being TTFO for daring to ask for anything.
All the facts are there to do this, it just needs the dots joining. Butcher would be a good place to join them from.
The interview with Crosby in the Telegraph last weekend was revealing, he claims to have been far more confident than Cameron based on extensive private polling. The Tory message was simple: vote labour or ukip and you'll get Ed and SNP, very negative but it worked, the thought terrified people. Regardless of resources I just can't see what unified message labour will have come 2020, Burnham, from the working class North has already mentioned immigration, the likes of Toynbee and Jones will recoil from that.
I wouldn't take two Guardian journalists as being representative of very much at all. What is striking about the Labour leadership contest is that there is no left wing candidate. Whoever wins, Labour will swing rightwards. The only issue is by how far. It's also going to be a very England-focused vote: one MP and a few thousand members means there'll be no Scottish influence of note.
southam,if you mean swinging rightwards by been tough on immigration,then your wrong.
The most leftwing labour governments of the past at least controlled immigration (except for new labour) controlling immigration is not leftwing or rightwing,it's just right.
When are you thinking of? The UK had basically open door to anyone until WW1, then basically open door to people from the Commonwealth until the 1960s, then joined the EU in the early 1970s which started letting in relatively poor countries in the early 1980s.
The word your missing is control,if you think they isn't a difference to the last 15 years to the previous one hundred years on immigration,then I'm afraid you have been living in Tokyo to long.
On topic - I wonder how much the 'more money buys more cutting edge marketing' really differs from the contributions of the Saatchi's in the 80s. Or whether the upper limits of what can be delivered purely by that advantage have changed at all. Finger in the air, I reckon micro-targeting probably not effective where there are more than 1-2000 votes in the private polling returns, and that this swung no more than 2 dozen seats tops. Obviously, 2 dozen is still a critical outcome changing number in 2015, but our start point for GE2015 was also a long way wrong. When the universal attrition of government does ultimately leave the Conservatives properly, deeply unpopular at some point in the 2020s, marketing alone will not save them.
Comments
BTW - does anyone else reckon the Tory clean sweep increases the chances of rail improvement in the SW ("see, vote for us and you get sweeties")
A fight between Kendall and Burnham as the main frontrunners also makes the contest look more significant than one in wihch Burnham and Cooper are the main players, as currently that looks tone wise to be a fight with more to distinguish the pair.
Consider e.g.
AB 40
LK 28-32
YC 28-32
But its true. There's a reason the union membership numbers are collapsing and the actions of those at the top of the unions aren't going to reverse the trend.
The purpose of a union was supposed to be to help its members, not help Len McCluskey spread his own personal pet ideology. What does Len understand about how modern workers are working? He's as remote as any politician.
Superunions may be good at getting influence within Labour, they're not necessarily that great at helping individual workers. Which is why individuals are by and large ignoring them.
Toxictastic.
[User Formerly Known As Grandiose]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dqw2KOOzdzQ
More labour nostalgia.
Jon Cruddas stages his very own mini winter of discontent.
Like several other PBers - I'm vintage enough to have lived it, and stood in queues for bread and sugar. And the lights going out and and and all through the 70s.
It threw a VERY long shadow over my opinions of Labour HMG for very many years. Only Tony persuaded me to give them a go - and OMG where did that end...
I won't vote Labour again after the old adage - Fool Me Once, Shame On You...Fool Me Twice - Shame On Me.
As an ex-union rep, I'd say the major reason for joining a union is as an insurance policy against individual victimisation.
I'm undecided whether it's enough to overcome her other deficiencies, though.
The most leftwing labour governments of the past at least controlled immigration (except for new labour) controlling immigration is not leftwing or rightwing,it's just right.
If she ever came close to power, I would imagine that opponents would start talking up her health issues with ME
Plus she comes with Balls attached. And that is a huge, huge drag.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_Klebb
but less likeable.
The incorruptibility of Hillary Clinton.
And as popular with the police as Theresa May.
I didn't like his attempts to undermine Ms Soubry on here within weeks of winning, and emailed her to alert her to his claims that she wasn't doing her job.
And find his claims that it was all a v late swing disingenuous.
This Tory Would Never Be For Palmer.
It's really no wonder that you got thumped at the polls.
Quotes nesting properly btw, huzzah!
Alternatively, in this at least, I agree with Nick.
Not addressing this is their Achilles Heel. Tony tried it and then Gordon busted the bank literally.
The Tories Black Wednesday took the Blue Team two decades to recover from. And a Coalition. Until Labour gets credible on economics - they're stuffed and denying it, blaming Evil Tories blah blah doesn't make it go away.
Arf
Interesting that Burnham was the Chief Sec just before her; between that and Health he seems to have an awkward history of being at departments where things are going wrong.
NPXXMP has even argued that the polls were right and it was the election result that was wrong. The pollsters, you see, were polling people who weren't all registered to vote. So what the punters actually wanted was a draw, but unfortunately a lot of the Labour ones who wanted that just couldn't be arsed to equip themselves with a vote.
It's this combination of denial and complacency about the Tories not being very good that more than anything else makes me think 2020 is nailed on. Labour are convinced they weren't wrong, weren't hated and distrusted, and if only the stupid bastard voters had paid attention they'd have seen sense, voted Labour and put them back in charge.
So in 2020 they'll be busily reiterating the messages of 2015 to the idiot bloody voters who didn't get it last time.
Meanwhile the Tories will be moving ahead. I wouldn't be that surprised if the Tories pulled off something stunning, like getting Labour decisively distrusted on the NHS. Electing Butcher Burnham of the Mid Staffs Massacre will be an important first step.
Cigars all round.....
Basically, they'd need to show that Labour demonstrably squandered billions to line the pockets of PFI companies and NHS staff, managers, and Labour placemen. None of this improved the NHS; it buggered it up, to the point where old ladies drank their flower water from their vases while starving to death in their own poo.
Labour basically brought back the Dickensian workhouse. In so doing it returned the NHS to levels of squalor not seen in modern times. And in the person of Butcher, Labour then tried to cover up the Mid Staffs Massacre - to protect the producer interest.
It will essentially require people to understand that Labour is Dickens' Mr. Bumble the Beadle, applauding himself for his good nature while making a lot of money; and that we are all Oliver Twist, being TTFO for daring to ask for anything.
All the facts are there to do this, it just needs the dots joining. Butcher would be a good place to join them from.