politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » We should take a David Miliband comeback seriously…it reall
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » We should take a David Miliband comeback seriously…it really could happen
David Miliband is on manoeuvres. There is no doubt about that. Having been out of the spotlight since moving to America, he now clearly intends to make his presence felt. He has made several high profile interventions in recent weeks on where Labour (and his brother) went wrong. Such interventions in politics are rarely accidental. They are planned and for a purpose.
Comments
-
Ha ha ha ha ha with elephant-sized knobs on! No way would even the Labour Party be so deluded or desperate as to consider going back to the past in such a gallumphingly obvious and counter-productive way. Nor would the voters. Even David Bananaman himself is intelligent enough to realise that.
This is not like a long-shot of betting on Obama at 50/1 four years in advance. This is like the bets at 1000/1 on Elvis being found alive, or the Queen having triplets before Christmas.0 -
Morning all – and welcome Mr Pedley.
Miliband Snr’s return does appear at first glance a distinct possibility, although I believe the hurdles that hinder his path are far greater than assumed in the article, not least of which is the opposition from the Brownite faction which still has a major foothold within the party. – Most obvious question however is why would a new leader in situ, encourage such an obvious potential threat?
I fear David M’s time has come and gone, but he’ll always have that banana pix as a reminder.0 -
As the OP notes, David Miliband is open to the same attacks used against his brother: he looks weird and speaks in pseudo-academic jargon. It may be that David is a better administrator and will prepare a better campaign (or even any campaign rather than waiting for a 35 per cent victory to fall from the sky).
GE 2015 was not fought on policies, so the question of left or right wing did not arise, and it probably will not matter very much in five years' time either. We know what the 2020 Conservative campaign will look like, directed by Crosby and Messina: personal abuse of the Labour leader, sent to swing voters. Labour must work out how to counter that.0 -
There's little chance of this happening.
David Miliband would be 54/55 at the time of a 2020 election. That is old for a new elected PM by recent standards - a year younger than Brown (who got the top job unelected by default). Cameron was 43, Blair 44, Major 47, Thatcher 54.
It's sad, but youthful PMs seem popular. There will also be a tranche of MPs relatively unhindered by the toxic Blair years who would be covetously eyeing the top spot.
The Miliband name is also toxic, although nowhere near as much as Blair or Brown. The polling may show him as popular, but a large chunk of that will be name recognition, and also people uninspired by the current candidates. A great deal is being made out of a low figure of 18%.
He also ha a history that might come back to bite him: the Gibson inquiry into extraordinary rendition was scrapped, but how is the Met Police investigation going?
The exception would be if the new leader turns out to as hopeless as, or worse than, Miliband (which Burnham could well be), then Labour might be in a state, and other leadership candidates may decide that pinning another loss on a Miliband would be a good idea, allowing them to come in later.0 -
I love it when Labour supporters say there was personal abuse of the Labour leader, when Labour wasted five years obsessing about Eton, pasties, horses and Gideon.DecrepitJohnL said:As the OP notes, David Miliband is open to the same attacks used against his brother: he looks weird and speaks in pseudo-academic jargon. It may be that David is a better administrator and will prepare a better campaign (or even any campaign rather than waiting for a 35 per cent victory to fall from the sky).
GE 2015 was not fought on policies, so the question of left or right wing did not arise, and it probably will not matter very much in five years' time either. We know what the 2020 Conservative campaign will look like, directed by Crosby and Messina: personal abuse of the Labour leader, sent to swing voters. Labour must work out how to counter that.
Even more, when influential members of the Labour party working in a Labour-led No. 10 were responsible for the hideous McBride scandal.
But like SO, I daresay you think that's all okay because the Tories are *EVIL*.
You also state that GE2015 was not fought on policies. I think you might be saying that because Labour's policies were an incoherent, diarrhetic mess.0 -
Off topic round up.
BBC - George Galloway has officially entered the race to become London's next mayor.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-33126020
BBC - Nominations for those vying to be the next leader of the Labour Party close at midday.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33127323
0 -
Some interesting thoughts here, Keiran, but when you say "A poll by Survation conducted shortly after the General Election showed the public backing David Miliband for Labour leader too," I do wonder if the public were confusing their Milibands. It has been known......
And I am not sure when you say that "the public see David Miliband as credible". I certainly don´t. But then I don´t see the Labour Party as credible anyway.0 -
What's any of that got to do with the price of pasties? You may have misunderstood the point: I am not making a moral judgement, merely an observation with an important corollary: that Labour's leadership campaign is in danger of concentrating on the wrong points, since policy was neither here nor there.JosiasJessop said:
I love it when Labour supporters say there was personal abuse of the Labour leader, when Labour wasted five years obsessing about Eton, pasties, horses and Gideon.DecrepitJohnL said:As the OP notes, David Miliband is open to the same attacks used against his brother: he looks weird and speaks in pseudo-academic jargon. It may be that David is a better administrator and will prepare a better campaign (or even any campaign rather than waiting for a 35 per cent victory to fall from the sky).
GE 2015 was not fought on policies, so the question of left or right wing did not arise, and it probably will not matter very much in five years' time either. We know what the 2020 Conservative campaign will look like, directed by Crosby and Messina: personal abuse of the Labour leader, sent to swing voters. Labour must work out how to counter that.
Even more, when influential members of the Labour party working in a Labour-led No. 10 were responsible for the hideous McBride scandal.
But like SO, I daresay you think that's all okay because the Tories are *EVIL*.
You also state that GE2015 was not fought on policies. I think you might be saying that because Labour's policies were an incoherent, diarrhetic mess.0 -
All of this is taking place against a backdrop of growing concern among Labour that whoever is elected will be little more than a caretaker leader. Last week David Miliband dropped his heaviest hint yet he is preparing a return to British politics. “Unless one of them gets their act together, whoever wins will be DOA,” one MP glumly told me.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11674382/Labours-past-is-killing-its-future.html
Brother against brother. There are some in Labour’s ranks who are currently looking back to those days with fondness.0 -
You may want to re-read your post. You know, the bit that states you think the Conservative campaign in 2020 will look like 'personal abuse of the Labour leader'. I mean, come on.DecrepitJohnL said:
What's any of that got to do with the price of pasties? You may have misunderstood the point: I am not making a moral judgement, merely an observation with an important corollary: that Labour's leadership campaign is in danger of concentrating on the wrong points, since policy was neither here nor there.JosiasJessop said:
I love it when Labour supporters say there was personal abuse of the Labour leader, when Labour wasted five years obsessing about Eton, pasties, horses and Gideon.DecrepitJohnL said:As the OP notes, David Miliband is open to the same attacks used against his brother: he looks weird and speaks in pseudo-academic jargon. It may be that David is a better administrator and will prepare a better campaign (or even any campaign rather than waiting for a 35 per cent victory to fall from the sky).
GE 2015 was not fought on policies, so the question of left or right wing did not arise, and it probably will not matter very much in five years' time either. We know what the 2020 Conservative campaign will look like, directed by Crosby and Messina: personal abuse of the Labour leader, sent to swing voters. Labour must work out how to counter that.
Even more, when influential members of the Labour party working in a Labour-led No. 10 were responsible for the hideous McBride scandal.
But like SO, I daresay you think that's all okay because the Tories are *EVIL*.
You also state that GE2015 was not fought on policies. I think you might be saying that because Labour's policies were an incoherent, diarrhetic mess.
The reason you think policy was neither here nor there was because Labour's policy platform in 2015 was so incoherent and dire. If they had come up with a manifesto of good, sensible policies (and there were a few) then policy would have been relevant and would have attracted more attacks. Because many of Labour's policies were self-evidently dire, policy flew out of the window.
It all came down to Miliband's main problem, as stated by PB Tories on here for years: he was good at recognising problems, and utterly terrible at coming up with solutions.0 -
Umm, no.JosiasJessop said:It all came down to Miliband's main problem, as stated by PB Tories on here for years: he was good at recognising problems, and utterly terrible at coming up with solutions.
He was terrible at recognising problems.
An energy price freeze, as prices fell through the floor.
A cost of living crisis, that never happened.
Weaponising the NHS
Non-doms0 -
David Miliband is, according to conventional wisdom, a political genius who would sweep all before him were he to return. Of course, the only previous time that genius was tested, he was beaten by his supposed dimwit of a younger brother and went off in a huff.
No, forget it. Yesterday's man, and never half the politician he was cracked up to be.0 -
The David coming back story only has legs because the two front runners are so awful, their teams made up of the losers who were trounced in the GE and that they have to spend the next 3 months sucking up to the same deluded activists that thought Gordon and Ed were good choices.
They should have an open primary.0 -
With policies?DecrepitJohnL said:GE 2015 was not fought on policies...... We know what the 2020 Conservative campaign will look like.....personal abuse of the Labour leader...... Labour must work out how to counter that.
Until Labour works out what it is for this leadership exercise is pretty pointless.
'Not as nasty as the Tories/our cuts will be nicer' has been tested to destruction - and look what happens when faced by a party that really does (appear to) know what it wants - the SNP......0 -
Energy prices are a problem for many people, and some see the energy companies as exploiting price changes. That is a problem. The solution he envisaged - the price cap - was barmy, as many of us pointed out at the time.Scott_P said:
Umm, no.JosiasJessop said:It all came down to Miliband's main problem, as stated by PB Tories on here for years: he was good at recognising problems, and utterly terrible at coming up with solutions.
He was terrible at recognising problems.
An energy price freeze, as prices fell through the floor.
A cost of living crisis, that never happened.
Weaponising the NHS
Non-doms
Take another example: zero hour contracts. Not many people on here seemed to support the exploitative ZHC's. It was a good campaign, of the sort Labour should be running, and the Labour MP who campaigned on this needs congratulating. But when the coalition moved to ban exclusive ZHC's (which are now banned as of the 26th May, I think), Labour went further and talked about banning all ZHCs, regardless of whether people on them liked them. They sawa problem, but their solution was again barmy.
And so on.
Weaponising the NHS was not a policy; it was a campaign. A rather sick one, but a campaign nonetheless.0 -
Let me say it again. The Conservative campaign will consist mainly of personal abuse of the Labour leader, like the one just gone.JosiasJessop said:
You may want to re-read your post. You know, the bit that states you think the Conservative campaign in 2020 will look like 'personal abuse of the Labour leader'. I mean, come on.DecrepitJohnL said:
What's any of that got to do with the price of pasties? You may have misunderstood the point: I am not making a moral judgement, merely an observation with an important corollary: that Labour's leadership campaign is in danger of concentrating on the wrong points, since policy was neither here nor there.JosiasJessop said:
I love it when Labour supporters say there was personal abuse of the Labour leader, when Labour wasted five years obsessing about Eton, pasties, horses and Gideon.DecrepitJohnL said:As the OP notes, David Miliband is open to the same attacks used against his brother: he looks weird and speaks in pseudo-academic jargon. It may be that David is a better administrator and will prepare a better campaign (or even any campaign rather than waiting for a 35 per cent victory to fall from the sky).
GE 2015 was not fought on policies, so the question of left or right wing did not arise, and it probably will not matter very much in five years' time either. We know what the 2020 Conservative campaign will look like, directed by Crosby and Messina: personal abuse of the Labour leader, sent to swing voters. Labour must work out how to counter that.
Even more, when influential members of the Labour party working in a Labour-led No. 10 were responsible for the hideous McBride scandal.
But like SO, I daresay you think that's all okay because the Tories are *EVIL*.
You also state that GE2015 was not fought on policies. I think you might be saying that because Labour's policies were an incoherent, diarrhetic mess.
The reason you think policy was neither here nor there was because Labour's policy platform in 2015 was so incoherent and dire. If they had come up with a manifesto of good, sensible policies (and there were a few) then policy would have been relevant and would have attracted more attacks. Because many of Labour's policies were self-evidently dire, policy flew out of the window.
It all came down to Miliband's main problem, as stated by PB Tories on here for years: he was good at recognising problems, and utterly terrible at coming up with solutions.
And what CCHQ also did very cleverly was to shut down immediately any political attacks on it: hence the sudden (unfunded) commitment to NHS growth, and the law to stop the evil ... erm, themselves ... raising taxes.
0 -
Ed’s problems were manifold, not least of which was his lack political stature, his greatest failure however imho, was that for all his talk of ‘one nation’ he appeared to itensely dislike a great many of them. – And at the GE2015, they reciprocated in kind.Scott_P said:
Umm, no.JosiasJessop said:It all came down to Miliband's main problem, as stated by PB Tories on here for years: he was good at recognising problems, and utterly terrible at coming up with solutions.
He was terrible at recognising problems.
An energy price freeze, as prices fell through the floor.
A cost of living crisis, that never happened.
Weaponising the NHS
Non-doms0 -
I think the great British public are done with both of the Miliband brothers.0
-
I agree with all of this. He was too cowardly to move against Gordon Brown, too high-handed to win the leadership after the election and too narcissistic to serve under his brother though he was asked three times.SirNorfolkPassmore said:David Miliband is, according to conventional wisdom, a political genius who would sweep all before him were he to return. Of course, the only previous time that genius was tested, he was beaten by his supposed dimwit of a younger brother and went off in a huff.
No, forget it. Yesterday's man, and never half the politician he was cracked up to be.
He is not the answer to Labour's problems: he is one of Labour's problems.0 -
You should really take that plank out of your eye. Do you really think Labour's campaign was any better against Cameron and Osborne? Really? Labour wasted five years attacking Cameron and 'Gideon' on things that cheered the ever-shrinking Labour base, but mattered little to the rest of the population.DecrepitJohnL said:Let me say it again. The Conservative campaign will consist mainly of personal abuse of the Labour leader, like the one just gone.
(snip)
If Labour had developed a sane policy platform for the manifesto, that is where the attacks would have gone. Instead you had a leader who was seen as a joke (e.g. Ed Stone was an utterly unforced error), and a mess of a policy platform.
There were so many open goals against the Conservatives, and Labour missed every single one.
You attitude sums up the problem Labour has. Too many of its supporters are in utter denial about why they lost this year. And they will vote like Lemmings for another leader who will also fail.
I mean, that piece of scum Burnham for leader? Really?0 -
Was Prof Sir Tim Hunt writing to The Guardian earlier this year? http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2015/mar/23/im-aroused-by-my-female-colleagues0
-
Without policies to attack, what else is there?DecrepitJohnL said:
Let me say it again. The Conservative campaign will consist mainly of personal abuse of the Labour leader, like the one just gone.JosiasJessop said:
You may want to re-read your post. You know, the bit that states you think the Conservative campaign in 2020 will look like 'personal abuse of the Labour leader'. I mean, come on.DecrepitJohnL said:
What's any of that got to do with the price of pasties? You may have misunderstood the point: I am not making a moral judgement, merely an observation with an important corollary: that Labour's leadership campaign is in danger of concentrating on the wrong points, since policy was neither here nor there.JosiasJessop said:
I love it when Labour supporters say there was personal abuse of the Labour leader, when Labour wasted five years obsessing about Eton, pasties, horses and Gideon.DecrepitJohnL said:As the OP notes, David Miliband is open to the same attacks used against his brother: he looks weird and speaks in pseudo-academic jargon. It may be that David is a better administrator and will prepare a better campaign (or even any campaign rather than waiting for a 35 per cent victory to fall from the sky).
GE 2015 was not fought on policies, so the question of left or right wing did not arise, and it probably will not matter very much in five years' time either. We know what the 2020 Conservative campaign will look like, directed by Crosby and Messina: personal abuse of the Labour leader, sent to swing voters. Labour must work out how to counter that.
Even more, when influential members of the Labour party working in a Labour-led No. 10 were responsible for the hideous McBride scandal.
But like SO, I daresay you think that's all okay because the Tories are *EVIL*.
You also state that GE2015 was not fought on policies. I think you might be saying that because Labour's policies were an incoherent, diarrhetic mess.
The reason you think policy was neither here nor there was because Labour's policy platform in 2015 was so incoherent and dire. If they had come up with a manifesto of good, sensible policies (and there were a few) then policy would have been relevant and would have attracted more attacks. Because many of Labour's policies were self-evidently dire, policy flew out of the window.
It all came down to Miliband's main problem, as stated by PB Tories on here for years: he was good at recognising problems, and utterly terrible at coming up with solutions.
And as other are pointing out, let he who is without sin cast the first stone....0 -
David Miliband, the day before yesterday's man.
The Blairite grimace and hand gesture in the above picture say it all.0 -
@BBCNormanS: Labour's @jeremycorbyn says "numbers are creeping up" to secure 35 nominations needed for Labour leadership @LBC0
-
While this may reflect my prejudices, I struggle with David Milliband being answer to the question, "who will lead the Labour Party to the promised land?". His ministerial history is not stellar and his judgement appears to be adrift.0
-
Neither of the Miliband brothers appears to handle defeat well - Ed should take a leaf out of IDS book and go and 'do something' to help him understand one of the many problems faced by modern Britain - then he might be worth listening to - rather than hanging around the Labour benches like a bad smell....antifrank said:
too narcissistic to serve under his brother though he was asked three times.SirNorfolkPassmore said:David Miliband is, according to conventional wisdom, a political genius who would sweep all before him were he to return. Of course, the only previous time that genius was tested, he was beaten by his supposed dimwit of a younger brother and went off in a huff.
No, forget it. Yesterday's man, and never half the politician he was cracked up to be.0 -
I'm afraid I am with the majority here. I simply see no circumstances in which a Labour party would go back to David Miliband for leadership.
It is undoubtedly true that the current field for leadership is poor and uninspiring. It is possible in the run up to the next Parliament that there might be an element of desperation. But which section of the current party is likely to think that David is the answer? Which leader is likely to allow him to even get into Parliament?
Labour need to move on from the Blair/Brown years, not go back to them. David may well become a Labour "big beast" or outrider in the media. But I don't see him back in the Commons and I don't see him as a candidate.0 -
As I've been saying for years, Labour's not campaigning at all was a mistake. Labour expecting a 35 per cent victory to drop into Ed Miliband's lap was a mistake. None of which alters the character of the Conservative campaign, and I'm not really sure what is the point of these non-denial denials -- the Conservatives had no choice; Labour made them do it; and so on.JosiasJessop said:
You should really take that plank out of your eye. Do you really think Labour's campaign was any better against Cameron and Osborne? Really? Labour wasted five years attacking Cameron and 'Gideon' on things that cheered the ever-shrinking Labour base, but mattered little to the rest of the population.DecrepitJohnL said:Let me say it again. The Conservative campaign will consist mainly of personal abuse of the Labour leader, like the one just gone.
(snip)
If Labour had developed a sane policy platform for the manifesto, that is where the attacks would have gone. Instead you had a leader who was seen as a joke (e.g. Ed Stone was an utterly unforced error), and a mess of a policy platform.
There were so many open goals against the Conservatives, and Labour missed every single one.
You attitude sums up the problem Labour has. Too many of its supporters are in utter denial about why they lost this year. And they will vote like Lemmings for another leader who will also fail.
I mean, that piece of scum Burnham for leader? Really?
So for the umpteenth time: Where Labour lost was not on policy, because policy barely came into it. Rather, it was about the mechanics of the campaign, and that is what the Labour leadership contenders ought to be addressing but are not.0 -
What does David M bring to the party beside his own ego, a history of bottling it and an unresolved grudge with his brother?
It is time to move on, not backwards!0 -
Difficult to know who would have been worse Ed or David.. David had to be rescued after an disastrous India/ Pakistan tour (by Mandleson)
Don't think David would be any better, both split the party Ed played all the wrong notes in the wrong order, David might just play some of the right notes but in the wrong order. Ed was defeated so would David.
Labour need to skip a generation0 -
@MsVance - ‘Neither of the Miliband brothers appears to handle defeat well’
Hardly surprising, it’s a novel experience for them - The Labour party appears to have groomed and nurtured the pair for great things since puberty; every pathway swept and door opened, from spad to safe seats to ministerial position. - For all the talk of the Old Etonian’s right to rule, it never applied more so than to the Milibands.
0 -
I would respectfully disagree. The lack of a coherent policy package that might have made them look like a potential government in waiting was the fundamental problem with their campaign. It was the work not done, the hard choices not made, the back of a fag packet ideas that fell apart and the bland rubbish of the Edstone that caused Labour to lose.DecrepitJohnL said:
As I've been saying for years, Labour's not campaigning at all was a mistake. Labour expecting a 35 per cent victory to drop into Ed Miliband's lap was a mistake. None of which alters the character of the Conservative campaign, and I'm not really sure what is the point of these non-denial denials -- the Conservatives had no choice; Labour made them do it; and so on.JosiasJessop said:
You should really take that plank out of your eye. Do you really think Labour's campaign was any better against Cameron and Osborne? Really? Labour wasted five years attacking Cameron and 'Gideon' on things that cheered the ever-shrinking Labour base, but mattered little to the rest of the population.DecrepitJohnL said:Let me say it again. The Conservative campaign will consist mainly of personal abuse of the Labour leader, like the one just gone.
(snip)
If Labour had developed a sane policy platform for the manifesto, that is where the attacks would have gone. Instead you had a leader who was seen as a joke (e.g. Ed Stone was an utterly unforced error), and a mess of a policy platform.
There were so many open goals against the Conservatives, and Labour missed every single one.
You attitude sums up the problem Labour has. Too many of its supporters are in utter denial about why they lost this year. And they will vote like Lemmings for another leader who will also fail.
I mean, that piece of scum Burnham for leader? Really?
So for the umpteenth time: Where Labour lost was not on policy, because policy barely came into it. Rather, it was about the mechanics of the campaign, and that is what the Labour leadership contenders ought to be addressing but are not.
If they are to be at the races the next time it is essential that the next leader recognises this and works hard on putting together a credible and coherent plan for office from the day he or she is elected. No more blank pieces of paper but policies developed, tested, sold and then sold again taking into account the criticisms, not just by the leader but by the entire shadow cabinet. The British people deserve a choice. Its Labour's job to provide it.0 -
I like David Miliband. However, unfortunately, among the long list of reasons as to why Ed Miliband was the most disastrous Labour leader of all time is his destruction of the political career of his much more talented brother - and it remains destroyed.0
-
I know Liam Byrne isn't popular at the moment with anyone, but I think his diagnosis of Labour's problem was almost spot on. Unfortunately for Labour, because of his note, he has no credibility left.with them.0 -
All the candidates apart from the ones that have dropped out are old Lab in some form or other and represent simply more of the same. I have no idea whether Dan Jarvis was being talked up beyond his ability but Lab needs to find a clean break candidate now to take them to 2020.
The thought that there could be a change of leadership in 2018 is ridiculous. First, the incumbent would, rightly, feel aggrieved at having to step down, not to say a vote now for a non-candidate would make a mockery of the selection process; and secondly, whoever took over, or was crowned, would scarcely have time to create a relationship with the British public.
They must be creative, jettison Andy, Yvette and, dear god help us, David and find someone new....of course I have no idea who that would be.0 -
The Miliband brothers were boys trying and woefully failing to do a man's job. They lacked crucial experience and relied on the dying reputation of their father. Also they were ensnared in complicit family tax avoidance which became part of a millstone round their necks.
Labour should not rely any more on family dynasties as so often the children and grandchildren do not have the qualities of the family founder.0 -
The Note will be ancient history next time but they cannot go through this Parliament opposing every cut but maintaining that they are committed to cutting the deficit and expect people to believe them. It is just not a credible position.CD13 said:
I know Liam Byrne isn't popular at the moment with anyone, but I think his diagnosis of Labour's problem was almost spot on. Unfortunately for Labour, because of his note, he has no credibility left.with them.
So they need to address the question of higher taxes head on. Not just for bankers but for the majority. If we really want Nordic level of state services we would need to pay Nordic level of taxes. Can they win that argument? There is a perception that the UK is heavily taxed. Actually, it isn't but there is an argument to be made.
If the State is to have more money there is a very wide spread concern that it would simply waste it. No one wants to pay taxes for that so the test of efficiency is key to winning the first argument. How do you achieve that? Blairite style reforms, the use of the private sector or some other way? A credible answer needs to be found or the argument for higher taxes is unwinnable.
What are the priorities for the extra cash? Presumably the NHS but what else? There is a strong argument that we are not spending enough on education in this country and that the poor bear the consequences of that in terms of lack of opportunity. What works where and why? Again some serious work is needed.
By the next election the State's share of GDP should be in the 30s. The argument it should be higher to help the disadvantaged in society is not unwinnable. But there is a lot of work to be done.0 -
Spot on. The new leader needs to focus on policy and not just on themes, though these are important. There will need to be a better campaign team, but that is some years off and they need some ammo to fire.DavidL said:
I would respectfully disagree. The lack of a coherent policy package that might have made them look like a potential government in waiting was the fundamental problem with their campaign. It was the work not done, the hard choices not made, the back of a fag packet ideas that fell apart and the bland rubbish of the Edstone that caused Labour to lose.DecrepitJohnL said:
As I've been saying for years, Labour's not campaigning at all was a mistake. Labour expecting a 35 per cent victory to drop into Ed Miliband's lap was a mistake. None of which alters the character of the Conservative campaign, and I'm not really sure what is the point of these non-denial denials -- the Conservatives had no choice; Labour made them do it; and so on.JosiasJessop said:
You should really take that plank out of your eye. Do you really think Labour's campaign was any better against Cameron and Osborne? Really? Labour wasted five years attacking Cameron and 'Gideon' on things that cheered the ever-shrinking Labour base, but mattered little to the rest of the population.DecrepitJohnL said:Let me say it again. The Conservative campaign will consist mainly of personal abuse of the Labour leader, like the one just gone.
(snip)
There were so many open goals against the Conservatives, and Labour missed every single one.
You attitude sums up the problem Labour has. Too many of its supporters are in utter denial about why they lost this year. And they will vote like Lemmings for another leader who will also fail.
I mean, that piece of scum Burnham for leader? Really?
So for the umpteenth time: Where Labour lost was not on policy, because policy barely came into it. Rather, it was about the mechanics of the campaign, and that is what the Labour leadership contenders ought to be addressing but are not.
If they are to be at the races the next time it is essential that the next leader recognises this and works hard on putting together a credible and coherent plan for office from the day he or she is elected. No more blank pieces of paper but policies developed, tested, sold and then sold again taking into account the criticisms, not just by the leader but by the entire shadow cabinet. The British people deserve a choice. Its Labour's job to provide it.
It is important not to refight the last parliament, let alone the Blair Brown years. Issues such as the benefit cap and bedroom tax will be long in the tooth by 2020, and the focus needs to be forward thinking.
0 -
Well said.SimonStClare said:
@MsVance - ‘Neither of the Miliband brothers appears to handle defeat well’
Hardly surprising, it’s a novel experience for them - The Labour party appears to have groomed and nurtured the pair for great things since puberty; every pathway swept and door opened, from spad to safe seats to ministerial position. - For all the talk of the Old Etonian’s right to rule, it never applied more so than to the Milibands.0 -
As for the current candidates, I expect that either Andy Burnham or Yvette Cooper would make a perfectly good fist of the job if Labour can recover their nerve. Liz Kendall would be a big gamble and so far I haven't seen enough from her to persuade me that she would be worth it.
All three main candidates, however, should enable a sensible debate about the next steps for the party to take place in the coming months. Once they get past the twin dangers of fatalism and self-flagellation, Labour will be able to face up to their serious but not hopeless position and put together a strategy for 2020.0 -
I have lost the link to the ITV election night coverage.... being left with BBC's is proving tiresome finally.... this is almost an international emergency, what is David's number anyone?
If anyone sees it I still await the delight of watching the Sky election night coverage- might it be made available on DVD for a Scrap xmas present?
0 -
Close your eyes and think of any of the leader/deputy leader candidates and try and imagine them as Prime Minister in 2020.. Nope thought so, neither could I.
They could be leader of the Labour party, but that's long way from being PM as ED found out.0 -
The major problem with Burnham and Cooper is the simple fact that neither look or even sound Prime Ministerial..Let us not forget that they purport to represent this great country and its people . on the world stage...they would be laughed at..quite rightly0
-
If Greece leaves the Euro, David Cameron's hand in Britain's negotiations with the EU would be greatly strengthened. The EU hierarchy would not want the EU to look as though it is crumbling so it would not wish to have a second grievous blow so soon. So David Cameron could push much harder.
It is true also that if a deal is reached with Greece then David Cameron's negotiating position is weakened, but not to the same extent. Losing Britain would be a grievous blow for the EU all by itself.0 -
Good morning, everyone.
A problem D. Miliband faces is that those currently in place will not want him returning. It's a bit similar to the Boris problem. Those who've been plugging away in government for five years are unlikely to welcome the prospect of being led by someone who has not, and who might not be seen as the most serious of leaders/bosses.
Mr. Scrapheap, ITV coverage:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4DsAi2dI700 -
It'd be very amusing if the best candidate for Labour leader 2020 was an Old Etonian
SquareRoot said:Close your eyes and think of any of the leader/deputy leader candidates and try and imagine them as Prime Minister in 2020.. Nope thought so, neither could I.
They could be leader of the Labour party, but that's long way from being PM as ED found out.0 -
Off-Thread
There is a somewhat biased report this morning which is headlined by, 'Elite firms are sidelining the UK's bright working-class applicants in favour of privileged, "polished" candidates, a report says.'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-33109052
As an employer in not an elite-firm, we require five main qualities from new employees:
1. To have the factual knowledge required
2. The ability to use that factual knowledge to provide solutions to difficult problems posed by clients.
3. To have a good command of written and spoken English so that it can be understood easily by any English-speaker globally.
4. To focus on knowledge and skill self-improvement - both in an out of work.
5. To be able to present themselves with some confidence (after some training) before global clients.
Surely this is not too much to ask from our education system - but it is quite apparent that the huge emphasis on the dubious merits of enforced 'diversity' has totally ignored the requirements of the employer in a global market-place. Employers should not be expected to remedy (and bear the costs) the defects of our education system.
0 -
Labour did campaign. It's not their opponents' fault that the campaign was so dire. Although I can understand why you might want to sweep the campaign under the carpet. Didn't they exceed the four million conversations they were hoping for? Wasn't Ed Stone part of a campaign?DecrepitJohnL said:
As I've been saying for years, Labour's not campaigning at all was a mistake. Labour expecting a 35 per cent victory to drop into Ed Miliband's lap was a mistake. None of which alters the character of the Conservative campaign, and I'm not really sure what is the point of these non-denial denials -- the Conservatives had no choice; Labour made them do it; and so on.JosiasJessop said:
You should really take that plank out of your eye. Do you really think Labour's campaign was any better against Cameron and Osborne? Really? Labour wasted five years attacking Cameron and 'Gideon' on things that cheered the ever-shrinking Labour base, but mattered little to the rest of the population.DecrepitJohnL said:Let me say it again. The Conservative campaign will consist mainly of personal abuse of the Labour leader, like the one just gone.
(snip)
If Labour had developed a sane policy platform for the manifesto, that is where the attacks would have gone. Instead you had a leader who was seen as a joke (e.g. Ed Stone was an utterly unforced error), and a mess of a policy platform.
There were so many open goals against the Conservatives, and Labour missed every single one.
You attitude sums up the problem Labour has. Too many of its supporters are in utter denial about why they lost this year. And they will vote like Lemmings for another leader who will also fail.
I mean, that piece of scum Burnham for leader? Really?
So for the umpteenth time: Where Labour lost was not on policy, because policy barely came into it. Rather, it was about the mechanics of the campaign, and that is what the Labour leadership contenders ought to be addressing but are not.
You sadly miss the point: as long as intelligent Labourites such as yourself go on thinking that the reason they lost was that the Conservatives were horrid to Ed (whilst ignoring McBride et al), then you will lose.
You are asking the new leadership to head in utterly the wrong direction: on the mechanism of the campaign rather than on developing a coherent package of messages and policies.
If Labour follow your advice, they will lose in 2020.0 -
Losing Britain would be a grievous blow for the EU all by itself
Which is exactly why it should happen.
'England has saved herself by her exertions, and will, as I trust, save Europe by her example'0 -
An apposite day for you to be posting.runnymede said:Losing Britain would be a grievous blow for the EU all by itself
Which is exactly why it should happen.
'England has saved herself by her exertions, and will, as I trust, save Europe by her example'0 -
@JohnRentoul: Jim Murphy on David Miliband in an interview on Today: “There is nothing to suggest in my private discussions that he will come back.”0
-
Mr L,
You're right about the note (and it was only a poor joke anyway), but Liam's view is ... Labour did well in areas of high immigration and "urban intellectuals", but lost much of the vote they expected. The LD's defectors chose Ukip rather than Labour, and Labour now also have a "demographic problem". The old gits went elsewhere and the old gits are the future.
Next time, there will be a larger proportion of old gits for Labour to ignore. Think the Chuckle Brothers and not Russell Brand.
OK, that's just my summary, but the conclusion is that the 35% group doesn't exist or is much less that 35%. He also wants more greenery but that may conflict with the aforementioned old gits.0 -
Brilliant - thunderbirds are go! thanks MD.... laters, well 8 hours or so... great office background 'music' to my ears.Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
0 -
Just watching some E3 videos: Dishonored 2's announced [no date so it would seem 2016 at the earliest, particularly as the first game's been remastered for the new(ish) consoles], and Fallout 4 is doing its best to make me buy it. You can craft entire settlements. It looks bloody fantastic (not seen a female protagonist yet, though, or the character creator).
Edited extra bit: np, Mr. Scrapheap. Enjoy Owen Jones' gradual realisation of the result.
Edited extra bit 2: Fallout 4's character creator may've been shown, but I missed the video.0 -
I loved Dishonored. I think it was the last game I completed (excluding Civilization x, LBP), in fact. That being said, I only managed to complete it because I had to fly to Australia and back, and there's not much else to do in 48 hours of travelling...Morris_Dancer said:Just watching some E3 videos: Dishonored 2's announced [no date so it would seem 2016 at the earliest, particularly as the first game's been remastered for the new(ish) consoles], and Fallout 4 is doing its best to make me buy it. You can craft entire settlements. It looks bloody fantastic (not seen a female protagonist yet, though, or the character creator).
Edited extra bit: np, Mr. Scrapheap. Enjoy Owen Jones' gradual realisation of the result.
Edited extra bit 2: Fallout 4's character creator may've been shown, but I missed the video.
Fallout is a real time sink, and I mean that in the nicest possible way.0 -
Dishonoured 2 is coming as well? man, this is going to be (and has been) a great couple of years for games. I try not to get too hyped, but I've given in. I hope XCOM 2 is awesome - the enemy within expansion and stuff like the long war mod really gave the reboot so much replayabilityMorris_Dancer said:Just watching some E3 videos: Dishonored 2's announced [no date so it would seem 2016 at the earliest, particularly as the first game's been remastered for the new(ish) consoles], and Fallout 4 is doing its best to make me buy it. You can craft entire settlements. It looks bloody fantastic (not seen a female protagonist yet, though, or the character creator).
Edited extra bit: np, Mr. Scrapheap. Enjoy Owen Jones' gradual realisation of the result.
Edited extra bit 2: Fallout 4's character creator may've been shown, but I missed the video.0 -
Mr. 1000, the gameplay in Dishonored was very slick (blinking worked very well). My slight problem with it was that Bethesda created an interesting, original world [more so than most in videogames] but it wasn't an Elder Scrolls style RPG where you could explore all of that.
On the other hand, Ubisoft's approach of Assassinising every game they seem to make is not going down well (some reckon they're effectively just reskinning the graphics and retaining the mechanics).
Importantly, you can craft a kennel for Dogmeat. Who I hope to actually bloody find this time.
.....
Although I did plan on waiting until the price drops.
Turning it back to the topic of MIliband: I still don't buy that Labour's undergone such a culture shift. It's easy now, 3-5 years before the event, to claim they'll be big and brave. But in 3 years it'll be the middle of a second [technically first, but it'll feel like the second] Conservative Government in a row. Don't forget Miliband enjoyed a 10 point lead around the corresponding point last time.
Labour would need to work bloody hard not to look at least in with a chance of power in 2015 when polling occurs in 2013. And then the window to change closes [even if Labour had the nerve to do it].
Edited extra bit: Mr. kle4, aye but no release date. I think Fallout 4's 10 November, which is a little later than the earlier rumour of 23 October, but not much.0 -
It would be good if Corbyn gets enough votes to be a Lab leader candidate (and be defeated in the election), then the full debate from the left can be aired and the Unions decide if they still wish to support Labour or start their own party.0
-
Is there any evidence from anywhere that the public even wants D Miliband to be Labour leader?
Personally I always thought he was a waste of space...0 -
Mr. Gin, the focus group video from 2010 had it breaking 7 to Burnham, 5 to D. Miliband. The younger Miliband got zero support.0
-
Boris is not a problem and he has few problems himself. He has helped himself and the conservatives enormously as Mayor and now he is back in parliament. Cameron will retire after 15 years and if he wishes he can stand for the leadership.Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
A problem D. Miliband faces is that those currently in place will not want him returning. It's a bit similar to the Boris problem. Those who've been plugging away in government for five years are unlikely to welcome the prospect of being led by someone who has not, and who might not be seen as the most serious of leaders/bosses.
Mr. Scrapheap, ITV coverage:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4DsAi2dI70
Labour have a big problem in that no matter what the membership may want I do not see any of the candidates offering it. Labour are of course ostracising the wrong prime minister. Only by defenestrating Brown not Blair will thy purge their sins.
0 -
David Miliband would be a fantastic Labour leader from the Tories' perspective. Weak, money-grubbing, indecisive, a flop as Foreign Secretary, a red prince with a sense of entitlement, just as weird as Ed, never done a real job like Ed and just as much of a tax dodger as Ed.
He'd also have to taint himself by displacing Labour's first woman leader.0 -
I think a lot depends on what happens to Greece after it falls out the Euro (if it falls out the Euro).antifrank said:If Greece leaves the Euro, David Cameron's hand in Britain's negotiations with the EU would be greatly strengthened. The EU hierarchy would not want the EU to look as though it is crumbling so it would not wish to have a second grievous blow so soon. So David Cameron could push much harder.
It is true also that if a deal is reached with Greece then David Cameron's negotiating position is weakened, but not to the same extent. Losing Britain would be a grievous blow for the EU all by itself.
The most likely outcome of a traumatic end for Greece in the Euro, is that the Eurozone ends up becoming ever more tightly entwined. "To stop this happening again, we much strengthen the bonds, etc etc." This, of course, makes it increasingly hard for those members of the EU that are not members of the Eurozone.
The - as I've said many time before - Eurozone is going to look more and more like a country. There will be fiscal transfers between the various parts. There will be common Eurozone debt. And, in time, Eurozone MEPs will in the European Parliament will start to exercise democratic oversight of the running of the Eurozone.
I don't believe it is possible to square the circle between the EU and the Eurozone. Essentially, I don't see how a satisfactory arrangement can be worked out between the two groups of countries: they will be pushing ahead for integration, and will regard us as standing in their way. We will feel that the EU is being run for the Eurozone and not for all its members.
As a result, it's hard to see how ourselves, the Swedes and possibly the Danes can remain a part of the EU (Denmark is different, in that they still have the Krona, but have an essentially permanent peg to the Euro).
It would be better we (and the other EU leaders) recognised this issue now, and organised a velvet divorce. I would suggest that the non-Eurozone members become Associate EU members, which remain part of the single market (like EFTA/EEA), but just like with Norway or Switzerland, are not subject to EU regulation on working conditions, or the like. We remove ourselves from the CAP and from the bulk of the contributions (which should instead be between Eurozone members).0 -
Mr. Flightpath, not sure Boris as PM will fly north of the Watford Gap.0
-
Yes, from this weekend's YouGovGIN1138 said:Is there any evidence from anywhere that the public even wants D Miliband to be Labour leader?
Personally I always thought he was a waste of space...
Imagine that David Miliband was still an MP and was running to be Labour leader. Which, if any, of the following candidates for Labour leader would then make you most likely to vote Labour?
David Miliband 18
Andy Burnham 6
Yvette Cooper 4
Liz Kendall 3
Jeremy Corbyn 3
Mary Creagh 1
Not sure 27
Not applicable as I'd sooner trap my manhood in a door than vote Labour* 37
* Actual wording was Not applicable - I would never vote Labour anyway
http://bit.ly/1JSLjpF0 -
O/T
New York's rent regulation fight
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32891544
Is this a future model for London?0 -
Whether it's the economy, Lutfur Rahman, housing or indeed anything else, Labour causes the problem, and someone else then has to fix it. This is usually in the face first of Labour denial that there is a problem at all, then of Labour whining that someone else isn't solving their problem fast enough.Scott_P said:
Umm, no.JosiasJessop said:It all came down to Miliband's main problem, as stated by PB Tories on here for years: he was good at recognising problems, and utterly terrible at coming up with solutions.
He was terrible at recognising problems.
An energy price freeze, as prices fell through the floor.
A cost of living crisis, that never happened.
Weaponising the NHS
Non-doms
0 -
In Eds case it would need to be get a job in the city.CarlottaVance said:
Neither of the Miliband brothers appears to handle defeat well - Ed should take a leaf out of IDS book and go and 'do something' to help him understand one of the many problems faced by modern Britain - then he might be worth listening to - rather than hanging around the Labour benches like a bad smell....antifrank said:
too narcissistic to serve under his brother though he was asked three times.SirNorfolkPassmore said:David Miliband is, according to conventional wisdom, a political genius who would sweep all before him were he to return. Of course, the only previous time that genius was tested, he was beaten by his supposed dimwit of a younger brother and went off in a huff.
No, forget it. Yesterday's man, and never half the politician he was cracked up to be.0 -
You can say it again as often as you like, it'll still be a lie.DecrepitJohnL said:
Let me say it again. The Conservative campaign will consist mainly of personal abuse of the Labour leader, like the one just gone.JosiasJessop said:
You may want to re-read your post. You know, the bit that states you think the Conservative campaign in 2020 will look like 'personal abuse of the Labour leader'. I mean, come on.DecrepitJohnL said:
What's any of that got to do with the price of pasties? You may have misunderstood the point: I am not making a moral judgement, merely an observation with an important corollary: that Labour's leadership campaign is in danger of concentrating on the wrong points, since policy was neither here nor there.JosiasJessop said:
I love it when Labour supporters say there was personal abuse of the Labour leader, when Labour wasted five years obsessing about Eton, pasties, horses and Gideon.DecrepitJohnL said:As the OP notes, David Miliband is open to the same attacks used against his brother: he looks weird and speaks in pseudo-academic jargon. It may be that David is a better administrator and will prepare a better campaign (or even any campaign rather than waiting for a 35 per cent victory to fall from the sky).
GE 2015 was not fought on policies, so the question of left or right wing did not arise, and it probably will not matter very much in five years' time either. We know what the 2020 Conservative campaign will look like, directed by Crosby and Messina: personal abuse of the Labour leader, sent to swing voters. Labour must work out how to counter that.
Even more, when influential members of the Labour party working in a Labour-led No. 10 were responsible for the hideous McBride scandal.
But like SO, I daresay you think that's all okay because the Tories are *EVIL*.
You also state that GE2015 was not fought on policies. I think you might be saying that because Labour's policies were an incoherent, diarrhetic mess.
The reason you think policy was neither here nor there was because Labour's policy platform in 2015 was so incoherent and dire. If they had come up with a manifesto of good, sensible policies (and there were a few) then policy would have been relevant and would have attracted more attacks. Because many of Labour's policies were self-evidently dire, policy flew out of the window.
It all came down to Miliband's main problem, as stated by PB Tories on here for years: he was good at recognising problems, and utterly terrible at coming up with solutions.
And what CCHQ also did very cleverly was to shut down immediately any political attacks on it: hence the sudden (unfunded) commitment to NHS growth, and the law to stop the evil ... erm, themselves ... raising taxes.0 -
Rent controls are among the most evil and wrong-headed inventions in history.Financier said:O/T
New York's rent regulation fight
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32891544
Is this a future model for London?
They discourage investment in housing stock. They prevent the efficient allocation of scarce resource. They subvert the price mechanism. And they make landlords evil.0 -
Top post! Some really excellent points.DavidL said:
So they need to address the question of higher taxes head on. Not just for bankers but for the majority. If we really want Nordic level of state services we would need to pay Nordic level of taxes. Can they win that argument? There is a perception that the UK is heavily taxed. Actually, it isn't but there is an argument to be made.
If the State is to have more money there is a very wide spread concern that it would simply waste it. No one wants to pay taxes for that so the test of efficiency is key to winning the first argument. How do you achieve that? Blairite style reforms, the use of the private sector or some other way? A credible answer needs to be found or the argument for higher taxes is unwinnable.
In many ways this is THE choice that the country has to face on the domestic front, in the same way as the EU is the main choice in terms of external relations.
0 -
He's probably the one the public has ever hard of...TheScreamingEagles said:
Yes, from this weekend's YouGovGIN1138 said:Is there any evidence from anywhere that the public even wants D Miliband to be Labour leader?
Personally I always thought he was a waste of space...
Imagine that David Miliband was still an MP and was running to be Labour leader. Which, if any, of the following candidates for Labour leader would then make you most likely to vote Labour?
David Miliband 18
Andy Burnham 6
Yvette Cooper 4
Liz Kendall 3
Jeremy Corbyn 3
Mary Creagh 1
Not sure 27
Not applicable as I'd sooner trap my manhood in a door than vote Labour* 37
* Actual wording was Not applicable - I would never vote Labour anyway
http://bit.ly/1JSLjpF
0 -
Shush.Bond_James_Bond said:
You can say it again as often as you like, it'll still be a lie.DecrepitJohnL said:
Let me say it again. The Conservative campaign will consist mainly of personal abuse of the Labour leader, like the one just gone.JosiasJessop said:
You may want to re-read your post. You know, the bit that states you think the Conservative campaign in 2020 will look like 'personal abuse of the Labour leader'. I mean, come on.DecrepitJohnL said:
What's any of that got to do with the price of pasties? You may have misunderstood the point: I am not making a moral judgement, merely an observation with an important corollary: that Labour's leadership campaign is in danger of concentrating on the wrong points, since policy was neither here nor there.JosiasJessop said:
I loDecrepitJohnL said:As the OP notes, David Miliband is open to the same attacks used against his brother: he looks weird and speaks in pseudo-academic jargon. It may be that David is a better administrator and will prepare a better campaign (or even any campaign rather than waiting for a 35 per cent victory to fall from the sky).
t.
responsible for the hideous McBride scandal.
But like SO, I daresay you think that's all okay because the Tories are *EVIL*.
You also state that GE2015 was not fought on policies. I think you might be saying that because Labour's policies were an incoherent, diarrhetic mess.
The reason you think policy was neither here nor there was because Labour's policy platform in 2015 was so incoherent and dire. If they had come up with a manifesto of good, sensible policies (and there were a few) then policy would have been relevant and would have attracted more attacks. Because many of Labour's policies were self-evidently dire, policy flew out of the window.
It all came down to Miliband's main problem, as stated by PB Tories on here for years: he was good at recognising problems, and utterly terrible at coming up with solutions.
And what CCHQ also did very cleverly was to shut down immediately any political attacks on it: hence the sudden (unfunded) commitment to NHS growth, and the law to stop the evil ... erm, themselves ... raising taxes.
That's exactly what we want Lab to keep telling itself: huge conspiracy, MSM, personal attacks, or, most recently and gaining traction: actually if you look at it this way (turns page upside down), we won the election.
Anything that makes them feel better about and somehow justifies the shellacking they got the better.
In fact I thought Jim Murphy on the radio this morning was actually quite good.0 -
Greece won't leave the euro. The Greeks want to stay and the EU nomenklatura in Berlin and Brussels want them to stay because departure would be so potentially damaging for the project. The sums of money that need to be written off are too large for Greece ever to repay but relatively small in the grand scheme of things, so the whole charade is really just about a organising a managed default by Greece.antifrank said:If Greece leaves the Euro, David Cameron's hand in Britain's negotiations with the EU would be greatly strengthened. The EU hierarchy would not want the EU to look as though it is crumbling so it would not wish to have a second grievous blow so soon. So David Cameron could push much harder.
It is true also that if a deal is reached with Greece then David Cameron's negotiating position is weakened, but not to the same extent. Losing Britain would be a grievous blow for the EU all by itself.
0 -
If David Miliband were to come back would the media start calling him Ed ?0
-
@MSmithsonPB: Been stuck on Eurostar train at Channel Tunnel entrance for nearly an hour. Reason - animals on the line after Calais.0
-
DM, but not his brother, has always induced in me a sort of narcolepsy.
I find that listening to him is a bit like listening to the weather report---with my firmest intent, by the time they get to my area my mind is elsewhere.0 -
*claps*Bond_James_Bond said:
Whether it's the economy, Lutfur Rahman, housing or indeed anything else, Labour causes the problem, and someone else then has to fix it. This is usually in the face first of Labour denial that there is a problem at all, then of Labour whining that someone else isn't solving their problem fast enough.Scott_P said:
Umm, no.JosiasJessop said:It all came down to Miliband's main problem, as stated by PB Tories on here for years: he was good at recognising problems, and utterly terrible at coming up with solutions.
He was terrible at recognising problems.
An energy price freeze, as prices fell through the floor.
A cost of living crisis, that never happened.
Weaponising the NHS
Non-doms0 -
I hope he's not referring to these:TheScreamingEagles said:@MSmithsonPB: Been stuck on Eurostar train at Channel Tunnel entrance for nearly an hour. Reason - animals on the line after Calais.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syyl0gfNDRE0 -
The wording of that question is dreadful and YouGov should be ashamed to put it out under their name. You can't possibly name one possible answer in the question but not others... it's leading. YouGov is turning itself into a jokeshop.TheScreamingEagles said:
Yes, from this weekend's YouGov
Imagine that David Miliband was still an MP and was running to be Labour leader. Which, if any, of the following candidates for Labour leader would then make you most likely to vote Labour?
David Miliband 18
etc
0 -
made their way over from Georgia?TheScreamingEagles said:@MSmithsonPB: Been stuck on Eurostar train at Channel Tunnel entrance for nearly an hour. Reason - animals on the line after Calais.
0 -
To be fair to YouGov, it followed a question, which didn't mention David Miliband, but featured the other leadership contenders.SirNorfolkPassmore said:
The wording of that question is dreadful and YouGov should be ashamed to put it out under their name. You can't possibly name one possible answer in the question but not others... it's leading. YouGov is turning itself into a jokeshop.TheScreamingEagles said:
Yes, from this weekend's YouGov
Imagine that David Miliband was still an MP and was running to be Labour leader. Which, if any, of the following candidates for Labour leader would then make you most likely to vote Labour?
David Miliband 18
etc0 -
Actually, I see they did then list others... but the point stands. You can't make it all about DM in the intro and call it scientific. You'd need to say, if all the following were candidates in the leadership election, who would you support.0
-
Mr. Toms, when Lucy Verasamy presents the weather forecast it always has my full attention.0
-
Labour needs another clause 4 moment to distance itself from its actual record. With the slate wiped clean it would then be at liberty to screw up all over again in a bright, shiny and relevant new way.
No leadership candidate is equal to this; Mr. Bumble the Beadle and Mrs Balls are in denial and then there's just the other one, Ms Who.
As suggestions, though, the clause 4 moment should probably be one or ideally all of
- we utterly fecked the economy yet again, and we're sorry
- we admit the Tories do not in fact want and never have wanted or intended to privatise the NHS, and they are doing a pretty good job
- we now realise it's wrong to hate and expropriate wealth creators and so we now favour low taxes.
If Labour did all three of those they have basically addressed the three biggest electoral turn-offs, which are Labour's incompetence, Labour's dishonesty and Labour's cancerous envy. With those neutralised there'd be a lot less to fear from a Labour government.
The problem for Labour, of course, is where it then goes. For many of its activists, if you can only win elections by sincerely promising not to feck the economy, lie about the NHS or expropriate people you hate and envy, what is the actual point of winning elections?0 -
He would never do that, he's nearly as pro-immigration as Robert and I, which is saying a lot.JEO said:
I hope he's not referring to these:TheScreamingEagles said:@MSmithsonPB: Been stuck on Eurostar train at Channel Tunnel entrance for nearly an hour. Reason - animals on the line after Calais.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=syyl0gfNDRE0 -
No TV here. But did a search. Oh yes.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Toms, when Lucy Verasamy presents the weather forecast it always has my full attention.
0 -
rcs1000, antifrank,
That is a very interesting take on things. It will also be interesting to see what Grexit does to opinion polling in the UK. It will be difficult to make the economic case for the EU if the markets are racked with volatility due to Eurozone troubles all over again. Perhaps if the opinion polls look like the British are going to vote out, it will have a similar panic among the political elite as happened with Scotland. That might get Britain the reform we need.0 -
Sir Norfolk is right, did International Rescue pay for the poll ?TheScreamingEagles said:
To be fair to YouGov, it followed a question, which didn't mention David Miliband, but featured the other leadership contenders.SirNorfolkPassmore said:
The wording of that question is dreadful and YouGov should be ashamed to put it out under their name. You can't possibly name one possible answer in the question but not others... it's leading. YouGov is turning itself into a jokeshop.TheScreamingEagles said:
Yes, from this weekend's YouGov
Imagine that David Miliband was still an MP and was running to be Labour leader. Which, if any, of the following candidates for Labour leader would then make you most likely to vote Labour?
David Miliband 18
etc0 -
The Sunday TimesPulpstar said:
Sir Norfolk is right, did International Rescue pay for the poll ?TheScreamingEagles said:
To be fair to YouGov, it followed a question, which didn't mention David Miliband, but featured the other leadership contenders.SirNorfolkPassmore said:
The wording of that question is dreadful and YouGov should be ashamed to put it out under their name. You can't possibly name one possible answer in the question but not others... it's leading. YouGov is turning itself into a jokeshop.TheScreamingEagles said:
Yes, from this weekend's YouGov
Imagine that David Miliband was still an MP and was running to be Labour leader. Which, if any, of the following candidates for Labour leader would then make you most likely to vote Labour?
David Miliband 18
etc
0 -
That's good to know. However, you can be pro-immigration but believe it should happen through legal channels rather than through smuggling, as I am. I find it quite shocking how they can climb onto lorries so openly and in plain view. The French authorities do not seem to be making any effort to regulate it at all. It seems funny how the UK gets lectured on EU 'solidarity' when France acts like this.TheScreamingEagles said:
He would never do that, he's nearly as pro-immigration as Robert and I, which is saying a lot.JEO said:
I hope he's not referring to these:TheScreamingEagles said:@MSmithsonPB: Been stuck on Eurostar train at Channel Tunnel entrance for nearly an hour. Reason - animals on the line after Calais.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=syyl0gfNDRE0 -
Interesting that currently France is turning back refugees/emigrants at the coastal French/Italian border and sending them back to Italy!JEO said:
That's good to know. However, you can be pro-immigration but believe it should happen through legal channels rather than through smuggling, as I am. I find it quite shocking how they can climb onto lorries so openly and in plain view. The French authorities do not seem to be making any effort to regulate it at all. It seems funny how the UK gets lectured on EU 'solidarity' when France acts like this.TheScreamingEagles said:
He would never do that, he's nearly as pro-immigration as Robert and I, which is saying a lot.JEO said:
I hope he's not referring to these:TheScreamingEagles said:@MSmithsonPB: Been stuck on Eurostar train at Channel Tunnel entrance for nearly an hour. Reason - animals on the line after Calais.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=syyl0gfNDRE0 -
Lefties will face a fun dilemma in a few years' time - possibly very few years indeed - as they continue to try to build their structural prejudices into the education system.Financier said:Off-Thread
There is a somewhat biased report this morning which is headlined by, 'Elite firms are sidelining the UK's bright working-class applicants in favour of privileged, "polished" candidates, a report says.'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-33109052
As an employer in not an elite-firm, we require five main qualities from new employees:
1. To have the factual knowledge required
2. The ability to use that factual knowledge to provide solutions to difficult problems posed by clients.
3. To have a good command of written and spoken English so that it can be understood easily by any English-speaker globally.
4. To focus on knowledge and skill self-improvement - both in an out of work.
5. To be able to present themselves with some confidence (after some training) before global clients.
Surely this is not too much to ask from our education system - but it is quite apparent that the huge emphasis on the dubious merits of enforced 'diversity' has totally ignored the requirements of the employer in a global market-place. Employers should not be expected to remedy (and bear the costs) the defects of our education system.
They are as we know very exercised about how few state sector pupils get into Oxbridge, a disproportionate number coming from the private and grammar sectors. These are among the dozen or so universities producing graduates of the calibre you are talking about.
The trouble with any attempt to enshrine anti-selective bias into their admissions is going to be that it will necessarily entail racial bias against Asian pupils.0 -
I read earlier today that the UK has several times requested to be able to deploy our own agents in Calais, given the French don't do their jobs. France has turned down this request several times. Seems like the sort of thing Cameron should add on to our EU negotiations. This problem will only get worse as more and more asylum seekers come from Libya, Syria and Iraq - and who knows what will be the next Middle Eastern country to collapse.Financier said:
Interesting the currently Franceis turning back refugees/emigrants at the coastal French/Italian border and sending them back to Italy!JEO said:
That's good to know. However, you can be pro-immigration but believe it should happen through legal channels rather than through smuggling, as I am. I find it quite shocking how they can climb onto lorries so openly and in plain view. The French authorities do not seem to be making any effort to regulate it at all. It seems funny how the UK gets lectured on EU 'solidarity' when France acts like this.TheScreamingEagles said:
He would never do that, he's nearly as pro-immigration as Robert and I, which is saying a lot.JEO said:
I hope he's not referring to these:TheScreamingEagles said:@MSmithsonPB: Been stuck on Eurostar train at Channel Tunnel entrance for nearly an hour. Reason - animals on the line after Calais.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=syyl0gfNDRE0 -
I think we'd probably say "no", if the French asked us if they could put their agents at Dover.JEO said:
I read earlier today that the UK has several times requested to be able to deploy our own agents in Calais, given the French don't do their jobs. France has turned down this request several times. Seems like the sort of thing Cameron should add on to our EU negotiations. This problem will only get worse as more and more asylum seekers come from Libya, Syria and Iraq - and who knows what will be the next Middle Eastern country to collapse.Financier said:
Interesting the currently Franceis turning back refugees/emigrants at the coastal French/Italian border and sending them back to Italy!JEO said:
That's good to know. However, you can be pro-immigration but believe it should happen through legal channels rather than through smuggling, as I am. I find it quite shocking how they can climb onto lorries so openly and in plain view. The French authorities do not seem to be making any effort to regulate it at all. It seems funny how the UK gets lectured on EU 'solidarity' when France acts like this.TheScreamingEagles said:
He would never do that, he's nearly as pro-immigration as Robert and I, which is saying a lot.JEO said:
I hope he's not referring to these:TheScreamingEagles said:@MSmithsonPB: Been stuck on Eurostar train at Channel Tunnel entrance for nearly an hour. Reason - animals on the line after Calais.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=syyl0gfNDRE
And I think the reason is that it would look politically awful (i.e. a breach of sovereignty) to have some other country's officials working on your soil. The first time a French citizen was treated badly by a British customs agent on French soil would be on the front page of Le Monde.0 -
I think that's overdramatising it. Aren't there reciprocal customs officers already at St. Pancras/Gare du Nord?rcs1000 said:
I think we'd probably say "no", if the French asked us if they could put their agents at Dover.JEO said:
I read earlier today that the UK has several times requested to be able to deploy our own agents in Calais, given the French don't do their jobs. France has turned down this request several times. Seems like the sort of thing Cameron should add on to our EU negotiations. This problem will only get worse as more and more asylum seekers come from Libya, Syria and Iraq - and who knows what will be the next Middle Eastern country to collapse.Financier said:
Interesting the currently Franceis turning back refugees/emigrants at the coastal French/Italian border and sending them back to Italy!JEO said:
That's good to know. However, you can be pro-immigration but believe it should happen through legal channels rather than through smuggling, as I am. I find it quite shocking how they can climb onto lorries so openly and in plain view. The French authorities do not seem to be making any effort to regulate it at all. It seems funny how the UK gets lectured on EU 'solidarity' when France acts like this.TheScreamingEagles said:
He would never do that, he's nearly as pro-immigration as Robert and I, which is saying a lot.JEO said:
I hope he's not referring to these:TheScreamingEagles said:@MSmithsonPB: Been stuck on Eurostar train at Channel Tunnel entrance for nearly an hour. Reason - animals on the line after Calais.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=syyl0gfNDRE
And I think the reason is that it would look politically awful (i.e. a breach of sovereignty) to have some other country's officials working on your soil. The first time a French citizen was treated badly by a British customs agent on French soil would be on the front page of Le Monde.0 -
On topic, I agree with others that David is not the answer for Labour. However I don't think David concurs, and thus the 7/1 William Hill are offering that he is an MP before the next General Election is worth taking.0
-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/andy-burnham/11673954/Labour-leadership-contest-Cooper-and-Burnham-camps-declare-death-of-Taliban-New-Labour.html
They're determined to elect their own IDS, aren't they?
Trouble is, even if they summoned the balls to knife him, the replacement would be another IDS.0 -
Jez We Can
@DavidLammy: I won't be voting @Corbyn4Leader but I've nominated him because the next Labour leader should be chosen by members and supporters, not MPs.0 -
Jez We Can!
@jon_trickett: A significant number of MPs will nominate Jeremy this morning. Watch this space.....0
