politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Boost for Yvette Cooper in the battle for second place – th
Comments
-
I knew someone who worked for IDS who said he didBaskerville said:NB IIRC IDS was not in the SC. Enough acronyms?
'Howard briefed against IDS'. He did not; he was very careful not to. I think he foresaw the role he would have to play.0 -
Surely the immediate post-Corbyn leader will be the Deputy to be elected alongside him...HYUFD said:
The immediate post Corbyn leader would be Margaret Beckett or Alan Johnson as Howard succeeded IDSrottenborough said:
Get betting:oxfordsimon said:Just looking at the content of what the New Statesman has said, I can't quite see the logic in their thinking.
They are essentially saying that she deserves to come second so that she is ready to take over when Corbyn fails. But why on earth would Labour vote for her after rejecting her the first time round?
If she wasn't good enough to beat Corbyn, she isn't good enough to lead the party. Simple as that.
The post-Corbyn leader will be coming from a completely new generation - not one of those who has failed this time round.
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/labour-leader-at-next-general-election
Tom Watson for Labour Leader... now there's a thought.0 -
I definitely saw that article a few days ago. Sunday or Monday IIRC.tlg86 said:Apologies for bringing this up again, but I think I'm going mad. After SeanT posted the stuff about the murders in Sweden I googled it and could only find reference to it on Breitbart. Tonight, however, I found this page on the BBC website:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-33905334
It's dated August 13, but I swear I couldn't find anything last time I looked. Is there anyway of checking the validity of a date on a website? I must admit, I thought this incident occurred earlier this week, not last week, so maybe I just didn't search hard enough for it.0 -
I frankly still think they are both too old and too tainted (a few alleged anonymous briefings don't really stack up against use of language like 'morons' attached to a name and face)!HYUFD said:
The immediate post Corbyn leader would be Margaret Beckett or Alan Johnson as Howard succeeded IDS
The value bet there looks to me to be Tom Watson. Even if he loses the Deputy Leadership, he's likely to be a big hitter in a Corbyn shadow cabinet (let's face it, he's not going to worry about the leader's principles or policies) and he's also by far the most aggressive parliamentary performer Labour have with the fall of Balls. As deputy leader he would be a shoo-in - as say, Shadow Defence Secretary or Shadow Home Secretary he would be a formidable candidate.
OK, so people may not like him, and he's controversial. But for a party in the mess Labour will be after 18-24 months of Corbyn, I think they would go for clarity, youth and aggression over age and muddle.
He wouldn't be Howard to Corbyn's IDS, but he could be Macmillan to Corbyn's Eden, or Bonar Law to Corbyn's Balfour.0 -
Cheers mate, do you need to register or just rock up at the door?Sunil_Prasannan said:
24th August (next Monday). Doors open at 6.30pm for a 7pm start, at: St Pancras Parish Church, Euston Road, London, NW1 2BA.Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:
Sunil, When and where?Sunil_Prasannan said:
There's another bash with Andy in London!Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:
I've also received the invite to a drink with Andy that you referenced earlier.Sunil_Prasannan said:Got another email from Diane!
Colchester seems a bit of a trek to get to.
If it was Yvette, then I may make the effort.
And talking of bashes. Is there a Dirty Dicks gathering in the not too distant future?
EDIT - I passed by there a couple of weeks ago!
0 -
Casino_Royale said:
The most accurate poster - and by some measure - in predicting the election was the now (disgracefully) banned "AudreyAnne". I wonder if she (he?) is back with us in a different guise.antifrank said:
I am still reflecting on how I got the general election so wrong. I had completely discounted the chance of an overall majority.Casino_Royale said:
I am on *this* leadership election. The only way I lose is if the whole thing is called off, the whole thing is re-run and new entrants come in.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Royale, you're green whatever happens, right?
Never complain about being green. As Kermit the Frog taught us, it isn't easy.
Edited extra bit: ha, bet you're glad you stayed up to watch the results roll in
I think the chances of that are now minuscule.
PS: I'm very lucky my mate - who ran the election party - set up a betting station for me at his desktop PC, moved right into the living room next to the TV as the results came in!
But don't worry: you got so many other things right, and in your analysis, you put the rest of us to shame.0 -
I don't think that the hundreds of thousands of Corbyn supporters will be put off by a few obvious smears by the usual suspects, who rightly see an establishment media assault as a good indication the target is doing something right.Plato said:The avalanche of bad news stories about Corbyn could just tip it away from him.
Casino_Royale said:Call me chicken.. But I've traded my book to an all-green position now with Corbyn netting me £185, Kendall £200, and Burnham/Cooper a tenner each. I'm -640 on the rest of the field but view that as very low risk.
I was at +£500 on Corbyn at one point but got cold feet and couldn't afford to drop a grand if he just fell short.
The GE has taught me there are no dead certs.
0 -
Despite loathing Tom Watson with a rare passion and thinking he's voter repellent, he'd be a tricky person to face in the HoC as he's so bombastic.ydoethur said:
I frankly still think they are both too old and too tainted (a few alleged anonymous briefings don't really stack up against use of language like 'morons' attached to a name and face)!HYUFD said:
The immediate post Corbyn leader would be Margaret Beckett or Alan Johnson as Howard succeeded IDS
The value bet there looks to me to be Tom Watson. Even if he loses the Deputy Leadership, he's likely to be a big hitter in a Corbyn shadow cabinet (let's face it, he's not going to worry about the leader's principles or policies) and he's also by far the most aggressive parliamentary performer Labour have with the fall of Balls. As deputy leader he would be a shoo-in - as say, Shadow Defence Secretary or Shadow Home Secretary he would be a formidable candidate.
OK, so people may not like him, and he's controversial. But for a party in the mess Labour will be after 18-24 months of Corbyn, I think they would go for clarity, youth and aggression over age and muddle.
He wouldn't be Howard to Corbyn's IDS, but he could be Macmillan to Corbyn's Eden, or Bonar Law to Corbyn's Balfour.0 -
It definitely existed at 10PM on August 13, although I'm not sure what timezone that is.AndyJS said:
I definitely saw that article a few days ago. Sunday or Monday IIRC.tlg86 said:Apologies for bringing this up again, but I think I'm going mad. After SeanT posted the stuff about the murders in Sweden I googled it and could only find reference to it on Breitbart. Tonight, however, I found this page on the BBC website:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-33905334
It's dated August 13, but I swear I couldn't find anything last time I looked. Is there anyway of checking the validity of a date on a website? I must admit, I thought this incident occurred earlier this week, not last week, so maybe I just didn't search hard enough for it.
http://web.archive.org/web/20150813220116/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-339053340 -
Ah, okay - I wonder if what's really gone on is that the guy's so desperate to stay in Sweden that he's committed murder and seriously injured himself in an attempt to stop the deportation. Either way, it deserved more coverage than it's had.AndyJS said:
I definitely saw that article a few days ago. Sunday or Monday IIRC.tlg86 said:Apologies for bringing this up again, but I think I'm going mad. After SeanT posted the stuff about the murders in Sweden I googled it and could only find reference to it on Breitbart. Tonight, however, I found this page on the BBC website:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-33905334
It's dated August 13, but I swear I couldn't find anything last time I looked. Is there anyway of checking the validity of a date on a website? I must admit, I thought this incident occurred earlier this week, not last week, so maybe I just didn't search hard enough for it.0 -
I got my vote and manifesto booklet today. Burnham is the only one who doesn't say anything silly about the Tories.
This gives me a tough decision: I had him down as my 4th preference before I read the manifestos as I thought the last thing the country needed was a five-year re-run of the last five years, with AB's policies being barely distinguishable from EdM.
But if I were voting on the manifestos alone it would probably be a plump vote for Burnham.0 -
LabourList @LabourList 31s31 seconds ago
Former TUC President Roger Lyons says Tessa’s One London vision is exactly what working people need http://ow.ly/R6J8X0 -
Watson could never be a unity figure as Blairites loathe him unlike Johnson or Beckett and to compare him to Macmillan or Bonar Law is laughable!ydoethur said:
I frankly still think they are both too old and too tainted (a few alleged anonymous briefings don't really stack up against use of language like 'morons' attached to a name and face)!HYUFD said:
The immediate post Corbyn leader would be Margaret Beckett or Alan Johnson as Howard succeeded IDS
The value bet there looks to me to be Tom Watson. Even if he loses the Deputy Leadership, he's likely to be a big hitter in a Corbyn shadow cabinet (let's face it, he's not going to worry about the leader's principles or policies) and he's also by far the most aggressive parliamentary performer Labour have with the fall of Balls. As deputy leader he would be a shoo-in - as say, Shadow Defence Secretary or Shadow Home Secretary he would be a formidable candidate.
OK, so people may not like him, and he's controversial. But for a party in the mess Labour will be after 18-24 months of Corbyn, I think they would go for clarity, youth and aggression over age and muddle.
He wouldn't be Howard to Corbyn's IDS, but he could be Macmillan to Corbyn's Eden, or Bonar Law to Corbyn's Balfour.
Beckett called herself a moron under pressure, she has not said anything critical of Corbyn as far as I can see0 -
Anyone who could describe Michael Gove as 'a miserable little pipsqueak of a man' and shout down the Deputy Speaker would be a formidable opponent across the despatch box and definitely perk up party morale. Whether it would do any good with swing voters is another question.Plato said:Despite loathing Tom Watson with a rare passion and thinking he's voter repellent, he'd be a tricky person to face in the HoC as he's so bombastic.
0 -
Welcome aboard, Mr £3.ThreeQuidder said:
I got my vote and manifesto booklet today. Burnham is the only one who doesn't say anything silly about the Tories.
This gives me a tough decision: I had him down as my 4th preference before I read the manifestos as I thought the last thing the country needed was a five-year re-run of the last five years, with AB's policies being barely distinguishable from EdM.
But if I were voting on the manifestos alone it would probably be a plump vote for Burnham.0 -
He lost his case against deportation back to Italy. Not surprising if he flipped on hearing the decision since life as an immigrant in Sweden is about a million times more comfortable than in Italy.tlg86 said:
Ah, okay - I wonder if what's really gone on is that the guy's so desperate to stay in Sweden that he's committed murder and seriously injured himself in an attempt to stop the deportation. Either way, it deserved more coverage than it's had.AndyJS said:
I definitely saw that article a few days ago. Sunday or Monday IIRC.tlg86 said:Apologies for bringing this up again, but I think I'm going mad. After SeanT posted the stuff about the murders in Sweden I googled it and could only find reference to it on Breitbart. Tonight, however, I found this page on the BBC website:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-33905334
It's dated August 13, but I swear I couldn't find anything last time I looked. Is there anyway of checking the validity of a date on a website? I must admit, I thought this incident occurred earlier this week, not last week, so maybe I just didn't search hard enough for it.0 -
Not if the replacement is unopposedoxfordsimon said:
Surely the immediate post-Corbyn leader will be the Deputy to be elected alongside him...HYUFD said:
The immediate post Corbyn leader would be Margaret Beckett or Alan Johnson as Howard succeeded IDSrottenborough said:
Get betting:oxfordsimon said:Just looking at the content of what the New Statesman has said, I can't quite see the logic in their thinking.
They are essentially saying that she deserves to come second so that she is ready to take over when Corbyn fails. But why on earth would Labour vote for her after rejecting her the first time round?
If she wasn't good enough to beat Corbyn, she isn't good enough to lead the party. Simple as that.
The post-Corbyn leader will be coming from a completely new generation - not one of those who has failed this time round.
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/labour-leader-at-next-general-election
Tom Watson for Labour Leader... now there's a thought.0 -
0
-
'IDS ≠ Corbyn. It would be more like Cameron having had Bill Cash in the Shadow Cabinet.'
Bill Cash was IDS' Shadow Attorney General0 -
Yes but Miliband was not manufacturing his own electorate was he.Casino_Royale said:Call me chicken.. But I've traded my book to an all-green position now with Corbyn netting me £185, Kendall £200, and Burnham/Cooper a tenner each. I'm -640 on the rest of the field but view that as very low risk.
I was at +£500 on Corbyn at one point but got cold feet and couldn't afford to drop a grand if he just fell short.
The GE has taught me there are no dead certs.
Go all in, yer wus!
PS someone made a joke on TV the other night on the subject of Dave Banana and Ed Stone which went something on the lines of, he would be more likely to vote for Glenn Millerband than either of them.
To be fair it does look like Ed's boarded a plane and disappeared without trace.
0 -
Tom Watson as deputy leader would be interesting. He's tried to be a master of the dark arts, but has proved less than competent at it. Like the previous master, Mandelson, he has had to resign from the front bench twice, except in his case it was over disloyalty and internal party machinations.ydoethur said:
Anyone who could describe Michael Gove as 'a miserable little pipsqueak of a man' and shout down the Deputy Speaker would be a formidable opponent across the despatch box and definitely perk up party morale. Whether it would do any good with swing voters is another question.Plato said:Despite loathing Tom Watson with a rare passion and thinking he's voter repellent, he'd be a tricky person to face in the HoC as he's so bombastic.
Worse, he was involved in the Falkirk scandal, which heralded Scottish Labour's descent to electoral oblivion.
Electing him deputy might well be a worse move than electing Corbyn as leader. He's a UXB.0 -
What about a new unity candidate to step in after Corbyn is forced out from the mounting piles of smelly stuff?HYUFD said:
Not if the replacement is unopposedoxfordsimon said:
Surely the immediate post-Corbyn leader will be the Deputy to be elected alongside him...HYUFD said:
The immediate post Corbyn leader would be Margaret Beckett or Alan Johnson as Howard succeeded IDSrottenborough said:
Get betting:oxfordsimon said:Just looking at the content of what the New Statesman has said, I can't quite see the logic in their thinking.
They are essentially saying that she deserves to come second so that she is ready to take over when Corbyn fails. But why on earth would Labour vote for her after rejecting her the first time round?
If she wasn't good enough to beat Corbyn, she isn't good enough to lead the party. Simple as that.
The post-Corbyn leader will be coming from a completely new generation - not one of those who has failed this time round.
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/labour-leader-at-next-general-election
Tom Watson for Labour Leader... now there's a thought.
Step forward Alan Johnson. Would save Labour and get the party to 2020 without massive splits.0 -
Bonar Law was widely loathed too. He took over a riven party with both factions hating him. He was nearly toppled eighteen months after he took over the leadership in a putsch backed by the Cecils. That's one reason why he went to such extraordinary lengths to support the Ulster militants - it was the one thing all the Unionists agreed on. If it had not been for the First World War, the odds were he would have led the Unionists back to power, but the odds were all against his keeping it for very long. His elder statesman persona, that proved so important in 1922, was largely forged by his work during the war. And don't forget, even in 1922 almost all of Lloyd George's former cabinet refused to serve under him.HYUFD said:
Watson could never be a unity figure as Blairites loathe him unlike Johnson or Beckett and to compare him to Macmillan or Bonar Law is laughable!
Macmillan was not trusted by the left of the Tory party. He was seen as too Whiggish, too self-serving, too arrogant. But they were willing to work with someone decisive, like Macmillan, ahead of somebody they liked and trusted but could never make up his mind (Butler) because they believed the situation needed clarity of thought and purpose.
So I think the parallel stands. It's not a question of whether there is anybody good out there - because there isn't. It's a question of who would be the best candidate under the circumstances. For all the reasons I have outlined, I do not think either Beckett or Johnson are plausible candidates (the mere fact that a septuagenarian failure like Beckett is being mentioned is a fair indication of the weakness of the field). So I think Watson would be plausible as Labour leader in 2020, and that therefore looks the value bet.0 -
Tom Watson?
A slug in a suit. Hahaha. Blairites would have a fit.0 -
I see TW very much in the EdB mode: cracking Leader of the Opposition as he'd wind up the Tories no end. But totally non-credible as an alternative PM. Still, better than EdM. The 2010 failure was to pick neither the best alternative PM (DM) or the best LOTO (EdB).ydoethur said:
Anyone who could describe Michael Gove as 'a miserable little pipsqueak of a man' and shout down the Deputy Speaker would be a formidable opponent across the despatch box and definitely perk up party morale. Whether it would do any good with swing voters is another question.Plato said:Despite loathing Tom Watson with a rare passion and thinking he's voter repellent, he'd be a tricky person to face in the HoC as he's so bombastic.
This time round I see YC as the best alternative PM (just, and more as a least-worst option - so sad that the TB-GB wars killed of a generation of Labour's best talent) and I guess JC as the best LOTO (on the grounds that the Tories have never faced anyone anything like him so might not know how to deal with him).0 -
The Deputy would lead Labour until the nomination process was complete. Just as Harriet is doing now.HYUFD said:
Not if the replacement is unopposedoxfordsimon said:
Surely the immediate post-Corbyn leader will be the Deputy to be elected alongside him...HYUFD said:
The immediate post Corbyn leader would be Margaret Beckett or Alan Johnson as Howard succeeded IDSrottenborough said:
Get betting:oxfordsimon said:Just looking at the content of what the New Statesman has said, I can't quite see the logic in their thinking.
They are essentially saying that she deserves to come second so that she is ready to take over when Corbyn fails. But why on earth would Labour vote for her after rejecting her the first time round?
If she wasn't good enough to beat Corbyn, she isn't good enough to lead the party. Simple as that.
The post-Corbyn leader will be coming from a completely new generation - not one of those who has failed this time round.
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/labour-leader-at-next-general-election
Tom Watson for Labour Leader... now there's a thought.0 -
That depends if JC flat out quits before the election of the replacement like EdM did. If he does, the deputy becomes leader for the interim. Though how that would work out if the deputy stood in the election is beyond me right now.HYUFD said:
Not if the replacement is unopposedoxfordsimon said:
Surely the immediate post-Corbyn leader will be the Deputy to be elected alongside him...HYUFD said:
The immediate post Corbyn leader would be Margaret Beckett or Alan Johnson as Howard succeeded IDSrottenborough said:
Get betting:oxfordsimon said:Just looking at the content of what the New Statesman has said, I can't quite see the logic in their thinking.
They are essentially saying that she deserves to come second so that she is ready to take over when Corbyn fails. But why on earth would Labour vote for her after rejecting her the first time round?
If she wasn't good enough to beat Corbyn, she isn't good enough to lead the party. Simple as that.
The post-Corbyn leader will be coming from a completely new generation - not one of those who has failed this time round.
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/labour-leader-at-next-general-election
Tom Watson for Labour Leader... now there's a thought.
0 -
If we weren't starting from here = Hattie should stay on. For all her monomania - she's a feisty, experienced and totally loyal Labour frontman.ydoethur said:
Bonar Law was widely loathed too. He took over a riven party with both factions hating him. He was nearly toppled eighteen months after he took over the leadership in a putsch backed by the Cecils. That's one reason why he went to such extraordinary lengths to support the Ulster militants - it was the one thing all the Unionists agreed on. If it had not been for the First World War, the odds were he would have led the Unionists back to power, but the odds were all against his keeping it for very long. His elder statesman persona, that proved so important in 1922, was largely forged by his work during the war. And don't forget, even in 1922 almost all of Lloyd George's former cabinet refused to serve under him.HYUFD said:
Watson could never be a unity figure as Blairites loathe him unlike Johnson or Beckett and to compare him to Macmillan or Bonar Law is laughable!
Macmillan was not trusted by the left of the Tory party. He was seen as too Whiggish, too self-serving, too arrogant. But they were willing to work with someone decisive, like Macmillan, ahead of somebody they liked and trusted but could never make up his mind (Butler) because they believed the situation needed clarity of thought and purpose.
So I think the parallel stands. It's not a question of whether there is anybody good out there - because there isn't. It's a question of who would be the best candidate under the circumstances. For all the reasons I have outlined, I do not think either Beckett or Johnson are plausible candidates (the mere fact that a septuagenarian failure like Beckett is being mentioned is a fair indication of the weakness of the field). So I think Watson would be plausible as Labour leader in 2020, and that therefore looks the value bet.0 -
If you believe everything you read in a manifesto, you must be green and naive indeed. Burnham sounds like a zombie and looks and acts like a zombie, and as I have written before - a dirty looking zombie at that.ThreeQuidder said:I got my vote and manifesto booklet today. Burnham is the only one who doesn't say anything silly about the Tories.
This gives me a tough decision: I had him down as my 4th preference before I read the manifestos as I thought the last thing the country needed was a five-year re-run of the last five years, with AB's policies being barely distinguishable from EdM.
But if I were voting on the manifestos alone it would probably be a plump vote for Burnham.
Nevertheless, welcome @ThreeQuidder, to the PB fray and long may you stay.
0 -
AJ has never shown the slightest interest in becoming leader, though. If that's genuine (and I can't see how it isn't given the various chances he's had in different circumstances to become leader) he's off the table as an option.TCPoliticalBetting said:
What about a new unity candidate to step in after Corbyn is forced out from the mounting piles of smelly stuff?HYUFD said:
Not if the replacement is unopposedoxfordsimon said:
Surely the immediate post-Corbyn leader will be the Deputy to be elected alongside him...HYUFD said:
The immediate post Corbyn leader would be Margaret Beckett or Alan Johnson as Howard succeeded IDSrottenborough said:
Get betting:oxfordsimon said:Just looking at the content of what the New Statesman has said, I can't quite see the logic in their thinking.
They are essentially saying that she deserves to come second so that she is ready to take over when Corbyn fails. But why on earth would Labour vote for her after rejecting her the first time round?
If she wasn't good enough to beat Corbyn, she isn't good enough to lead the party. Simple as that.
The post-Corbyn leader will be coming from a completely new generation - not one of those who has failed this time round.
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/labour-leader-at-next-general-election
Tom Watson for Labour Leader... now there's a thought.
Step forward Alan Johnson. Would save Labour and get the party to 2020 without massive splits.
0 -
Progressive Jews come out for Corbyn, and against the Jewish Chronicle.
http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/142553/anti-israel-activists-attack-jc-challenging-jeremy-corbyn
"We do not accept that you speak on behalf of progressive Jews in this country. You speak only for Jews who support Israel, right or wrong.
"There is something deeply unpleasant and dishonest about your McCarthyite guilt by association technique..."
0 -
I had to stick Andy in last place - on the basis of his appalling crawling and flip-floppery.ThreeQuidder said:
I see TW very much in the EdB mode: cracking Leader of the Opposition as he'd wind up the Tories no end. But totally non-credible as an alternative PM. Still, better than EdM. The 2010 failure was to pick neither the best alternative PM (DM) or the best LOTO (EdB).ydoethur said:
Anyone who could describe Michael Gove as 'a miserable little pipsqueak of a man' and shout down the Deputy Speaker would be a formidable opponent across the despatch box and definitely perk up party morale. Whether it would do any good with swing voters is another question.Plato said:Despite loathing Tom Watson with a rare passion and thinking he's voter repellent, he'd be a tricky person to face in the HoC as he's so bombastic.
This time round I see YC as the best alternative PM (just, and more as a least-worst option - so sad that the TB-GB wars killed of a generation of Labour's best talent) and I guess JC as the best LOTO (on the grounds that the Tories have never faced anyone anything like him so might not know how to deal with him).0 -
Swayed by good looks.Plato said:Jerry and Angela
Sunil_Prasannan said:
Whom did you vote for?Plato said:The candidates are very hit and miss - I've had blurb from JC and Watson inc two emails, nothing from the rest. Not even an email from Kendall or Yvette.
Since I've now voted, it's all a bit academic - their campaigns are piss poor at getting off the starting blocks.
0 -
He is also of course the man who came up with the brilliant idea of diverting activists from Morley and Outwood to saturate Sheffield Hallam in the hope of taking it, which worked so well.JosiasJessop said:
Tom Watson as deputy leader would be interesting. He's tried to be a master of the dark arts, but has proved less than competent at it. Like the previous master, Mandelson, he has had to resign from the front bench twice, except in his case it was over disloyalty and internal party machinations.ydoethur said:
Anyone who could describe Michael Gove as 'a miserable little pipsqueak of a man' and shout down the Deputy Speaker would be a formidable opponent across the despatch box and definitely perk up party morale. Whether it would do any good with swing voters is another question.Plato said:Despite loathing Tom Watson with a rare passion and thinking he's voter repellent, he'd be a tricky person to face in the HoC as he's so bombastic.
Worse, he was involved in the Falkirk scandal, which heralded Scottish Labour's descent to electoral oblivion.
Electing him deputy might well be a worse move than electing Corbyn as leader. He's a UXB.
http://order-order.com/2015/08/03/tom-watsons-campaign-cock-up-amnesia/#:HHYItmsbgoRzlA
I'm not saying he'd be a good leader - he wouldn't. But he might just be the right man in the right place at the right time.
(Alan Johnson will be 70 in 2020. The last 70 year old leader to contest an election was Foot in 1983 - and before that, Attlee and Davies in 1955. Indeed, Jo Grimond was only 63 when he had his second spell as Liberal leader. While Johnson is definitely a better candidate than any on offer, I think his time has now passed.)0 -
How do you know that 3quidder is not an entryist?MikeK said:
If you believe everything you read in a manifesto, you must be green and naive indeed. Burnham sounds like a zombie and looks and acts like a zombie, and as I have written before - a dirty looking zombie at that.ThreeQuidder said:I got my vote and manifesto booklet today. Burnham is the only one who doesn't say anything silly about the Tories.
This gives me a tough decision: I had him down as my 4th preference before I read the manifestos as I thought the last thing the country needed was a five-year re-run of the last five years, with AB's policies being barely distinguishable from EdM.
But if I were voting on the manifestos alone it would probably be a plump vote for Burnham.
Nevertheless, welcome @ThreeQuidder, to the PB fray and long may you stay.
0 -
Jeez, I'd forgotten that. Dark times.HYUFD said:Bill Cash was IDS' Shadow Attorney General
0 -
The market is leader at next election, not any kind of temporary thing (which would be the deputy leader I suspect). If you fancy Johnson he is available at 25s. Though I think it worthy of note that Tony Blair returning as leader is posted at lower odds than Owen Jones.HYUFD said:
The immediate post Corbyn leader would be Margaret Beckett or Alan Johnson as Howard succeeded IDSrottenborough said:
Get betting:oxfordsimon said:Just looking at the content of what the New Statesman has said, I can't quite see the logic in their thinking.
They are essentially saying that she deserves to come second so that she is ready to take over when Corbyn fails. But why on earth would Labour vote for her after rejecting her the first time round?
If she wasn't good enough to beat Corbyn, she isn't good enough to lead the party. Simple as that.
The post-Corbyn leader will be coming from a completely new generation - not one of those who has failed this time round.
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/labour-leader-at-next-general-election
0 -
You need to sign up, yes.Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:
Cheers mate, do you need to register or just rock up at the door?Sunil_Prasannan said:
24th August (next Monday). Doors open at 6.30pm for a 7pm start, at: St Pancras Parish Church, Euston Road, London, NW1 2BA.Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:
Sunil, When and where?Sunil_Prasannan said:
There's another bash with Andy in London!Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:
I've also received the invite to a drink with Andy that you referenced earlier.Sunil_Prasannan said:Got another email from Diane!
Colchester seems a bit of a trek to get to.
If it was Yvette, then I may make the effort.
And talking of bashes. Is there a Dirty Dicks gathering in the not too distant future?
EDIT - I passed by there a couple of weeks ago!
http://www.andy4labour.co.uk/meet_andy_in_central_london?utm_campaign=stpancrasinvite&utm_medium=email&utm_source=ab0 -
Thank you!MikeK said:
If you believe everything you read in a manifesto, you must be green and naive indeed. Burnham sounds like a zombie and looks and acts like a zombie, and as I have written before - a dirty looking zombie at that.ThreeQuidder said:I got my vote and manifesto booklet today. Burnham is the only one who doesn't say anything silly about the Tories.
This gives me a tough decision: I had him down as my 4th preference before I read the manifestos as I thought the last thing the country needed was a five-year re-run of the last five years, with AB's policies being barely distinguishable from EdM.
But if I were voting on the manifestos alone it would probably be a plump vote for Burnham.
Nevertheless, welcome @ThreeQuidder, to the PB fray and long may you stay.
No, I don't take manifestos at face value. But each of JC, YC and LK said something at variance with the reality of today or the history of the past that makes me think that *if they really believe that* it would mean I couldn't in good conscience vote for them. AB didn't.0 -
Anti-Israelis back anti-Israeli shock, eh?RodCrosby said:Progressive Jews come out for Corbyn, and against the Jewish Chronicle.
http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/142553/anti-israel-activists-attack-jc-challenging-jeremy-corbyn
"We do not accept that you speak on behalf of progressive Jews in this country. You speak only for Jews who support Israel, right or wrong.
"There is something deeply unpleasant and dishonest about your McCarthyite guilt by association technique..."
0 -
Most of the signatories are well known Israel hating Jews. So what else is new? Progressives; my arse!!RodCrosby said:Progressive Jews come out for Corbyn, and against the Jewish Chronicle.
http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/142553/anti-israel-activists-attack-jc-challenging-jeremy-corbyn
"We do not accept that you speak on behalf of progressive Jews in this country. You speak only for Jews who support Israel, right or wrong.
"There is something deeply unpleasant and dishonest about your McCarthyite guilt by association technique..."0 -
There is still some sanity in the world then!rottenborough said:
The market is leader at next election, not any kind of temporary thing (which would be the deputy leader I suspect). If you fancy Johnson he is available at 25s. Though I think it worthy of note that Tony Blair returning as leader is posted at lower odds than Owen Jones.0 -
ThreeQuidder said:
Thank you!MikeK said:
If you believe everything you read in a manifesto, you must be green and naive indeed. Burnham sounds like a zombie and looks and acts like a zombie, and as I have written before - a dirty looking zombie at that.ThreeQuidder said:I got my vote and manifesto booklet today. Burnham is the only one who doesn't say anything silly about the Tories.
This gives me a tough decision: I had him down as my 4th preference before I read the manifestos as I thought the last thing the country needed was a five-year re-run of the last five years, with AB's policies being barely distinguishable from EdM.
But if I were voting on the manifestos alone it would probably be a plump vote for Burnham.
Nevertheless, welcome @ThreeQuidder, to the PB fray and long may you stay.
No, I don't take manifestos at face value. But each of JC, YC and LK said something at variance with the reality of today or the history of the past that makes me think that *if they really believe that* it would mean I couldn't in good conscience vote for them. AB didn't.
Indeed, bets on Dennis Skinner as Corbyn's Shadow Business Secretary?Tissue_Price said:
Jeez, I'd forgotten that. Dark times.HYUFD said:Bill Cash was IDS' Shadow Attorney General
0 -
My instinct before was either:Plato said:I had to stick Andy in last place - on the basis of his appalling crawling and flip-floppery.
ThreeQuidder said:
I see TW very much in the EdB mode: cracking Leader of the Opposition as he'd wind up the Tories no end. But totally non-credible as an alternative PM. Still, better than EdM. The 2010 failure was to pick neither the best alternative PM (DM) or the best LOTO (EdB).ydoethur said:
Anyone who could describe Michael Gove as 'a miserable little pipsqueak of a man' and shout down the Deputy Speaker would be a formidable opponent across the despatch box and definitely perk up party morale. Whether it would do any good with swing voters is another question.Plato said:Despite loathing Tom Watson with a rare passion and thinking he's voter repellent, he'd be a tricky person to face in the HoC as he's so bombastic.
This time round I see YC as the best alternative PM (just, and more as a least-worst option - so sad that the TB-GB wars killed of a generation of Labour's best talent) and I guess JC as the best LOTO (on the grounds that the Tories have never faced anyone anything like him so might not know how to deal with him).
LK, JC, YC, AB - or LK, YC, AB, JC - depending on how much JC is determined to lead Britain out of the civilised world and towards Putin et al. I see LK as inexperienced (not her faut of course) but actually living in the real world and taking Labour in the right direction; AB as a repeat of EdM; and YC as a slight variant on GB - though hopefully in better circumstances.0 -
Johnson is a reasonable outside bet to lead Labour in 2020 if Corbyn wins next monthrottenborough said:
The market is leader at next election, not any kind of temporary thing (which would be the deputy leader I suspect). If you fancy Johnson he is available at 25s. Though I think it worthy of note that Tony Blair returning as leader is posted at lower odds than Owen Jones.HYUFD said:
The immediate post Corbyn leader would be Margaret Beckett or Alan Johnson as Howard succeeded IDSrottenborough said:
Get betting:oxfordsimon said:Just looking at the content of what the New Statesman has said, I can't quite see the logic in their thinking.
They are essentially saying that she deserves to come second so that she is ready to take over when Corbyn fails. But why on earth would Labour vote for her after rejecting her the first time round?
If she wasn't good enough to beat Corbyn, she isn't good enough to lead the party. Simple as that.
The post-Corbyn leader will be coming from a completely new generation - not one of those who has failed this time round.
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/labour-leader-at-next-general-election0 -
It wouldn't surprise me a bit, you may well be right. Sadly, however, a combination of that outcome and the labelling of non-believers as 'Tories' may well give ordinary people the impression that only 'Tories' see anything amiss with the stories that are now surfacing. Are Labour going to be in the business of actively encouraging people to vote Conservative?JWisemann said:
I don't think that the hundreds of thousands of Corbyn supporters will be put off by a few obvious smears by the usual suspects, who rightly see an establishment media assault as a good indication the target is doing something right.Plato said:The avalanche of bad news stories about Corbyn could just tip it away from him.
Casino_Royale said:Call me chicken.. But I've traded my book to an all-green position now with Corbyn netting me £185, Kendall £200, and Burnham/Cooper a tenner each. I'm -640 on the rest of the field but view that as very low risk.
I was at +£500 on Corbyn at one point but got cold feet and couldn't afford to drop a grand if he just fell short.
The GE has taught me there are no dead certs.0 -
Re: the previous thread.
There are many more male MPs, and even more so until recent times, and there has only been two competitive Labour leadership elections since the mid-90s.
The quality of female leadership candidates hasn't been high. The best of the bunch has been Yvette Cooper this election and Maragret Beckett in 1994, and it's tough to argue either really deserved to win over their male counterparts.
I also wouldn't be surprised if there's an "old boys club" issue involved as well.
And, probably controversially, I've long wondered whether if there might be an underlying systemic problem with selection - maybe the qualities and characteristics required to become a female MPs and reach the front-bench equally make it hard for them to become party leader.0 -
Corbyn would likely only be forced out if an alternative leader had at least 2/3 of MPs nominating him beforehand anywayoxfordsimon said:
The Deputy would lead Labour until the nomination process was complete. Just as Harriet is doing now.HYUFD said:
Not if the replacement is unopposedoxfordsimon said:
Surely the immediate post-Corbyn leader will be the Deputy to be elected alongside him...HYUFD said:
The immediate post Corbyn leader would be Margaret Beckett or Alan Johnson as Howard succeeded IDSrottenborough said:
Get betting:oxfordsimon said:Just looking at the content of what the New Statesman has said, I can't quite see the logic in their thinking.
They are essentially saying that she deserves to come second so that she is ready to take over when Corbyn fails. But why on earth would Labour vote for her after rejecting her the first time round?
If she wasn't good enough to beat Corbyn, she isn't good enough to lead the party. Simple as that.
The post-Corbyn leader will be coming from a completely new generation - not one of those who has failed this time round.
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/labour-leader-at-next-general-election
Tom Watson for Labour Leader... now there's a thought.0 -
I got past the stringent checks...(!)flightpath01 said:
How do you know that 3quidder is not an entryist?MikeK said:
If you believe everything you read in a manifesto, you must be green and naive indeed. Burnham sounds like a zombie and looks and acts like a zombie, and as I have written before - a dirty looking zombie at that.ThreeQuidder said:I got my vote and manifesto booklet today. Burnham is the only one who doesn't say anything silly about the Tories.
This gives me a tough decision: I had him down as my 4th preference before I read the manifestos as I thought the last thing the country needed was a five-year re-run of the last five years, with AB's policies being barely distinguishable from EdM.
But if I were voting on the manifestos alone it would probably be a plump vote for Burnham.
Nevertheless, welcome @ThreeQuidder, to the PB fray and long may you stay.
In all seriousness, I haven't always voted Labour. I didn't in May - didn't think I could support the local candidate who had been more than a bit of a prat when leader/deputy (can't remember or be bothered to check now!) of the local council - but I did in a parliamentary by election in the last parliament.0 -
See belowThreeQuidder said:
That depends if JC flat out quits before the election of the replacement like EdM did. If he does, the deputy becomes leader for the interim. Though how that would work out if the deputy stood in the election is beyond me right now.HYUFD said:
Not if the replacement is unopposedoxfordsimon said:
Surely the immediate post-Corbyn leader will be the Deputy to be elected alongside him...HYUFD said:
The immediate post Corbyn leader would be Margaret Beckett or Alan Johnson as Howard succeeded IDSrottenborough said:
Get betting:oxfordsimon said:Just looking at the content of what the New Statesman has said, I can't quite see the logic in their thinking.
They are essentially saying that she deserves to come second so that she is ready to take over when Corbyn fails. But why on earth would Labour vote for her after rejecting her the first time round?
If she wasn't good enough to beat Corbyn, she isn't good enough to lead the party. Simple as that.
The post-Corbyn leader will be coming from a completely new generation - not one of those who has failed this time round.
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/labour-leader-at-next-general-election
Tom Watson for Labour Leader... now there's a thought.0 -
"Leader after next (excluding acting)" would be a fun one, but setting the odds would be, um, challenging...!rottenborough said:
The market is leader at next election, not any kind of temporary thing (which would be the deputy leader I suspect). If you fancy Johnson he is available at 25s. Though I think it worthy of note that Tony Blair returning as leader is posted at lower odds than Owen Jones.HYUFD said:
The immediate post Corbyn leader would be Margaret Beckett or Alan Johnson as Howard succeeded IDSrottenborough said:
Get betting:oxfordsimon said:Just looking at the content of what the New Statesman has said, I can't quite see the logic in their thinking.
They are essentially saying that she deserves to come second so that she is ready to take over when Corbyn fails. But why on earth would Labour vote for her after rejecting her the first time round?
If she wasn't good enough to beat Corbyn, she isn't good enough to lead the party. Simple as that.
The post-Corbyn leader will be coming from a completely new generation - not one of those who has failed this time round.
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/labour-leader-at-next-general-election0 -
There's just something irresistible about her voice.
TBH, I stuck her first because she's got no charisma or looks to play on - I felt she must be sensible or geniune. Watson second as he's revolting, Flint as half useful in 3rd, Bradshaw for being the opposite of Angela and Creasy last as she was once rude to me on Twitter.
Very scientific!TCPoliticalBetting said:
Swayed by good looks.Plato said:Jerry and Angela
Sunil_Prasannan said:
Whom did you vote for?Plato said:The candidates are very hit and miss - I've had blurb from JC and Watson inc two emails, nothing from the rest. Not even an email from Kendall or Yvette.
Since I've now voted, it's all a bit academic - their campaigns are piss poor at getting off the starting blocks.0 -
Okay, so in 48 hours all the sentiment is now moving against Corbyn, but the Betfair price has barely moved. 1.38 the mid point right about now.
I usually bet only Arytons on politics bets, just for fun rather than to pay the mortgage. But I'm on at 100/1 here so Jeremy had better bloody win me the grand now!0 -
Bonar Law had been leader since 1910 when he almost won, a totally different story. Macmillan won one of the largest Tory victories in history, again, a totally different story from Watson. Watson has next to zero chance of leading Labour in 2020, he is too divisive for starters as he consistently undermined Blair. No, Beckett or Johnson it will have to be, the only candidates experienced enough and acceptable enough to Blairities, Brownites and the Left to fit the billydoethur said:
Bonar Law was widely loathed too. He took over a riven party with both factions hating him. He was nearly toppled eighteen months after he took over the leadership in a putsch backed by the Cecils. That's one reason why he went to such extraordinary lengths to support the Ulster militants - it was the one thing all the Unionists agreed on. If it had not been for the First World War, the odds were he would have led the Unionists back to power, but the odds were all against his keeping it for very long. His elder statesman persona, that proved so important in 1922, was largely forged by his work during the war. And don't forget, even in 1922 almost all of Lloyd George's former cabinet refused to serve under him.HYUFD said:
Watson could never be a unity figure as Blairites loathe him unlike Johnson or Beckett and to compare him to Macmillan or Bonar Law is laughable!
Macmillan was not trusted by the left of the Tory party. He was seen as too Whiggish, too self-serving, too arrogant. But they were willing to work with someone decisive, like Macmillan, ahead of somebody they liked and trusted but could never make up his mind (Butler) because they believed the situation needed clarity of thought and purpose.
So I think the parallel stands. It's not a question of whether there is anybody good out there - because there isn't. It's a question of who would be the best candidate under the circumstances. For all the reasons I have outlined, I do not think either Beckett or Johnson are plausible candidates (the mere fact that a septuagenarian failure like Beckett is being mentioned is a fair indication of the weakness of the field). So I think Watson would be plausible as Labour leader in 2020, and that therefore looks the value bet.0 -
AnneJGP said:
It wouldn't surprise me a bit, you may well be right. Sadly, however, a combination of that outcome and the labelling of non-believers as 'Tories' may well give ordinary people the impression that only 'Tories' see anything amiss with the stories that are now surfacing. Are Labour going to be in the business of actively encouraging people to vote Conservative?JWisemann said:
I don't think that the hundreds of thousands of Corbyn supporters will be put off by a few obvious smears by the usual suspects, who rightly see an establishment media assault as a good indication the target is doing something right.Plato said:The avalanche of bad news stories about Corbyn could just tip it away from him.
Casino_Royale said:Call me chicken.. But I've traded my book to an all-green position now with Corbyn netting me £185, Kendall £200, and Burnham/Cooper a tenner each. I'm -640 on the rest of the field but view that as very low risk.
I was at +£500 on Corbyn at one point but got cold feet and couldn't afford to drop a grand if he just fell short.
The GE has taught me there are no dead certs.
They are hardly 'stories that are now surfacing'. Corbyn is well known as a long time activist on behalf of Palestinian rights, a very worthy cause given the hideous oppression of the people there. Just because some of his fellow travellers in this broad church hold some unpleasant views has no bearing on Corbyn, and anyone sane can see that. Not everyone is as thick as PB Tories, you do have to remember.AnneJGP said:
It wouldn't surprise me a bit, you may well be right. Sadly, however, a combination of that outcome and the labelling of non-believers as 'Tories' may well give ordinary people the impression that only 'Tories' see anything amiss with the stories that are now surfacing. Are Labour going to be in the business of actively encouraging people to vote Conservative?JWisemann said:
I don't think that the hundreds of thousands of Corbyn supporters will be put off by a few obvious smears by the usual suspects, who rightly see an establishment media assault as a good indication the target is doing something right.Plato said:The avalanche of bad news stories about Corbyn could just tip it away from him.
Casino_Royale said:Call me chicken.. But I've traded my book to an all-green position now with Corbyn netting me £185, Kendall £200, and Burnham/Cooper a tenner each. I'm -640 on the rest of the field but view that as very low risk.
I was at +£500 on Corbyn at one point but got cold feet and couldn't afford to drop a grand if he just fell short.
The GE has taught me there are no dead certs.
0 -
Me and @Rottenborough are already in that market with a private betThreeQuidder said:
"Leader after next (excluding acting)" would be a fun one, but setting the odds would be, um, challenging...!rottenborough said:
The market is leader at next election, not any kind of temporary thing (which would be the deputy leader I suspect). If you fancy Johnson he is available at 25s. Though I think it worthy of note that Tony Blair returning as leader is posted at lower odds than Owen Jones.HYUFD said:
The immediate post Corbyn leader would be Margaret Beckett or Alan Johnson as Howard succeeded IDSrottenborough said:
Get betting:oxfordsimon said:Just looking at the content of what the New Statesman has said, I can't quite see the logic in their thinking.
They are essentially saying that she deserves to come second so that she is ready to take over when Corbyn fails. But why on earth would Labour vote for her after rejecting her the first time round?
If she wasn't good enough to beat Corbyn, she isn't good enough to lead the party. Simple as that.
The post-Corbyn leader will be coming from a completely new generation - not one of those who has failed this time round.
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/labour-leader-at-next-general-election
0 -
0
-
We had a long lag when he was clearly emerging as the favourite as well. Also, don't forget a huge number of the electorate have probably already voted, and the ones who were enthused by Corbyn were probably the ones who voted first anyway, rather than, 'Ooooh, I must vote for one of the idiots who doesn't seem to have a clue what they're doing. Maybe I'll get round to it after watching Neighbours.'Sandpit said:Okay, so in 48 hours all the sentiment is now moving against Corbyn, but the Betfair price has barely moved. 1.38 the mid point right about now.
I usually bet only Arytons on politics bets, just for fun rather than to pay the mortgage. But I'm on at 100/1 here so Jeremy had better bloody win me the grand now!
They may wish they hadn't given the stories now emerging, although as we can see they don't seem to be affecting the his admirers much, but their votes will still count.0 -
Indeed, and, bar David Miliband, yougov had Johnson polling better than all the candidates in this leadership race, not just CorbynTCPoliticalBetting said:
What about a new unity candidate to step in after Corbyn is forced out from the mounting piles of smelly stuff?HYUFD said:
Not if the replacement is unopposedoxfordsimon said:
Surely the immediate post-Corbyn leader will be the Deputy to be elected alongside him...HYUFD said:
The immediate post Corbyn leader would be Margaret Beckett or Alan Johnson as Howard succeeded IDSrottenborough said:
Get betting:oxfordsimon said:Just looking at the content of what the New Statesman has said, I can't quite see the logic in their thinking.
They are essentially saying that she deserves to come second so that she is ready to take over when Corbyn fails. But why on earth would Labour vote for her after rejecting her the first time round?
If she wasn't good enough to beat Corbyn, she isn't good enough to lead the party. Simple as that.
The post-Corbyn leader will be coming from a completely new generation - not one of those who has failed this time round.
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/labour-leader-at-next-general-election
Tom Watson for Labour Leader... now there's a thought.
Step forward Alan Johnson. Would save Labour and get the party to 2020 without massive splits.0 -
The Unite numbers/sentiment sounded fantastic for him though.Sandpit said:Okay, so in 48 hours all the sentiment is now moving against Corbyn, but the Betfair price has barely moved. 1.38 the mid point right about now.
I usually bet only Arytons on politics bets, just for fun rather than to pay the mortgage. But I'm on at 100/1 here so Jeremy had better bloody win me the grand now!0 -
Betfair cricket odds - Eng 7/5, Aus 8/5, Draw 4/1.
Possibly a spot of rain in the morning, and showers forecast for the weekend.
Might wait for the toss, can't see the value there at all.0 -
Can I be the only PBer on here tonight who can honestly say that he's never voted Labour in his life?0
-
Oooh, a game. Croydon North?ThreeQuidder said:In all seriousness, I haven't always voted Labour. I didn't in May - didn't think I could support the local candidate who had been more than a bit of a prat when leader/deputy (can't remember or be bothered to check now!) of the local council - but I did in a parliamentary by election in the last parliament.
0 -
I think the smears against JC seem too much like smears to gain much traction. Yeah, he's talked to a few not-so-nice people over the years. So what?
Reminds me of Obama "palling around with terrorists".0 -
Nope.MikeK said:Can I be the only PBer on here tonight who can honestly say that he's never voted Labour in his life?
0 -
Nope. I have only voted 3 ways. Conservative, LD and paper-spoiling!MikeK said:Can I be the only PBer on here tonight who can honestly say that he's never voted Labour in his life?
0 -
A brief perusal of the comments on various articles on Labour Uncut, a blog clearly vehemently opposed to Jeremy Corbyn, tends to suggest that those inclined to support him are impervious to any suggestions that his character is questionable, despite mounting evidence of less than savoury associations with numerous undesirables. They simply aren't interested.
The majority are attracted by his plain speaking, his vision, his clarity of purpose and care not a jot about who he may have stood beside or what they may have said about British soldiers, homosexuals, Jews or the British state. He could have signed a Standing Order paying a tenner a month to Hezbollah and they wouldn't bat an eyelid.
And these are the people who will be sending off their ballots with a first preference for JC and have no interest in an AV for any of the others. And they seem to outnumber everyone else.
The only conclusion that can be drawn is that the next Leader of the Opposition will be the Rt Hon Member for Islington North. God help the Labour Party.0 -
I'll be incredibly disappointed if Jezza doesn't get the job. Imagine how frigging DULL it'll be if Yvette gets it.
YawnaramaSandpit said:Okay, so in 48 hours all the sentiment is now moving against Corbyn, but the Betfair price has barely moved. 1.38 the mid point right about now.
I usually bet only Arytons on politics bets, just for fun rather than to pay the mortgage. But I'm on at 100/1 here so Jeremy had better bloody win me the grand now!0 -
So basically the supposed scandal is that Corbyn has met some unpleasant people in the course of meeting thousands of people whilst campaigning for the rights of a horribly oppressed people, who just happen to be being oppressed by a close friend of much of the UK establishment. And this is basically all they have on the guy. I don't think this is going to wash with the 70% of the UK who have a negative opinion of Israel (I'd say it's quite likely the remaining 30% are closely correlated with Tory supporters anyway, given their historical approval of racist, oppressive regimes)0
-
I think that you will find that Obama has done more damage to the US of A than presently apparent.Oliver_PB said:I think the smears against JC seem too much like smears to gain much traction. Yeah, he's talked to a few not-so-nice people over the years. So what?
Reminds me of Obama "palling around with terrorists".0 -
After Trent Bridge I lamented the good old days of 3, 4, 5 years ago when laying the draw was (subject to raid being forecast) still a rock solid strategy with a decent return...Sandpit said:Betfair cricket odds - Eng 7/5, Aus 8/5, Draw 4/1.
Possibly a spot of rain in the morning, and showers forecast for the weekend.
Might wait for the toss, can't see the value there at all.
0 -
Just signed up!Sunil_Prasannan said:
You need to sign up, yes.Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:
Cheers mate, do you need to register or just rock up at the door?Sunil_Prasannan said:
24th August (next Monday). Doors open at 6.30pm for a 7pm start, at: St Pancras Parish Church, Euston Road, London, NW1 2BA.Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:
Sunil, When and where?Sunil_Prasannan said:
There's another bash with Andy in London!Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:
I've also received the invite to a drink with Andy that you referenced earlier.Sunil_Prasannan said:Got another email from Diane!
Colchester seems a bit of a trek to get to.
If it was Yvette, then I may make the effort.
And talking of bashes. Is there a Dirty Dicks gathering in the not too distant future?
EDIT - I passed by there a couple of weeks ago!
http://www.andy4labour.co.uk/meet_andy_in_central_london?utm_campaign=stpancrasinvite&utm_medium=email&utm_source=ab
0 -
Yes - but I'm not talking about what they did. I'm talking about how they were perceived. Bonar Law was from 1911 (not 1910) the leader of the largest party in a hung parliament, at a time when the Liberals were imploding over Ireland. He had in theory a terrific hand to play, and there are not a few historians, including Conservative ones, who think that because of the factional fighting in his party he misplayed it badly. Macmillan said, when kissing hands, that he might not last six weeks. But he did. Because he was the right man in the right place.HYUFD said:
Bonar Law had been leader since 1910 when he almost won, a totally different story. Macmillan won one of the largest Tory victories in history, again, a totally different story from Watson. Watson has next to zero chance of leading Labour in 2020, he is too divisive for starters as he consistently undermined Blair. No, Beckett or Johnson it will have to be, the only candidates experienced enough and acceptable enough to Blairities, Brownites and the Left to fit the bill
I really don't think you are grasping the key point. Beckett and Johnson are too old, too controversial, too tainted by the remarks they have made and will doubtless continue to make, and they are STILL hated by large sections of the party (you think Blairites hate Watson? Ask the left how they feel about Johnson - the word 'traitor' comes up a lot. There are far more on the left than there are Blairites, even allowing for some chaos in the ranks).
So again, the deputy leader or senior shadow cabinet figure, however rude, however arrogant, however bad his campaigning skills, is a likelier candidate to replace Corbyn than those two.
If I am wrong, I will happily admit it three years from now. But the happiest person of all would be Cameron's successor.0 -
Mr Wiseman.. you are very funny..ever thought of a career in standup comedy..0
-
To be fair, those who vote JC 1st preference don't need to express subsequent preferences: there is approximately zero chance he'll fall outside the top 2.Kinga said:A brief perusal of the comments on various articles on Labour Uncut, a blog clearly vehemently opposed to Jeremy Corbyn, tends to suggest that those inclined to support him are impervious to any suggestions that his character is questionable, despite mounting evidence of less than savoury associations with numerous undesirables. They simply aren't interested.
The majority are attracted by his plain speaking, his vision, his clarity of purpose and care not a jot about who he may have stood beside or what they may have said about British soldiers, homosexuals, Jews or the British state. He could have signed a Standing Order paying a tenner a month to Hezbollah and they wouldn't bat an eyelid.
And these are the people who will be sending off their ballots with a first preference for JC and have no interest in an AV for any of the others. And they seem to outnumber everyone else.
The only conclusion that can be drawn is that the next Leader of the Opposition will be the Rt Hon Member for Islington North. God help the Labour Party.0 -
It's fine to dislike Obama or Corbyn, it's just wrong-headed to dislike them because they've previously had the vaguest of associations with terrorists or anti-semites or whatever.MikeK said:
I think that you will find that Obama has done more damage to the US of A than presently apparent.Oliver_PB said:I think the smears against JC seem too much like smears to gain much traction. Yeah, he's talked to a few not-so-nice people over the years. So what?
Reminds me of Obama "palling around with terrorists".0 -
JC is chair of an organisation that arguably is built on anti-semitism. It's a dilemma...Oliver_PB said:
It's fine to dislike Obama or Corbyn, it's just wrong-headed to dislike them because they've previously had the vaguest of associations with terrorists or anti-semites or whatever.MikeK said:
I think that you will find that Obama has done more damage to the US of A than presently apparent.Oliver_PB said:I think the smears against JC seem too much like smears to gain much traction. Yeah, he's talked to a few not-so-nice people over the years. So what?
Reminds me of Obama "palling around with terrorists".0 -
But what Corbyn has said and done and not said and done does have bearing on him. He himself realises it - even if you do not - and that is why his responses have been such a mess, when challenged.JWisemann said:AnneJGP said:JWisemann said:Plato said:The avalanche of bad news stories about Corbyn could just tip it away from him.
Casino_Royale said:Call me chicken.. But I've traded my book to an all-green position now with Corbyn netting me £185, Kendall £200, and Burnham/Cooper a tenner each. I'm -640 on the rest of the field but view that as very low risk.
I was at +£500 on Corbyn at one point but got cold feet and couldn't afford to drop a grand if he just fell short.
The GE has taught me there are no dead certs.
They are hardly 'stories that are now surfacing'. Corbyn is well known as a long time activist on behalf of Palestinian rights, a very worthy cause given the hideous oppression of the people there. Just because some of his fellow travellers in this broad church hold some unpleasant views has no bearing on Corbyn, and anyone sane can see that. Not everyone is as thick as PB Tories, you do have to remember.AnneJGP said:JWisemann said:Plato said:The avalanche of bad news stories about Corbyn could just tip it away from him.
Casino_Royale said:Call me chicken.. But I've traded my book to an all-green position now with Corbyn netting me £185, Kendall £200, and Burnham/Cooper a tenner each. I'm -640 on the rest of the field but view that as very low risk.
.
And now - forgetting the Palestine/Israel issues - we discover that he is Chair of the Stop the War movement which last year - August 2014 - opposed Western intervention to save Yazidis from their gruesome fate under IS. To be precise, that fate for Yazidi girls involves mass rape, enslavement as sex slaves, being bought and sold, and murder. He is the chair of the organisation which has decided that it would be better for such girls to be left to their fate than for the West to do anything to help them because to do so would be to be on the side of the US.
This is not someone he met or may have shaken hands with. This is the organisation he chairs. So presumably this is his view.
And it is legitimate for others to comment on the view that he takes. After all, presumably his chairmanship of Stop the War is a key part of the new politics which he has been proclaiming.
0 -
-
Why would the Betfair price move?Sandpit said:Okay, so in 48 hours all the sentiment is now moving against Corbyn, but the Betfair price has barely moved. 1.38 the mid point right about now.
I usually bet only Arytons on politics bets, just for fun rather than to pay the mortgage. But I'm on at 100/1 here so Jeremy had better bloody win me the grand now!
Next big event will the YouGov poll I guess. But I assume the candidates internal numbers haven't shifted at all (or we'd have heard about it), which is good for Corbyn.0 -
The turn-around time for the email ballot for £3ers will be very fast. I'd imagine a huge % will be completed within 24hrs of receipt.
And a large % of these will be Corbynites. Unless something drastic happens to either YC or AB this week - I can't see it being anything other than very very close or a Jezza win on 1st prefs.Kinga said:A brief perusal of the comments on various articles on Labour Uncut, a blog clearly vehemently opposed to Jeremy Corbyn, tends to suggest that those inclined to support him are impervious to any suggestions that his character is questionable, despite mounting evidence of less than savoury associations with numerous undesirables. They simply aren't interested.
The majority are attracted by his plain speaking, his vision, his clarity of purpose and care not a jot about who he may have stood beside or what they may have said about British soldiers, homosexuals, Jews or the British state. He could have signed a Standing Order paying a tenner a month to Hezbollah and they wouldn't bat an eyelid.
And these are the people who will be sending off their ballots with a first preference for JC and have no interest in an AV for any of the others. And they seem to outnumber everyone else.
The only conclusion that can be drawn is that the next Leader of the Opposition will be the Rt Hon Member for Islington North. God help the Labour Party.0 -
I listened to Jezza's interview on R4 today. He didn't really answer any of the questions and was irritated to be reminded of the question. A mind that runs on railway lines and won't be deflected. The mental flexibility of a plankton.
But I dislike him, as much for what he says as for what he reminds me of. I still think the lemmings will come to a screeching halt just before the cliff edge.0 -
Am I the only PBer who's only ever voted UKIP?
0 -
No, wrong. The only acceptable alternative leader pre-election would have to be experienced, a former Cabinet Minister and respected across the party, not the noncefinder general who spent his early years undermining Blair. Beckett and Johnson have been loyal to every Labour leader and would likely even be loyal to Corbyn AFTER the leadership election. I have also never heard anyone call Alan Johnson a traitor.ydoethur said:
Yes - but I'm not talking about what they did. I'm talking about how they were perceived. Bonar Law was from 1911 (not 1910) the leader of the largest party in a hung parliament, at a time when the Liberals were imploding over Ireland. He had in theory a terrific hand to play, and there are not a few historians, including Conservative ones, who think that because of the factional fighting in his party he misplayed it badly. Macmillan said, when kissing hands, that he might not last six weeks. But he did. Because he was the right man in the right place.HYUFD said:
Bonar Law had been leader since 1910 when he almost won, a totally different story. Macmillan won one of the largest Tory victories in history, again, a totally different story from Watson. Watson has next to zero chance of leading Labour in 2020, he is too divisive for starters as he consistently undermined Blair. No, Beckett or Johnson it will have to be, the only candidates experienced enough and acceptable enough to Blairities, Brownites and the Left to fit the bill
I really don't think you are grasping the key point. Beckett and Johnson are too old, too controversial, too tainted by the remarks they have made and will doubtless continue to make, and they are STILL hated by large sections of the party (you think Blairites hate Watson? Ask the left how they feel about Johnson - the word 'traitor' comes up a lot. There are far more on the left than there are Blairites, even allowing for some chaos in the ranks).
So again, the deputy leader or senior shadow cabinet figure, however rude, however arrogant, however bad his campaigning skills, is a likelier candidate to replace Corbyn than those two.
If I am wrong, I will happily admit it three years from now. But the happiest person of all would be Cameron's successor.0 -
Well that's pretty standard behaviour in fairness. Was it any worse than Lucy Powell and Chuka Umunna types, who act that way all the time in inteviews? I presume it's a reaction against the trend of overly aggressive interviewers, but the newer breed seem to overcompensate.CD13 said:
I listened to Jezza's interview on R4 today. He didn't really answer any of the questions and was irritated to be reminded of the question. A
0 -
Am I the only PBer who's voted Lab, Con, LD, Green, Independent Mayoral Candidate and UKIP? (though not all at once, obviously!)0
-
So you flip-flop more than Andy Burnham? :OSunil_Prasannan said:Am I the only PBer who's voted Lab, Con, LD, Green, Independent Mayoral Candidate and UKIP? (though not all at once, obviously!)
0 -
I noticed he has a pronounced habit of talking and talking - and has no idea that he isn't there just to spout. Martha had to tell him to stop multiple times. And that he needed to answer the caller's question. He got a bit testy, but not half as bad as C4 News
I think playing in the Big Boys League is proving a bit harder than he thought.CD13 said:
I listened to Jezza's interview on R4 today. He didn't really answer any of the questions and was irritated to be reminded of the question. A mind that runs on railway lines and won't be deflected. The mental flexibility of a plankton.
But I dislike him, as much for what he says as for what he reminds me of. I still think the lemmings will come to a screeching halt just before the cliff edge.0 -
Welcome! Laying the draw is still statistically the most likely outcome, made me money in the last few Tests. I'll have a good look at several weather forecasts before laying this time.ThreeQuidder said:
After Trent Bridge I lamented the good old days of 3, 4, 5 years ago when laying the draw was (subject to raid being forecast) still a rock solid strategy with a decent return...Sandpit said:Betfair cricket odds - Eng 7/5, Aus 8/5, Draw 4/1.
Possibly a spot of rain in the morning, and showers forecast for the weekend.
Might wait for the toss, can't see the value there at all.
Could be worse though, we could be trying to predict rain or not for the Belgian GP at Spa - roll of the dice that one!0 -
Another utterly ridiculous saga about whether or not someone has black blood running through their veins.MP_SE said:
What in God's name is wrong with these people:
https://twitter.com/Nero/status/633981278036082688
0 -
Except in Corbyn's case, it's not the vaguest of associations. Raed Salah, of blood libel fame, wasn't someone that happened to be in a room with him. He's a man that Corbyn has met several times, and defended as a leader of his people and an honoured citizen. He even criticized the media for demonising him.Oliver_PB said:
It's fine to dislike Obama or Corbyn, it's just wrong-headed to dislike them because they've previously had the vaguest of associations with terrorists or anti-semites or whatever.MikeK said:
I think that you will find that Obama has done more damage to the US of A than presently apparent.Oliver_PB said:I think the smears against JC seem too much like smears to gain much traction. Yeah, he's talked to a few not-so-nice people over the years. So what?
Reminds me of Obama "palling around with terrorists".0 -
And before today, I had never heard of anyone accusing Michael Howard of briefing against Iain Duncan Smith. I think that probably reflects the different circles we move in.HYUFD said:
No, wrong. The only acceptable alternative leader pre-election would have to be experienced, a former Cabinet Minister and respected across the party, not the noncefinder general who spent his early years undermining Blair. Beckett and Johnson have been loyal to every Labour leader and would likely even be loyal to Corbyn AFTER the leadership election. I have also never heard anyone call Alan Johnson a traitor.
To put it at its simplest - do you really think a 72 year old who was promoted to the Foreign Office solely as an emergency stop gap after two other more senior ministers had refused it, whose ministerial career was one of pretty much unmitigated disaster and ended nearly ten years ago, who is not really respected (let's be honest) by the MPs left in Labour and has agreed that she and other nominators of Corbyn are 'morons' is a stronger candidate than the man more than a quarter of the PLP has nominated to be deputy leader and who will be a key figure in the shadow cabinet, win or lose?
Yes, he's loathsome. Yes, he's incompetent. Yes, he's controversial. But he's still the likeliest emergency stop-gap figure. Perhaps Labour would be sensible to find an elder statesman(/woman) to fill in. But there isn't one who could do it. Therefore, Watson is the value bet.0 -
Never voted UKIP. Voted for all the rest. Also voted for a Green/Plaid Cymru joint ticket once though - does that count as two in one? If so, I'm up with you.Sunil_Prasannan said:Am I the only PBer who's voted Lab, Con, LD, Green, Independent Mayoral Candidate and UKIP? (though not all at once, obviously!)
0 -
MikeK said:
Can I be the only PBer on here tonight who can honestly say that he's never voted Labour in his life?
MikeK said:Can I be the only PBer on here tonight who can honestly say that he's never voted Labour in his life?
No, I have never and will never vote Labour. UKIP, Christian Alliance, Green but Tory, Tory, Tory.
0 -
I have never voted Labour either. And I have only voted Conservative in general elections.0
-
He also uses the "innocent by association" defence. So apparently the fact that his mother was against the Mosleyites in the 1930's is his answer to the questions raised about his friendships with Islamist extremists now. It's an evasive and dishonest answer to a legitimate question. If he really believed that he was doing something worthwhile by meeting with and inviting these Islamist extremists to Parliament then he should be willing to say what he was doing, why and why he thought and thinks it a good thing.kle4 said:
Well that's pretty standard behaviour in fairness. Was it any worse than Lucy Powell and Chuka Umunna types, who act that way all the time in inteviews? I presume it's a reaction against the trend of overly aggressive interviewers, but the newer breed seem to overcompensate.CD13 said:
I listened to Jezza's interview on R4 today. He didn't really answer any of the questions and was irritated to be reminded of the question. A
But he doesn't: he claims not to know them then when that is untenable comes out with rubbish like " he didn't say anything anti-semitic to me" or plays the "my parents were anti-fascists" card. It's evidence of someone who didn't think through properly what he was doing at the time or didn't care and now realises (or rather his office does) that there is a mismatch between the values he claims to believe in and his actions.
There's no new politics about him. He's just another politician trying to avoid difficult questions. I dare say you could find obscure Tory Monday Club MPs talking equally offensive and evasive rubbish in response to questions about their support for white supremacists in Africa.
0 -
@ Cyclefree
"And it is legitimate for others to comment on the view that he takes. After all, presumably his chairmanship of Stop the War is a key part of the new politics which he has been proclaiming."
It is highly legitimate and his inability to answer questions on these matters in interviews with C4 News previously, and on WATO today, raise grave concerns about not only the company he keeps but his suitability for the role he seeks to fill.
Unfortunately, the people who will be voting for him couldn't give a toss.
He has a vision you see.0 -
I've never voted Labour, but have voted Tory, Ukip and English Democrats!0
