Skip to content
Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Meanwhile for the other contenders the battle continues…

SystemSystem Posts: 12,598
edited August 2015 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Meanwhile for the other contenders the battle continues…

Andy Burnham's in Edinburgh to do a Q&A with his supporters. Here they are pic.twitter.com/sthKeR8po0

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    First
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    Apparently that is a little unfair as the room did fill up in later tweets.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    notme said:

    Apparently that is a little unfair as the room did fill up in later tweets.

    People walking in thinking it was the AA meeting in the next room?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,776
    Good evening, everyone.

    I do wonder if Burnham would be worse for Labour than Corbyn, given the latter seems destined for a Shadow Cabinet position if the former is leader.
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Good evening, everyone.

    I do wonder if Burnham would be worse for Labour than Corbyn, given the latter seems destined for a Shadow Cabinet position if the former is leader.

    Absolutely. A narrow narrow win for Burnham is the dream ticket. His entire administration will be dogged with the accusation that he only won due to the purges. All those £3 sign ups who have actually got motivated might not just leave the labour party, but actively move over to another party like the Greens.

    Jez well ahead on first preferences and andy nudging it on second..... If that happens it will be conclusive proof that God is a Conservative, and you can put the Son and the Holy Ghost down as a C also on the canvassing board.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,718
    FPT: Oh dear - the Jezbollah teaming up with the CAGE people. Notable that Babar Ahmed is mentioned. He is a friend of Sadiq Khan. CAGE were the people who described Jihadi John as a gentle boy or some such garbage.

    http://hurryupharry.org/2015/08/25/jeremy-corbyn-teams-up-with-moazzam-begg-to-help-terrorists/
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    edited August 2015
    Deacon has been taking the p out of Burnham for some while. Richly deserved. Loved the "plasterer" line earlier.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,776
    Miss Cyclefree, indeed, and blaming the evil nasty police for considering someone who went on to do what he did to be worthy of suspicion.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,247
    LOL!

    Burnham is the Jeb Bush of this contest.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    There are more people attending my local church than listen to mascara Burnham.. He is a busted flush.. Its Yvette or Corbyn, either are disastrous for Labour as Yvette doesn't grasp detail.. at least not in her campaigning....
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    Cyclefree said:

    FPT: Oh dear - the Jezbollah teaming up with the CAGE people. Notable that Babar Ahmed is mentioned. He is a friend of Sadiq Khan. CAGE were the people who described Jihadi John as a gentle boy or some such garbage.

    http://hurryupharry.org/2015/08/25/jeremy-corbyn-teams-up-with-moazzam-begg-to-help-terrorists/

    Corbyn's antics are bordering on the treasonous. Is it just a question of whether he is pulled down before the leadership result or shortly after?
    Much of this is appearing outside the main stream media, so could they be holding back until he is confirmed in place and then bring him down?
    Two weeks to save the Labour party.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,232
    Danny565 said:

    By the way, those people who said Jez has no political nous can eat their words now - his "women-only carriages" thing was a quite ingenious use of Lynton Crosby's "dead cat strategy" which has stopped people talking about his links to anti-semites.

    Maybe, but he needs a lot of dead cats to hand as things move forward.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    LOL, OGH really has it in for Burnham doesn't he.
  • saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245
    Danny565 said:

    LOL, OGH really has it in for Burnham doesn't he.

    He's definitely with the majority if so.
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    Trump 40%
    Carson 13%
    Bush 10%
    Cruz 7%
    Kasich 5%
    Fiorina 5%
    Rubio 5%

    http://www.oann.com/trump-breaks-new-ceiling-in-national-gop-poll/
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 46,363
    Danny565 said:

    LOL, OGH really has it in for Burnham doesn't he.

    It's hard not to have it in for someone who puts the reputation of a failed NHS trust in front of the welfare of patients.

    Andy Burnham is ... well, everyone knows the rest. ;)
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,776
    edited August 2015
    Mr. Jessop, your political idol?

    Edited extra bit: good for mascara sales?

    A lightweight?

    Someone whose premiership is as tempting a prospect as a handjob from Edward Scissorhands?
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    Cyclefree said:

    FPT: Oh dear - the Jezbollah teaming up with the CAGE people. Notable that Babar Ahmed is mentioned. He is a friend of Sadiq Khan. CAGE were the people who described Jihadi John as a gentle boy or some such garbage.

    http://hurryupharry.org/2015/08/25/jeremy-corbyn-teams-up-with-moazzam-begg-to-help-terrorists/

    That's unfair. Forcefully defending jihadis against the US rule of law is just diplomatic language to make people feel included.
  • ToryJimToryJim Posts: 4,193
    JosiasJessop said:

    Danny565 said:

    LOL, OGH really has it in for Burnham doesn't he.

    It's hard not to have it in for someone who puts the reputation of a failed NHS trust in front of the welfare of patients.

    Andy Burnham is ... well, everyone knows the rest. ;)
    Well putting that to one side. The trouble for Burnham is that he appears to have several views on any given topic and changes them to suit what he thinks will benefit him at any given moment. It makes him look disingenuous. That and his "I'm from the North me" patter just doesn't fly..
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. Jessop, your political idol?
    Someone whose premiership is as tempting a prospect as a handjob from Edward Scissorhands?

    chuckle
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    Labour Leadership
    Vote for Mad, Bad, Sad or Glad?
    Corbyn, Burnham, Cooper or Kendall - glad she will not be chosen.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,194
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Good evening, everyone.

    I do wonder if Burnham would be worse for Labour than Corbyn, given the latter seems destined for a Shadow Cabinet position if the former is leader.

    Actually according to comres yesterday Corbyn and Burnham are the best options for Labour, Cooper and Kendall poll even worse
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    edited August 2015
    Rumour has it,

    Burnham’s Q&A venue was upgraded from broom cupboard to classroom, due to demand. :lol:
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    HYUFD said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Good evening, everyone.

    I do wonder if Burnham would be worse for Labour than Corbyn, given the latter seems destined for a Shadow Cabinet position if the former is leader.

    Actually according to comres yesterday Corbyn and Burnham are the best options for Labour, Cooper and Kendall poll even worse
    Voters arent really paying attention. What the contest has showed is that Burnham is just not up to it.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,194
    notme said:

    HYUFD said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Good evening, everyone.

    I do wonder if Burnham would be worse for Labour than Corbyn, given the latter seems destined for a Shadow Cabinet position if the former is leader.

    Actually according to comres yesterday Corbyn and Burnham are the best options for Labour, Cooper and Kendall poll even worse
    Voters arent really paying attention. What the contest has showed is that Burnham is just not up to it.
    That is the cop out from someone who does not like the polling. The polling has been consistent throughout this contest that Burnham is the most popular choice with the public on a net basis, though in some polls Corbyn has the highest favourables. All 4 poll poorly, but Kendall and Cooper especially so, Kendall clearly loses voters to the Greens and fails to win enough Tories to make up for it, Cooper turns off floating voters while failing to enthuse Labour's core either
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    HYUFD said:

    notme said:

    HYUFD said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Good evening, everyone.

    I do wonder if Burnham would be worse for Labour than Corbyn, given the latter seems destined for a Shadow Cabinet position if the former is leader.

    Actually according to comres yesterday Corbyn and Burnham are the best options for Labour, Cooper and Kendall poll even worse
    Voters arent really paying attention. What the contest has showed is that Burnham is just not up to it.
    That is the cop out from someone who does not like the polling. The polling has been consistent throughout this contest that Burnham is the most popular choice with the public on a net basis, though in some polls Corbyn has the highest favourables. All 4 poll poorly, but Kendall and Cooper especially so, Kendall clearly loses voters to the Greens and fails to win enough Tories to make up for it, Cooper turns off floating voters while failing to enthuse Labour's core either
    Its not a case of ignoring the polls. It's about how he has performed over the last few weeks. Truly awful. He will be a poor leader.
  • DiversityIsOurGodNowDiversityIsOurGodNow Posts: 65
    Depressing. The people in that picture look like the dead-arses you see hanging around outside Wetherspoons in the morning. And to think Burnham was considered top talent prior to the Corbyn surge...truly staggering.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,300
    SimonStClare said:

    Rumour has it,

    Burnham’s Q&A venue was upgraded from broom cupboard to classroom, due to demand. :lol:

    Transport to the venue upgraded from Rickshaw to Taxi :lol:
  • TomsToms Posts: 2,478
    Just to say that I am told, by her outdoors, that when Yvette appeared in Cambridge on Tuesday she spoke sensibly and fielded questions with aplomb.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,194
    edited August 2015
    notme said:

    HYUFD said:

    notme said:

    HYUFD said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Good evening, everyone.

    I do wonder if Burnham would be worse for Labour than Corbyn, given the latter seems destined for a Shadow Cabinet position if the former is leader.

    Actually according to comres yesterday Corbyn and Burnham are the best options for Labour, Cooper and Kendall poll even worse
    Voters arent really paying attention. What the contest has showed is that Burnham is just not up to it.
    That is the cop out from someone who does not like the polling. The polling has been consistent throughout this contest that Burnham is the most popular choice with the public on a net basis, though in some polls Corbyn has the highest favourables. All 4 poll poorly, but Kendall and Cooper especially so, Kendall clearly loses voters to the Greens and fails to win enough Tories to make up for it, Cooper turns off floating voters while failing to enthuse Labour's core either
    Its not a case of ignoring the polls. It's about how he has performed over the last few weeks. Truly awful. He will be a poor leader.
    In your opinion, but in the opinion of the public at large he was the only 1 of the 4 in comres' poll for the Independent the Sunday before last with a net positive rating. He is the only candidate who could hold Corbyn's support if he wins, Cooper and Kendall probably could not, while also having some appeal to floating voters. Personally as I have said before I think David Miliband or Alan Johnson would be a better bet than Burnham, or Chuka Umunna had he stood, but of the 4 Burnham is clearly the best prospect for the party
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    SimonStClare said:

    Rumour has it,

    Burnham’s Q&A venue was upgraded from broom cupboard to classroom, due to demand. :lol:

    Transport to the venue upgraded from Rickshaw to Taxi :lol:

    Do we cut him a bit of slack.. was it pissing down..

    HELL NO..

    This is the man who is associated with the report into failings in hospitals.. his finger wasn't on the pulse,.
    Stafford anyone?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 66,274
    DiversityIsOurGodNow said:

    Depressing. The people in that picture look like the dead-arses you see hanging around outside Wetherspoons in the morning. And to think Burnham was considered top talent prior to the Corbyn surge...truly staggering.

    If Burnham was ever considered top talent it says it all about the uselessness of today's labour party. It must be inevitable tha it will split into two or even three after this most depressing of elections
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,194
    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    DiversityIsOurGodNow said:

    Depressing. The people in that picture look like the dead-arses you see hanging around outside Wetherspoons in the morning. And to think Burnham was considered top talent prior to the Corbyn surge...truly staggering.

    If Burnham was ever considered top talent it says it all about the uselessness of today's labour party. It must be inevitable tha it will split into two or even three after this most depressing of elections
    I don't think so, the LDs are in an even worse state than Labour and no Blairites will defect to Farron who also despises their mentor, nor will many go to the Tories, and as for the Left if it stayed in Labour under Blair and Brown it is not going to defect wholesale if Burnham or Cooper win
  • DisraeliDisraeli Posts: 1,106
    o/t Feeling a bit down in the dumps today, but this cheers me up.
    https://twitter.com/DanHannanMEP/status/636640403782037506
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 63,857
    I enjoyed this:

    https://twitter.com/MichaelPDeacon/status/636504602939125760
  • OchEyeOchEye Posts: 1,469
    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT: Oh dear - the Jezbollah teaming up with the CAGE people. Notable that Babar Ahmed is mentioned. He is a friend of Sadiq Khan. CAGE were the people who described Jihadi John as a gentle boy or some such garbage.

    http://hurryupharry.org/2015/08/25/jeremy-corbyn-teams-up-with-moazzam-begg-to-help-terrorists/

    Corbyn's antics are bordering on the treasonous. Is it just a question of whether he is pulled down before the leadership result or shortly after?
    Much of this is appearing outside the main stream media, so could they be holding back until he is confirmed in place and then bring him down?
    Two weeks to save the Labour party.
    There speaketh the true Daily Mail reader.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 66,274
    HYUFD said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    DiversityIsOurGodNow said:

    Depressing. The people in that picture look like the dead-arses you see hanging around outside Wetherspoons in the morning. And to think Burnham was considered top talent prior to the Corbyn surge...truly staggering.

    If Burnham was ever considered top talent it says it all about the uselessness of today's labour party. It must be inevitable tha it will split into two or even three after this most depressing of elections
    I don't think so, the LDs are in an even worse state than Labour and no Blairites will defect to Farron who also despises their mentor, nor will many go to the Tories, and as for the Left if it stayed in Labour under Blair and Brown it is not going to defect wholesale if Burnham or Cooper win</blockquote

    If Corbyn is elected and the left wing Unions effectively take control a split must be inevitable. Either way labour has no hope of being an effective opposition for years and that is not good for democracy
  • EPGEPG Posts: 6,739
    Disraeli said:

    o/t Feeling a bit down in the dumps today, but this cheers me up.
    https://twitter.com/DanHannanMEP/status/636640403782037506

    I wonder how many people in Africa are over 65? I tried a Fermi problem approach for the Corbyn surge question last thread, but can't work this one out.
  • NeilVWNeilVW Posts: 749
    edited August 2015
    @TCPoliticalBetting
    re BTL tax changes
    This is the official policy costing document, with figures approved by the OBR.
    Note that it says there is uncertainty around the size of the tax base. I suppose they are thinking relatively few will sell up?

    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/443195/Policy_costings_summer_budget_2015.pdf (p. 21)

    This document estimates that one in five individual landlords will receive less tax relief as a result of the changes:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/restricting-finance-cost-relief-for-individual-landlords/restricting-finance-cost-relief-for-individual-landlords
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,194
    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    HYUFD said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    DiversityIsOurGodNow said:

    Depressing. The people in that picture look like the dead-arses you see hanging around outside Wetherspoons in the morning. And to think Burnham was considered top talent prior to the Corbyn surge...truly staggering.

    If Burnham was ever considered top talent it says it all about the uselessness of today's labour party. It must be inevitable tha it will split into two or even three after this most depressing of elections
    I don't think so, the LDs are in an even worse state than Labour and no Blairites will defect to Farron who also despises their mentor, nor will many go to the Tories, and as for the Left if it stayed in Labour under Blair and Brown it is not going to defect wholesale if Burnham or Cooper win
    Why? Most Blairites are not Tories in their guts and could not join the party, they will not join Farron's LDs and under FPTP there is no mileage in creating yet another new party which is unlikely to bother the scorers and could cost them their seats

    The Tories were in a similar position under IDS the pendulum turns eventually, indeed someone like Alan Johnson could take over in 3 years or so if Corbyn is elected and fails to perform
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,300
    HYUFD said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    HYUFD said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    DiversityIsOurGodNow said:

    Depressing. The people in that picture look like the dead-arses you see hanging around outside Wetherspoons in the morning. And to think Burnham was considered top talent prior to the Corbyn surge...truly staggering.

    If Burnham was ever considered top talent it says it all about the uselessness of today's labour party. It must be inevitable tha it will split into two or even three after this most depressing of elections
    I don't think so, the LDs are in an even worse state than Labour and no Blairites will defect to Farron who also despises their mentor, nor will many go to the Tories, and as for the Left if it stayed in Labour under Blair and Brown it is not going to defect wholesale if Burnham or Cooper win
    Why? Most Blairites are not Tories in their guts and could not join the party, they will not join Farron's LDs and under FPTP there is no mileage in creating yet another new party which is unlikely to bother the scorers and could cost them their seats

    The Tories were in a similar position under IDS the pendulum turns eventually, indeed someone like Alan Johnson could take over in 3 years or so if Corbyn is elected and fails to perform
    What do you mean fails to perform??

    IDS never lost a GE as Tory leader!!!
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    edited August 2015
    I suppose it might be bowing to the inevitable, but Labour's decision to publish the breakdown of the leadership votes by members, affiliates and three-quidders will certainly fuel the civil war: there's bound to be ammunition in there for one side or another, and probably for several sides simultaneously.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited August 2015
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    I suppose it might be bowing to the inevitable, but Labour's decision to publish the breakdown of the leadership votes by members, affiliates and three-quidders will inevitably fuel the civil war: there's bound to be ammunition in there for one side or another, and probably for several sides simultaneously.

    Just when you think things can't get any worse for Labour they make this decision.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Newsnight just played host to the worst interview/debate in history.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    AndyJS said:

    Just when you think things can't get any worse for Labour they make this decision.

    If they hadn't they'd have been accused of hiding something. They are in a spiral of disaster in which any way they turn makes it worse.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    I suppose it might be bowing to the inevitable, but Labour's decision to publish the breakdown of the leadership votes by members, affiliates and three-quidders will certainly fuel the civil war: there's bound to be ammunition in there for one side or another, and probably for several sides simultaneously.

    That's presumably partly why they're doing it. Apparently it was only the Corbyn camp pushing against that during the Hattie meeting the other day.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,194
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    HYUFD said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    DiversityIsOurGodNow said:

    Depressing. The people in that picture look like the dead-arses you see hanging around outside Wetherspoons in the morning. And to think Burnham was considered top talent prior to the Corbyn surge...truly staggering.

    If Burnham was ever considered top talent it says it all about the uselessness of today's labour party. It must be inevitable tha it will split into two or even three after this most depressing of elections
    I don't think so, the LDs are in an even worse state than Labour and no Blairites will defect to Farron who also despises their mentor, nor will many go to the Tories, and as for the Left if it stayed in Labour under Blair and Brown it is not going to defect wholesale if Burnham or Cooper win
    Why? Most Blairites are not Tories in their guts and could not join the party, they will not join Farron's LDs and under FPTP there is no mileage in creating yet another new party which is unlikely to bother the scorers and could cost them their seats

    The Tories were in a similar position under IDS the pendulum turns eventually, indeed someone like Alan Johnson could take over in 3 years or so if Corbyn is elected and fails to perform
    What do you mean fails to perform??

    IDS never lost a GE as Tory leader!!!
    Only because he was toppled before he had the chance to lose it after the Tories came a poor third in Brent East. Though in 2001 the Tories were in a similar predicament with none of the field really offering much prospect of challenging Blair (remember this was pre Iraq) and so Tory members voted with their hearts for IDS as Labour activists may well also vote with their hearts for Corbyn
  • NeilVWNeilVW Posts: 749
    EPG said:

    Disraeli said:

    o/t Feeling a bit down in the dumps today, but this cheers me up.
    https://twitter.com/DanHannanMEP/status/636640403782037506

    I wonder how many people in Africa are over 65? I tried a Fermi problem approach for the Corbyn surge question last thread, but can't work this one out.
    39,632,587 over-65s in Africa in July 2013, out of a total population of 1,094,736,675 (3.6%). Might be some false precision going on there. Europe's equivalent percentage is 16.8%.

    http://www.geohive.com/earth/population_age_1.aspx
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    AndyJS said:

    Just when you think things can't get any worse for Labour they make this decision.

    If they hadn't they'd have been accused of hiding something. They are in a spiral of disaster in which any way they turn makes it worse.
    They were happy to hide it when they assumed someone like Burnham or Cooper would win. But now Jezbollah is heading for the title, they are doing their best to undermine him.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited August 2015
    The Telegraph and a few other papers are coming in for criticism for using a photo from the killer's footage after he started shooting:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    Tissue_Price said:

    That's presumably partly why they're doing it. Apparently it was only the Corbyn camp pushing against that during the Hattie meeting the other day.

    I think we can safely assume that calls to unite around the democratically-elected comrade leader will be totally ignored, assuming they are made at all.

    It's not often that you get to see an organisation disintegrating in real time in front of you in such detail and under such a spotlight.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Tissue_Price said:

    That's presumably partly why they're doing it. Apparently it was only the Corbyn camp pushing against that during the Hattie meeting the other day.

    I think we can safely assume that calls to unite around the democratically-elected comrade leader will be totally ignored, assuming they are made at all.

    It's not often that you get to see an organisation disintegrating in real time in front of you in such detail and under such a spotlight.
    Real time? It's practically slo-mo :-)
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    Tissue_Price said:

    Real time? It's practically slo-mo :-)

    True!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,194
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Tissue_Price said:

    That's presumably partly why they're doing it. Apparently it was only the Corbyn camp pushing against that during the Hattie meeting the other day.

    I think we can safely assume that calls to unite around the democratically-elected comrade leader will be totally ignored, assuming they are made at all.

    It's not often that you get to see an organisation disintegrating in real time in front of you in such detail and under such a spotlight.
    Though Labour membership is now at least double Conservative Party membership as a result of this leadership election
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    HYUFD said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Tissue_Price said:

    That's presumably partly why they're doing it. Apparently it was only the Corbyn camp pushing against that during the Hattie meeting the other day.

    I think we can safely assume that calls to unite around the democratically-elected comrade leader will be totally ignored, assuming they are made at all.

    It's not often that you get to see an organisation disintegrating in real time in front of you in such detail and under such a spotlight.
    Though Labour membership is now at least double Conservative Party membership as a result of this leadership election
    You're very welcome to them.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    edited August 2015
    HYUFD said:

    Though Labour membership is now at least double Conservative Party membership as a result of this leadership election

    An large undisciplined squabbling rabble is even worse than a small undisciplined squabbling rabble (not that I'm implying either description fits the Conservatives, of course!).
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,718
    Danny565 said:

    Newsnight just played host to the worst interview/debate in history.

    Who was involved?

  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    HYUFD said:

    Though Labour membership is now at least double Conservative Party membership as a result of this leadership election

    An large undisciplined squabbling rabble is even worse than a small undisciplined squabbling rabble.
    And at some point - maybe even before 2020 if they're lucky - Labour are probably going to have to take the power to elect the leader on a OMOV basis away from them.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,021
    HYUFD said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Tissue_Price said:

    That's presumably partly why they're doing it. Apparently it was only the Corbyn camp pushing against that during the Hattie meeting the other day.

    I think we can safely assume that calls to unite around the democratically-elected comrade leader will be totally ignored, assuming they are made at all.

    It's not often that you get to see an organisation disintegrating in real time in front of you in such detail and under such a spotlight.
    Though Labour membership is now at least double Conservative Party membership as a result of this leadership election
    Just think how even more awesome Labour's ground game will be with all those extra members
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,300
    HYUFD said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    HYUFD said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    DiversityIsOurGodNow said:

    Depressing. The people in that picture look like the dead-arses you see hanging around outside Wetherspoons in the morning. And to think Burnham was considered top talent prior to the Corbyn surge...truly staggering.

    If Burnham was ever considered top talent it says it all about the uselessness of today's labour party. It must be inevitable tha it will split into two or even three after this most depressing of elections
    I don't think so, the LDs are in an even worse state than Labour and no Blairites will defect to Farron who also despises their mentor, nor will many go to the Tories, and as for the Left if it stayed in Labour under Blair and Brown it is not going to defect wholesale if Burnham or Cooper win
    Why? Most Blairites are not Tories in their guts and could not join the party, they will not join Farron's LDs and under FPTP there is no mileage in creating yet another new party which is unlikely to bother the scorers and could cost them their seats

    The Tories were in a similar position under IDS the pendulum turns eventually, indeed someone like Alan Johnson could take over in 3 years or so if Corbyn is elected and fails to perform
    What do you mean fails to perform??

    IDS never lost a GE as Tory leader!!!
    Only because he was toppled before he had the chance to lose it after the Tories came a poor third in Brent East. Though in 2001 the Tories were in a similar predicament with none of the field really offering much prospect of challenging Blair (remember this was pre Iraq) and so Tory members voted with their hearts for IDS as Labour activists may well also vote with their hearts for Corbyn
    But my statement still stands! It was Howard wot lost the GE2005!
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,021
    Danny565 said:

    LOL, OGH really has it in for Burnham doesn't he.

    From my conversations with Mike, I get the impression Mike rates Burnham as a crapper version of Gordon Brown but without the charm or people skills.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,194
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Tissue_Price said:

    That's presumably partly why they're doing it. Apparently it was only the Corbyn camp pushing against that during the Hattie meeting the other day.

    I think we can safely assume that calls to unite around the democratically-elected comrade leader will be totally ignored, assuming they are made at all.

    It's not often that you get to see an organisation disintegrating in real time in front of you in such detail and under such a spotlight.
    Though Labour membership is now at least double Conservative Party membership as a result of this leadership election
    Just think how even more awesome Labour's ground game will be with all those extra members
    They might even hold Bootle!
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Cyclefree said:

    Danny565 said:

    Newsnight just played host to the worst interview/debate in history.

    Who was involved?

    Michael Woolf and some guy from a website which posted the video by the Virginia gunman.

    It was a potentially interesting debate (about whether the media has a duty not to give this psycho the attention he wanted by broadcasting the video, or whether not to do it would just be censorship) but was ruined by both people in the debate using arguments on the level of "I know you are but what am I".
  • eekeek Posts: 30,802
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Danny565 said:

    LOL, OGH really has it in for Burnham doesn't he.

    From my conversations with Mike, I get the impression Mike rates Burnham as a crapper version of Gordon Brown but without the charm or people skills.
    Ouch
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,194
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    HYUFD said:

    Though Labour membership is now at least double Conservative Party membership as a result of this leadership election

    An large undisciplined squabbling rabble is even worse than a small undisciplined squabbling rabble (not that I'm implying either description fits the Conservatives, of course!).
    True, but those who do back Corbyn back him passionately and they will campaign hard for him and pack town hall meetings on his behalf
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 22,107
    A touch unfair, politics is frequently carried out in rooms like this.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,965
    HYUFD said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    HYUFD said:

    Though Labour membership is now at least double Conservative Party membership as a result of this leadership election

    An large undisciplined squabbling rabble is even worse than a small undisciplined squabbling rabble (not that I'm implying either description fits the Conservatives, of course!).
    True, but those who do back Corbyn back him passionately and they will campaign hard for him and pack town hall meetings on his behalf
    Not sure thats true.

    I am massive Corbyn supporter but my local MP is Kendalls right hand man.

    Cant see me helping him as much as in 2015. There must be lots of others like me.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,300
    "Comrades, this is your Leadership Candidate. It is an honour to speak to you today, and I am honoured to be sailing with you on the maiden voyage of our motherland's most recent achievement. Once more, we play our dangerous game, a game of chess against our old adversary — The Conservative Party. For a hundred years, your fathers before you and your older brothers played this game and played it well. But today the game is different. We have the advantage. It reminds me of the heady days of 1945 and Clement Atlee, when the world trembled at the sound of our Nationalisations! Well, they will tremble again — at the sound of our Progressiveness. The order is: engage the Corbyn Drive!

    "Comrades, our own Parliamentary Party doesn't know our full potential. They will do everything possible to test us; but they will only test their own embarrassment. We will leave our MPs behind, we will pass through the Conservative patrols, past their sonar nets, and lay off their largest constituency, and listen to their chortling and tittering... while we conduct Austerity Debates! Then, and when we are finished, the only sound they will hear is our laughter, while we sail to Havana, where the sun is warm, and so is the... Comradeship!

    "A great day, Comrades! We sail into history!"
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,194
    edited August 2015
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    HYUFD said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    DiversityIsOurGodNow said:

    Depressing. The people in that picture look like the dead-arses you see hanging around outside Wetherspoons in the morning. And to think Burnham was considered top talent prior to the Corbyn surge...truly staggering.

    If Burnham was ever considered top talent it says it all about the uselessness of today's labour party. It must be inevitable tha it will split into two or even three after this most depressing of elections
    I don't think so, the LDs are in an even worse state than Labour and no Blairites will defect to Farron who also despises their mentor, nor will many go to the Tories, and as for the Left if it stayed in Labour under Blair and Brown it is not going to defect wholesale if Burnham or Cooper win
    Why? Most Blairites are not Tories in their guts and could not join the party, they will not join Farron's LDs and under FPTP there is no mileage in creating yet another new party which is unlikely to bother the scorers and could cost them their seats

    The Tories were in a similar position under IDS the pendulum turns eventually, indeed someone like Alan Johnson could take over in 3 years or so if Corbyn is elected and fails to perform
    What do you mean fails to perform??

    IDS never lost a GE as Tory leader!!!
    Only because he was toppled before he had the chance to lose it after the Tories came a poor third in Brent East. Though in 2001 the Tories were in a similar predicament with none of the field really offering much prospect of challenging Blair (remember this was pre Iraq) and so Tory members voted with their hearts for IDS as Labour activists may well also vote with their hearts for Corbyn
    But my statement still stands! It was Howard wot lost the GE2005!
    Evidence? IDS was ousted on 29th October 2003 the last ICM before his ousting had the Tories on 33% Labour on 38%, the last Mori the Tories on 35% Labour on 38%, the last NOP the Tories on 29% Labour on 38%, the last Populus the Tories on 34% Labour on 39%, the last Yougov the Tories and Labour tied on 34%.
    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/historical-polls/voting-intention-2001-2005
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    HYUFD said:

    True, but those who do back Corbyn back him passionately and they will campaign hard for him and pack town hall meetings on his behalf

    That's the problem. The grown-ups will be trying to get rid of him, MPs will be trying to keep as low a profile as possible in the hope that it all turns out to have been a bad dream, Andy B will be trying to make out that it was all his idea in the first place, everyone else will be saying 'I told you so', and the kids will be partying on behalf of a pensioner trot.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 25,358
    edited August 2015
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    It's not often that you get to see an organisation disintegrating in real time in front of you in such detail and under such a spotlight.

    How soon we forget Sarah Palin...a charismatic politician who excited the base, but who on even the most cursory examination did not have the character, perspective or ability necessary for the job and whose prospects collapsed under a storm of derision alternating with contempt.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,300
    HYUFD said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    HYUFD said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    DiversityIsOurGodNow said:

    Depressing. The people in that picture look like the dead-arses you see hanging around outside Wetherspoons in the morning. And to think Burnham was considered top talent prior to the Corbyn surge...truly staggering.

    If Burnham was ever considered top talent it says it all about the uselessness of today's labour party. It must be inevitable tha it will split into two or even three after this most depressing of elections
    I don't think so, the LDs are in an even worse state than Labour and no Blairites will defect to Farron who also despises their mentor, nor will many go to the Tories, and as for the Left if it stayed in Labour under Blair and Brown it is not going to defect wholesale if Burnham or Cooper win
    Why? Most Blairites are not Tories in their guts and could not join the party, they will not join Farron's LDs and under FPTP there is no mileage in creating yet another new party which is unlikely to bother the scorers and could cost them their seats

    The Tories were in a similar position under IDS the pendulum turns eventually, indeed someone like Alan Johnson could take over in 3 years or so if Corbyn is elected and fails to perform
    What do you mean fails to perform??

    IDS never lost a GE as Tory leader!!!
    Only because he was toppled before he had the chance to lose it after the Tories came a poor third in Brent East. Though in 2001 the Tories were in a similar predicament with none of the field really offering much prospect of challenging Blair (remember this was pre Iraq) and so Tory members voted with their hearts for IDS as Labour activists may well also vote with their hearts for Corbyn
    But my statement still stands! It was Howard wot lost the GE2005!
    Evidence? IDS was ousted on 29th October 2003 the last ICM before his ousting had the Tories on 33% Labour on 38%, the last Mori the Tories on 35% Labour on 38%, the last NOP the Tories on 29% Labour on 38%, the last Populus the Tories on 34% Labour on 39%, the last Yougov the Tories and Labour tied on 34%.
    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/historical-polls/voting-intention-2001-2005
    My evidence is simple: Howard was leader at GE2005!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,629
    viewcode said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    It's not often that you get to see an organisation disintegrating in real time in front of you in such detail and under such a spotlight.

    How soon we forget Sarah Palin...a charismatic politician who excited the base, but who on even the most cursory examination did not have the character, perspective or ability necessary for the job and whose prospects collapsed under a storm of derision alternating with contempt.
    I remember how much money I won on her winning that. I remember seeing info on that chartered/private flight from Anchorage to Minnesota and piling in on the money... happy times.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    viewcode said:

    How soon we forget Sarah Palin...a charismatic politician who excited the base, but who on even the most cursory examination did not have the character, perspective or ability necessary for the job and whose prospects collapsed under a storm of derision alternating with contempt.

    The Republicans at least had the excuse that she was fairly unknown.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,021
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    viewcode said:

    How soon we forget Sarah Palin...a charismatic politician who excited the base, but who on even the most cursory examination did not have the character, perspective or ability necessary for the job and whose prospects collapsed under a storm of derision alternating with contempt.

    The Republicans at least had the excuse that she was fairly unknown.
    So what's their excuse for Donald Trump?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,194
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    HYUFD said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    DiversityIsOurGodNow said:

    Depressing. The people in that picture look like the dead-arses you see hanging around outside Wetherspoons in the morning. And to think Burnham was considered top talent prior to the Corbyn surge...truly staggering.

    If Burnham was ever considered top talent it says it all about the uselessness of today's labour party. It must be inevitable tha it will split into two or even three after this most depressing of elections
    I don't think so, the LDs are in an even worse state than Labour and no Blairites will defect to Farron who also despises their mentor, nor will many go to the Tories, and as for the Left if it stayed in Labour under Blair and Brown it is not going to defect wholesale if Burnham or Cooper win
    Why? Most Blairites are not Tories in their guts and could not join the party, they will not join Farron's LDs and under FPTP there is no mileage in creating yet another new party which is unlikely to bother the scorers and could cost them their seats

    The Tories were in a similar position under IDS the pendulum turns eventually, indeed someone like Alan Johnson could take over in 3 years or so if Corbyn is elected and fails to perform
    What do you mean fails to perform??

    IDS never lost a GE as Tory leader!!!
    may well also vote with their hearts for Corbyn
    But my statement still stands! It was Howard wot lost the GE2005!
    Evidence? IDS was ousted on 29th October 2003 the last ICM before his ousting had the Tories on 33% Labour on 38%, the last Mori the Tories on 35% Labour on 38%, the last NOP the Tories on 29% Labour on 38%, the last Populus the Tories on 34% Labour on 39%, the last Yougov the Tories and Labour tied on 34%.
    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/historical-polls/voting-intention-2001-2005
    My evidence is simple: Howard was leader at GE2005!
    Yes and he gained 33 seats and cut Labour's majority by 100 seats
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,194
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Danny565 said:

    LOL, OGH really has it in for Burnham doesn't he.

    From my conversations with Mike, I get the impression Mike rates Burnham as a crapper version of Gordon Brown but without the charm or people skills.
    Mind you Mike was urging Labour to pick Ed rather than David in 2010
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,300
    HYUFD said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    HYUFD said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    DiversityIsOurGodNow said:

    Depressing. The people in that picture look like the dead-arses you see hanging around outside Wetherspoons in the morning. And to think Burnham was considered top talent prior to the Corbyn surge...truly staggering.

    If Burnham was ever considered top talent it says it all about the uselessness of today's labour party. It must be inevitable tha it will split into two or even three after this most depressing of elections
    I don't think so, the LDs are in an even worse state than Labour and no Blairites will defect to Farron who also despises their mentor, nor will many go to the Tories, and as for the Left if it stayed in Labour under Blair and Brown it is not going to defect wholesale if Burnham or Cooper win
    Why? Most Blairites are not Tories in their guts and could not join the party, they will not join Farron's LDs and under FPTP there is no mileage in creating yet another new party which is unlikely to bother the scorers and could cost them their seats

    The Tories were in a similar position under IDS the pendulum turns eventually, indeed someone like Alan Johnson could take over in 3 years or so if Corbyn is elected and fails to perform
    What do you mean fails to perform??

    IDS never lost a GE as Tory leader!!!
    may well also vote with their hearts for Corbyn
    But my statement still stands! It was Howard wot lost the GE2005!
    Evidence? IDS was ousted on 29th October 2003 the last ICM before his ousting had the Tories on 33% Labour on 38%, the last Mori the Tories on 35% Labour on 38%, the last NOP the Tories on 29% Labour on 38%, the last Populus the Tories on 34% Labour on 39%, the last Yougov the Tories and Labour tied on 34%.
    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/historical-polls/voting-intention-2001-2005
    My evidence is simple: Howard was leader at GE2005!
    Yes and he gained 33 seats and cut Labour's majority by 100 seats
    Still lost - Tories two shy of 200 seats. Even Ed won 232 for Labour :)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,194
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    HYUFD said:

    True, but those who do back Corbyn back him passionately and they will campaign hard for him and pack town hall meetings on his behalf

    That's the problem. The grown-ups will be trying to get rid of him, MPs will be trying to keep as low a profile as possible in the hope that it all turns out to have been a bad dream, Andy B will be trying to make out that it was all his idea in the first place, everyone else will be saying 'I told you so', and the kids will be partying on behalf of a pensioner trot.
    He deserves a chance, if after 3 years or so he has made little headway then is the time to start to topple him and his lack of a base in the parliamentary party means he will be on probation from day 1
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    So what's their excuse for Donald Trump?

    They haven't chosen him. Not yet, anyway.
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    bigjohnowls said:

    HYUFD said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    HYUFD said:

    Though Labour membership is now at least double Conservative Party membership as a result of this leadership election

    An large undisciplined squabbling rabble is even worse than a small undisciplined squabbling rabble (not that I'm implying either description fits the Conservatives, of course!).
    True, but those who do back Corbyn back him passionately and they will campaign hard for him and pack town hall meetings on his behalf
    Not sure thats true.

    I am massive Corbyn supporter but my local MP is Kendalls right hand man.

    Cant see me helping him as much as in 2015. There must be lots of others like me.
    you in barrow???
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    viewcode said:

    How soon we forget Sarah Palin...a charismatic politician who excited the base, but who on even the most cursory examination did not have the character, perspective or ability necessary for the job and whose prospects collapsed under a storm of derision alternating with contempt.

    The Republicans at least had the excuse that she was fairly unknown.
    So what's their excuse for Donald Trump?
    I wonder if Trump had entered the Dem nomination race what numbers he'd be polling. I have a sneaking suspicion it would be about what it is now as a Republican. He is a populist buffoon rather than a statesman of any particular political stripe.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,194
    bigjohnowls said:

    HYUFD said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    HYUFD said:

    Though Labour membership is now at least double Conservative Party membership as a result of this leadership election

    An large undisciplined squabbling rabble is even worse than a small undisciplined squabbling rabble (not that I'm implying either description fits the Conservatives, of course!).
    True, but those who do back Corbyn back him passionately and they will campaign hard for him and pack town hall meetings on his behalf
    Not sure thats true.

    I am massive Corbyn supporter but my local MP is Kendalls right hand man.

    Cant see me helping him as much as in 2015. There must be lots of others like me.
    When did Ed Miliband ever attract the enthusiasm Corbyn did? Michael Foot used to pack public meetings even on nights with cup ties on
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,194
    MTimT said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    viewcode said:

    How soon we forget Sarah Palin...a charismatic politician who excited the base, but who on even the most cursory examination did not have the character, perspective or ability necessary for the job and whose prospects collapsed under a storm of derision alternating with contempt.

    The Republicans at least had the excuse that she was fairly unknown.
    So what's their excuse for Donald Trump?
    I wonder if Trump had entered the Dem nomination race what numbers he'd be polling. I have a sneaking suspicion it would be about what it is now as a Republican. He is a populist buffoon rather than a statesman of any particular political stripe.
    His message is a largely populist anti immigrant one, that would not go down well in the Democratic primaries, their anti Wall Street populism is provided by Sanders
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,194
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    HYUFD said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    DiversityIsOurGodNow said:

    Depressing. The people in that picture look like the dead-arses you see hanging around outside Wetherspoons in the morning. And to think Burnham was considered top talent prior to the Corbyn surge...truly staggering.

    If Burnham was ever considered top talent it says it all about the uselessness of today's labour party. It must be inevitable tha it will split into two or even three after this most depressing of elections
    I don't think so, the LDs are in an even worse state than Labour and no Blairites will defect to Farron who also despises their mentor, nor will many go to the Tories, and as for the Left if it stayed in Labour under Blair and Brown it is not going to defect wholesale if Burnham or Cooper win

    The Tories were in a similar position under IDS the pendulum turns eventually, indeed someone like Alan Johnson could take over in 3 years or so if Corbyn is elected and fails to perform
    What do you mean fails to perform??

    IDS never lost a GE as Tory leader!!!
    may well also vote with their hearts for Corbyn
    But my statement still stands! It was Howard wot lost the GE2005!
    Evidence? IDS was ousted on 29th October 2003 the last ICM before his ousting had the Tories on 33% Labour on 38%, the last Mori the Tories on 35% Labour on 38%, the last NOP the Tories on 29% Labour on 38%, the last Populus the Tories on 34% Labour on 39%, the last Yougov the Tories and Labour tied on 34%.
    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/historical-polls/voting-intention-2001-2005
    My evidence is simple: Howard was leader at GE2005!
    Yes and he gained 33 seats and cut Labour's majority by 100 seats
    Still lost - Tories two shy of 200 seats. Even Ed won 232 for Labour :)
    Howard won 2% more than Ed and gained seats. Had IDS been storming ahead in the polls and gaining by elections he would not have been ousted as leader
  • flightpath01flightpath01 Posts: 4,903
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    viewcode said:

    How soon we forget Sarah Palin...a charismatic politician who excited the base, but who on even the most cursory examination did not have the character, perspective or ability necessary for the job and whose prospects collapsed under a storm of derision alternating with contempt.

    The Republicans at least had the excuse that she was fairly unknown.
    There have been worse VP nominees.
    But Trump if he persists musty be seen as a disaster - and not just for the Repunblicans. A mirror image of Corbyn, a Farage with brains, it also speaks volumes for the disaster that is 'populism'.
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Tissue_Price said:

    That's presumably partly why they're doing it. Apparently it was only the Corbyn camp pushing against that during the Hattie meeting the other day.

    I think we can safely assume that calls to unite around the democratically-elected comrade leader will be totally ignored, assuming they are made at all.

    It's not often that you get to see an organisation disintegrating in real time in front of you in such detail and under such a spotlight.
    Though Labour membership is now at least double Conservative Party membership as a result of this leadership election
    Just think how even more awesome Labour's ground game will be with all those extra members
    Very few things beat a Libdem ground game. People like old Vince would have had a phenomenal team of dedicated workers, who had put the effort in year after year. Its the only real way that libdems win.

    But even that didnt stop them getting swept away. What you are selling still has to have some value. Do we honestly believe that if labour had managed fifteen million conversations instead of five million it would have won?
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    HYUFD said:

    MTimT said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    viewcode said:

    How soon we forget Sarah Palin...a charismatic politician who excited the base, but who on even the most cursory examination did not have the character, perspective or ability necessary for the job and whose prospects collapsed under a storm of derision alternating with contempt.

    The Republicans at least had the excuse that she was fairly unknown.
    So what's their excuse for Donald Trump?
    I wonder if Trump had entered the Dem nomination race what numbers he'd be polling. I have a sneaking suspicion it would be about what it is now as a Republican. He is a populist buffoon rather than a statesman of any particular political stripe.
    His message is a largely populist anti immigrant one, that would not go down well in the Democratic primaries, their anti Wall Street populism is provided by Sanders
    Agreed that there'd be a strong reaction against him, just as there is in the GOP. His net negatives with the Latino electorate is -51 !!! But he'd probably get votes in the majority white states in the North and Midwest, so I'd think 15-25% would be what he'd be pulling.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 25,358
    RobD said:

    viewcode said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    It's not often that you get to see an organisation disintegrating in real time in front of you in such detail and under such a spotlight.

    How soon we forget Sarah Palin...a charismatic politician who excited the base, but who on even the most cursory examination did not have the character, perspective or ability necessary for the job and whose prospects collapsed under a storm of derision alternating with contempt.
    I remember how much money I won on her winning that. I remember seeing info on that chartered/private flight from Anchorage to Minnesota and piling in on the money... happy times.
    It seems like only yesterday, but lord, it's seven years ago now...
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,300
    World's Busiest Railway - Episode 3 (Wednesday)
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0684sgm/worlds-busiest-railway-2015-episode-3
  • flightpath01flightpath01 Posts: 4,903
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Tissue_Price said:

    That's presumably partly why they're doing it. Apparently it was only the Corbyn camp pushing against that during the Hattie meeting the other day.

    I think we can safely assume that calls to unite around the democratically-elected comrade leader will be totally ignored, assuming they are made at all.

    It's not often that you get to see an organisation disintegrating in real time in front of you in such detail and under such a spotlight.
    Though Labour membership is now at least double Conservative Party membership as a result of this leadership election
    Just think how even more awesome Labour's ground game will be with all those extra members
    The more corbynites the better if it keeps tories on 42 - the secret of life the universe and everything.

    As it is the great disaster that apparently faces the tories is that they want to tax landlords - landlords already on the top band of tax. This is undoubtedly tough - but will the nations heart bleed?
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    flightpath01 said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    viewcode said:

    How soon we forget Sarah Palin...a charismatic politician who excited the base, but who on even the most cursory examination did not have the character, perspective or ability necessary for the job and whose prospects collapsed under a storm of derision alternating with contempt.

    The Republicans at least had the excuse that she was fairly unknown.
    There have been worse VP nominees.
    But Trump if he persists musty be seen as a disaster - and not just for the Repunblicans. A mirror image of Corbyn, a Farage with brains, it also speaks volumes for the disaster that is 'populism'.
    As someone of libertarian tendencies (fiscal and foreign policy conservative, social liberal), I'd vote any Dem, even Sanders, over Trump if he were the GOP candidate. He would be extraordinarily dangerous for the world. I know a number of Republicans who think the same way.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,300
    HYUFD said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    HYUFD said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    DiversityIsOurGodNow said:

    Depressing. The people in that picture look like the dead-arses you see hanging around outside Wetherspoons in the morning. And to think Burnham was considered top talent prior to the Corbyn surge...truly staggering.

    If Burnham was ever considered top talent it says it all about the uselessness of today's labour party. It must be inevitable tha it will split into two or even three after this most depressing of elections
    I don't think so, the LDs are in an even worse state than Labour and no Blairites will defect to Farron who also despises their mentor, nor will many go to the Tories, and as for the Left if it stayed in Labour under Blair and Brown it is not going to defect wholesale if Burnham or Cooper win

    The Tories were in a similar position under IDS the pendulum turns eventually, indeed someone like Alan Johnson could take over in 3 years or so if Corbyn is elected and fails to perform
    What do you mean fails to perform??

    IDS never lost a GE as Tory leader!!!
    may well also vote with their hearts for Corbyn
    But my statement still stands! It was Howard wot lost the GE2005!
    Evidence? IDS was ousted on 29th October 2003 the last ICM before his ousting had the Tories on 33% Labour on 38%, the last Mori the Tories on 35% Labour on 38%, the last NOP the Tories on 29% Labour on 38%, the last Populus the Tories on 34% Labour on 39%, the last Yougov the Tories and Labour tied on 34%.
    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/historical-polls/voting-intention-2001-2005
    My evidence is simple: Howard was leader at GE2005!
    Yes and he gained 33 seats and cut Labour's majority by 100 seats
    Still lost - Tories two shy of 200 seats. Even Ed won 232 for Labour :)
    Howard won 2% more than Ed and gained seats. Had IDS been storming ahead in the polls and gaining by elections he would not have been ousted as leader
    True, but he may have turned things round by 2005!
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,809
    edited August 2015
    Anyone see the feature on Corbyn on BBC1 10pm News?

    As predicted re what will happen post his election - almost nothing on the economy - main focus was on leaving NATO and people he has associated with. Though no mention of the monarchy.

    At the end one other thing came up that I haven't seen mentioned. Reporter said Corbyn cycles everywhere as he doesn't agree with the impact cars have on the environment.

    Sounded innocuous but it's easy to imagine the tabloids going for that big time - Corby is "anti-car" - "he will declare war on motorists" etc etc. Will not go down well with a lot of people
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,021
    MTimT said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    viewcode said:

    How soon we forget Sarah Palin...a charismatic politician who excited the base, but who on even the most cursory examination did not have the character, perspective or ability necessary for the job and whose prospects collapsed under a storm of derision alternating with contempt.

    The Republicans at least had the excuse that she was fairly unknown.
    So what's their excuse for Donald Trump?
    I wonder if Trump had entered the Dem nomination race what numbers he'd be polling. I have a sneaking suspicion it would be about what it is now as a Republican. He is a populist buffoon rather than a statesman of any particular political stripe.
    I just hope for the GOP he is this Primary cycle's Herman Cain.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,629
    viewcode said:

    RobD said:

    viewcode said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    It's not often that you get to see an organisation disintegrating in real time in front of you in such detail and under such a spotlight.

    How soon we forget Sarah Palin...a charismatic politician who excited the base, but who on even the most cursory examination did not have the character, perspective or ability necessary for the job and whose prospects collapsed under a storm of derision alternating with contempt.
    I remember how much money I won on her winning that. I remember seeing info on that chartered/private flight from Anchorage to Minnesota and piling in on the money... happy times.
    It seems like only yesterday, but lord, it's seven years ago now...
    Should have bean Juneau... I don't know my state capitals!
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    HYUFD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Danny565 said:

    LOL, OGH really has it in for Burnham doesn't he.

    From my conversations with Mike, I get the impression Mike rates Burnham as a crapper version of Gordon Brown but without the charm or people skills.
    Mind you Mike was urging Labour to pick Ed rather than David in 2010
    I thought from memory he was suggesting there was value in backing Ed (as there was) rather than supporting Ed personally.

    Furthermore David was crap as was Ed. No reason whatsoever to believe David wouldn't have done equally as dreadfully as his brother he couldn't even beat himself.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,194
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    HYUFD said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    DiversityIsOurGodNow said:

    Depressing. The people in that picture look like the dead-arses you see hanging around outside Wetherspoons in the morning. And to think Burnham was considered top talent prior to the Corbyn surge...truly staggering.

    If Burnham was ever considered top talent it says it all about the uselessness of today's labour party. It must be inevitable tha it will split into two or even three after this most depressing of elections
    I don't think so, the LDs are in an even worse state than Labour and no Blairites will defect to Farron who also despises their mentor, nor will many go to the Tories, and as for the Left if it stayed in Labour under Blair and Brown it is not going to defect wholesale if Burnham or Cooper win

    The Tories were in a similar position under IDS the pendulum turns eventually, indeed someone like Alan Johnson could take over in 3 years or so if Corbyn is elected and fails to perform
    What do you mean fails to perform??

    IDS never lost a GE as Tory leader!!!
    may well also vote with their hearts for Corbyn
    But my statement still stands! It was Howard wot lost the GE2005!
    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/historical-polls/voting-intention-2001-2005
    My evidence is simple: Howard was leader at GE2005!
    Yes and he gained 33 seats and cut Labour's majority by 100 seats
    Still lost - Tories two shy of 200 seats. Even Ed won 232 for Labour :)
    Howard won 2% more than Ed and gained seats. Had IDS been storming ahead in the polls and gaining by elections he would not have been ousted as leader
    True, but he may have turned things round by 2005!
    It would have been too late to get rid of him by 2005 and he trailed Blair badly as preferred PM
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,629
    HYUFD said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    HYUFD said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    DiversityIsOurGodNow said:

    Depressing. The people in that picture look like the dead-arses you see hanging around outside Wetherspoons in the morning. And to think Burnham was considered top talent prior to the Corbyn surge...truly staggering.

    If Burnham was ever considered top talent it says it all about the uselessness of today's labour party. It must be inevitable tha it will split into two or even three after this most depressing of elections
    I don't think so, the LDs are in an even worse state than Labour and no Blairites will defect to Farron who also despises their mentor, nor will many go to the Tories, and as for the Left if it stayed in Labour under Blair and Brown it is not going to defect wholesale if Burnham or Cooper win

    The Tories were in a similar position under IDS the pendulum turns eventually, indeed someone like Alan Johnson could take over in 3 years or so if Corbyn is elected and fails to perform
    What do you mean fails to perform??

    IDS never lost a GE as Tory leader!!!
    may well also vote with their hearts for Corbyn
    But my statement still stands! It was Howard wot lost the GE2005!
    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/historical-polls/voting-intention-2001-2005
    My evidence is simple: Howard was leader at GE2005!
    Yes and he gained 33 seats and cut Labour's majority by 100 seats
    Still lost - Tories two shy of 200 seats. Even Ed won 232 for Labour :)
    Howard won 2% more than Ed and gained seats. Had IDS been storming ahead in the polls and gaining by elections he would not have been ousted as leader
    True, but he may have turned things round by 2005!
    It would have been too late to get rid of him by 2005 and he trailed Blair badly as preferred PM
    Weren't we told ad nauseam on here that leadership ratings didn't matter Re: Milliband? I thought we were.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,194
    MTimT said:

    HYUFD said:

    MTimT said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    viewcode said:

    How soon we forget Sarah Palin...a charismatic politician who excited the base, but who on even the most cursory examination did not have the character, perspective or ability necessary for the job and whose prospects collapsed under a storm of derision alternating with contempt.

    The Republicans at least had the excuse that she was fairly unknown.
    So what's their excuse for Donald Trump?
    I wonder if Trump had entered the Dem nomination race what numbers he'd be polling. I have a sneaking suspicion it would be about what it is now as a Republican. He is a populist buffoon rather than a statesman of any particular political stripe.
    His message is a largely populist anti immigrant one, that would not go down well in the Democratic primaries, their anti Wall Street populism is provided by Sanders
    Agreed that there'd be a strong reaction against him, just as there is in the GOP. His net negatives with the Latino electorate is -51 !!! But he'd probably get votes in the majority white states in the North and Midwest, so I'd think 15-25% would be what he'd be pulling.
    Indeed, though Trump would probably do best with white voters in the Deep South
Sign In or Register to comment.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2025