Skip to content

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Local By-Election Preview : October 7th 2015

SystemSystem Posts: 12,682
edited October 2015 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Local By-Election Preview : October 7th 2015

Riverside on Cardiff (Lab defence)
Result of council at last election (2012): Labour 46, Liberal Democrats 16, Conservatives 7, Independents 3, Plaid Cymru 2, Heath Independent 1 (Labour majority of 17)
Result of ward at last election (2012) :

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Why on Wednesday?
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    surbiton said:

    NickPalmer said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    DavidL said:

    Just watched Denis Healey, the best PM we never had.

    Labour really died when they failed to attract people like him into their leadership and ideas. He made many mistakes and some uncomfortable compromises but he was a giant. They don't make them like that anymore and Labour in particular is much the poorer for it.

    How would the media treat an ex-CP member aspiring to power nowadays?
    My personal experience for a long time has been that people treat youthful CP involvement as a curious past eccentricity, like saying you used to be a Zoroastrian or a Monopoly addict. It's at least 20 years since I met anyone who recoiled in horror.
    There is a serious note here. The CP were the only sizable organisation opposed to the Nazis. The rest were appeasing in one form or another.

    The documentary didn't mention him joining the Republicans in Spain against Franco. He was not an idealist only. He actually practised what he preached. He was a Socialist indeed but no pacifist !

    I am not sure why many expected him to join the SDP. He had Labour blood running through his veins.

    I intend to re-read the "The Time of My Life" - quite easily the best autobiography I have read.
  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    surbiton said:

    surbiton said:

    NickPalmer said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    DavidL said:

    Just watched Denis Healey, the best PM we never had.

    Labour really died when they failed to attract people like him into their leadership and ideas. He made many mistakes and some uncomfortable compromises but he was a giant. They don't make them like that anymore and Labour in particular is much the poorer for it.

    How would the media treat an ex-CP member aspiring to power nowadays?
    My personal experience for a long time has been that people treat youthful CP involvement as a curious past eccentricity, like saying you used to be a Zoroastrian or a Monopoly addict. It's at least 20 years since I met anyone who recoiled in horror.
    There is a serious note here. The CP were the only sizable organisation opposed to the Nazis. The rest were appeasing in one form or another.

    The documentary didn't mention him joining the Republicans in Spain against Franco. He was not an idealist only. He actually practised what he preached. He was a Socialist indeed but no pacifist !

    I am not sure why many expected him to join the SDP. He had Labour blood running through his veins.

    I intend to re-read the "The Time of My Life" - quite easily the best autobiography I have read.
    Healey was a Communist throughout the Soviet-Nazi Pact. What do you make of that?
  • glwglw Posts: 10,511
    edited October 2015
    SeanT said:

    But how could you be a communist - like so many leading and mediocre Labourites, from Corbyn down - AFTER Stalin's purges, AFTER the Cultural Revolution, AFTER the Khmer Rouge and the Hungarian Represssion and the Gulags and the Terror?

    Isn't the usual bollocks for an excuse "that's not real communism".

    And it occurs to me that there are probably some National Socialists who make a similar "the NSDAP weren't real National Socialists".
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    Friday should be interesting. Obama is going to visit Roseburg, Oregon. The county commission have voted he shouldn't come, the parents of the victims don't want him to come, and the local populace is mad because he wants more gun control (it's a hunting area) and because he's politicizing the shootings, on his own admission.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @Labourpaul: Just watching Cameron on the news. He doesn't look all that rattled.
  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    glw said:

    SeanT said:

    But how could you be a communist - like so many leading and mediocre Labourites, from Corbyn down - AFTER Stalin's purges, AFTER the Cultural Revolution, AFTER the Khmer Rouge and the Hungarian Represssion and the Gulags and the Terror?

    Isn't the usual bollocks for an excuse "that's not real communism".

    And it occurs to me that there are probably some National Socialists who make a similar "the NSDAP weren't real National Socialists".
    I think Palmer was a Euro Communist, they tried to find a middle way between Maoism and Stalinism by taking elements of both.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,884
    Apparently, FIFA has an Ethics Committee.....

  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @TelePolitics: Exclusive: Jeremy Corbyn snubs the Queen, saying he is too busy to be sworn in to the Privy Council http://t.co/EOmpOPeorg
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    edited October 2015
    SeanT said:

    fpt for surbiton

    QED. It was perhaps understandable to be communist in the 1930s, confronted with Hitler and Fascism (understandable though still hugely silly and misguided, I'd say).

    But how could you be a communist - like so many leading and mediocre Labourites, from Corbyn down - AFTER Stalin's purges, AFTER the Cultural Revolution, AFTER the Khmer Rouge and the Hungarian Represssion and the Gulags and the Terror?

    How could you possibly do that, without being, to put it politely, a total c*nt?

    Sadly, your lack of command over the English language clearly shows. I do recommend you read "The Time of My Life", a truly wonderful book.

    I think you are confusing the communism of the Healey kind with the Stalinist purges which had nothing to do with communism but more to do with dictatorial power. The communists come in many shades.

    Would you believe it, the world's fastest growing economic power [ still ] is run by a communist [sic] party ? I know you admire them too ! I don't. I find the entire business practice endemically corrupt. Even more so than in India, say.

    My own flirtation with Marxism as distinct from Communism [ I was never a member of any other party ] was from my student days. To those who say one changes over the years, I never changed.

    I have been sentenced though having to run a company in a capitalist world !
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    fpt for surbiton

    QED. It was perhaps understandable to be communist in the 1930s, confronted with Hitler and Fascism (understandable though still hugely silly and misguided, I'd say).

    But how could you be a communist - like so many leading and mediocre Labourites, from Corbyn down - AFTER Stalin's purges, AFTER the Cultural Revolution, AFTER the Khmer Rouge and the Hungarian Represssion and the Gulags and the Terror?

    How could you possibly do that, without being, to put it politely, a total c*nt?

    Sadly, your lack of command over the English language clearly shows. I do recommend you read "The Time of My Life", a truly wonderful book.

    I think you are confusing the communism of the Healey kind with the Stalinist purges which had nothing to do with communism but more to do with dictatorial power. The communists come in many shades.

    Would you believe it, the world's fastest growing economic power [ still ] is run by a communist [sic] party ?

    My own flirtation with Marxism as distinct from Communism [ I was never a member of any other party ] was from my student days. To those who say one changes over the years, I never changed.

    I have been sentenced though having to run a company in a capitalist world !
    Except for the fact that Leninism was utterly abhorrent and evil too.
  • Hertsmere_PubgoerHertsmere_Pubgoer Posts: 3,476
    MarqueeMark said:

    Apparently, FIFA has an Ethics Committee.....

    It's next door to Hertfordshire.
    Oh, wait......
    You said Ethics
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Tim_B said:

    Friday should be interesting. Obama is going to visit Roseburg, Oregon. The county commission have voted he shouldn't come, the parents of the victims don't want him to come, and the local populace is mad because he wants more gun control (it's a hunting area) and because he's politicizing the shootings, on his own admission.

    When a gun toting murderer killed school children, the American Right wanted School teachers to be armed.

    Presumably, when an 11 year old kills an 8 year old, all 8 year olds should be armed too ?

    There are people on the raving Right who could just say that.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 130,258
    Good speech from Cameron today, almost Blairlike.

    Sol Campbell meanwhile has moved on from mayoral ambitions to try and become a Tory Peer saying "I want to be a Lord. I'm not sure what of, or the title , but the next goal is to be a peer"
    http://www.westhamonline.net/forum_flat.php?8124246||mc=o||
  • Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,307
    edited October 2015
    Not as if the Communists and Fascists are really different anyway. Both want total power, suppress any other opinion,will get into mass killing of their populations. One uses nationalism, the other internationalism for the same ends; total power, suppression and control.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Apparently, FIFA has an Ethics Committee.....

    It's next door to Hertfordshire.
    Oh, wait......
    You said Ethics
    THey have suspended Blatter for 90 days apparently
  • Hertsmere_PubgoerHertsmere_Pubgoer Posts: 3,476
    Tim_B said:

    Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Apparently, FIFA has an Ethics Committee.....

    It's next door to Hertfordshire.
    Oh, wait......
    You said Ethics
    THey have suspended Blatter for 90 days apparently
    Many thanks for your updates over the course of the investigation by the Feds.
    I incorrectly credited Tim T with it a number of threads ago.
    The posts you have made are very interesting reading.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    surbiton said:

    Tim_B said:

    Friday should be interesting. Obama is going to visit Roseburg, Oregon. The county commission have voted he shouldn't come, the parents of the victims don't want him to come, and the local populace is mad because he wants more gun control (it's a hunting area) and because he's politicizing the shootings, on his own admission.

    When a gun toting murderer killed school children, the American Right wanted School teachers to be armed.

    Presumably, when an 11 year old kills an 8 year old, all 8 year olds should be armed too ?

    There are people on the raving Right who could just say that.
    To remove any doubt, in view of your somewhat heated comments, I should point out that I am not and never have been a member of the NRA or any other gun organization, and I do not own a weapon of any kind, except a German Shepherd of course.
  • isamisam Posts: 42,614
    It seems Cam is the one person in history who can manage to be all things to all people

    By having such a ridiculous student left wing, that sees anyone that doesnt want the entire 3rd world imported to england as hitler, Cameron gets to be called a vicious right winger while actually behaving like a moderate lefty. The tory badge kissers just want their team in charge even if they are new labour, so accept whatever he says, while the opposition maintain his right wing credentials for him by being to the left of Ryan Giggs... The perfect storm
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,903
    Rewatching DC's speech from earlier, a few things stand out which haven't had much press. It will be interesting to see the proposals that come out in these areas.

    1. Pledge on planning reform, including that "affordable" housing as part of new development be available to buy rather than rent as at present.

    2. Reform of social services, along the lines of previous schools reform, threatening takeover of failing SS departments.

    3. Making every school an Academy, no longer will local authorities run schools.

    4. Prison reform touched on earlier in the week. Selling Dickensian inner-city prisons and building modern jails, more use of tagging to allow non-violent offenders to keep jobs, reforms to prison education system to reduce repeat offending.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 130,258
    Quinnipiac Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida

    Pennsylvania

    Donald Trump 23% (24%)
    Ben Carson 17% (13%)
    Marco Rubio 12% (10%)
    Carly Fiorina 8% (7%)
    Ted Cruz 6% (5%)
    Chris Christie 5% (2%)
    Jeb Bush 4% (6%)
    Mike Huckabee 4% (2%)
    John Kasich 3% (3%)
    All others 2% or below
    Sample: 427 registered Republicans.Dates: 9/25 – 105. Margin of error: +/- 4.7. Results from poll dated 8/7-18 are in parentheses.

    Ohio

    Donald Trump 23% (21%)
    Ben Carson 18% (6%)
    John Kasich 13% (27%)
    Ted Cruz 11% (7%)
    Carly Fiorina 10% (5%)
    Marco Rubio 7% (7%)
    Jeb Bush 4% (5%)
    Rand Paul 3% (2%)
    All others 2% or below
    Sample: 433 registered Republicans. Dates: 9/25 – 10/5. Margin of error: +/- 4.7.

    Florida

    Donald Trump 28% (21%)
    Ben Carson 16% (11%)
    Marco Rubio 14% (11%)
    Jeb Bush 12% (17%)
    Carly Fiorina 7% (7%)
    Ted Cruz 6% (7%)
    All others 2% or below


    Democrats

    Pennsylvania

    Clinton 36%
    Biden 25%
    Sanders 19%

    Ohio

    Clinton 40%
    Biden 21%
    Sanders 19%

    Florida

    Clinton 43%
    Sanders 19%
    Biden 19%

    http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/2016-presidential-swing-state-polls/release-detail?ReleaseID=2287
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    MonikerDiCanio said:

    surbiton said:

    surbiton said:

    NickPalmer said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    DavidL said:

    Just watched Denis Healey, the best PM we never had.

    Labour really died when they failed to attract people like him into their leadership and ideas. He made many mistakes and some uncomfortable compromises but he was a giant. They don't make them like that anymore and Labour in particular is much the poorer for it.

    How would the media treat an ex-CP member aspiring to power nowadays?
    My personal experience for a long time has been that people treat youthful CP involvement as a curious past eccentricity, like saying you used to be a Zoroastrian or a Monopoly addict. It's at least 20 years since I met anyone who recoiled in horror.
    There is a serious note here. The CP were the only sizable organisation opposed to the Nazis. The rest were appeasing in one form or another.

    The documentary didn't mention him joining the Republicans in Spain against Franco. He was not an idealist only. He actually practised what he preached. He was a Socialist indeed but no pacifist !

    I am not sure why many expected him to join the SDP. He had Labour blood running through his veins.

    I intend to re-read the "The Time of My Life" - quite easily the best autobiography I have read.
    Healey was a Communist throughout the Soviet-Nazi Pact. What do you make of that?
    Not quite. He did resign from the CP on the fall of France. He mentions in "The Time of My Life" that he did regret his late resignation which he put it down to "inertia and indifference than from conviction"

    I don't think anybody at that time thought that the pact made Germany and the USSR friends. It was seen as buying time for the Soviets. And it did work. Since December 1941, the Germans were on the back foot, long before Johnny Come Lately arrived with the chewing gums !
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 56,928
    glw said:

    SeanT said:

    But how could you be a communist - like so many leading and mediocre Labourites, from Corbyn down - AFTER Stalin's purges, AFTER the Cultural Revolution, AFTER the Khmer Rouge and the Hungarian Represssion and the Gulags and the Terror?

    Isn't the usual bollocks for an excuse "that's not real communism".

    And it occurs to me that there are probably some National Socialists who make a similar "the NSDAP weren't real National Socialists".
    They exist - check out the Strasserites.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,903
    edited October 2015
    HYUFD said:

    Sol Campbell meanwhile has moved on from mayoral ambitions to try and become a Tory Peer saying "I want to be a Lord. I'm not sure what of, or the title , but the next goal is to be a peer"
    http://www.westhamonline.net/forum_flat.php?8124246||mc=o||

    That really shouldn't be one's goal in life. If he wants to be a politician he should earn some political respect first by standing for elected office somewhere.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    HYUFD said:

    Quinnipiac Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida

    Pennsylvania

    Donald Trump 23% (24%)
    Ben Carson 17% (13%)
    Marco Rubio 12% (10%)
    Carly Fiorina 8% (7%)
    Ted Cruz 6% (5%)
    Chris Christie 5% (2%)
    Jeb Bush 4% (6%)
    Mike Huckabee 4% (2%)
    John Kasich 3% (3%)
    All others 2% or below
    Sample: 427 registered Republicans.Dates: 9/25 – 105. Margin of error: +/- 4.7. Results from poll dated 8/7-18 are in parentheses.

    Ohio

    Donald Trump 23% (21%)
    Ben Carson 18% (6%)
    John Kasich 13% (27%)
    Ted Cruz 11% (7%)
    Carly Fiorina 10% (5%)
    Marco Rubio 7% (7%)
    Jeb Bush 4% (5%)
    Rand Paul 3% (2%)
    All others 2% or below
    Sample: 433 registered Republicans. Dates: 9/25 – 10/5. Margin of error: +/- 4.7.

    Florida

    Donald Trump 28% (21%)
    Ben Carson 16% (11%)
    Marco Rubio 14% (11%)
    Jeb Bush 12% (17%)
    Carly Fiorina 7% (7%)
    Ted Cruz 6% (7%)
    All others 2% or below


    Democrats

    Pennsylvania

    Clinton 36%
    Biden 25%
    Sanders 19%

    Ohio

    Clinton 40%
    Biden 21%
    Sanders 19%

    Florida

    Clinton 43%
    Sanders 19%
    Biden 19%

    http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/2016-presidential-swing-state-polls/release-detail?ReleaseID=2287

    Which States are winner-takes-all in the Republican primaries ?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 130,258
    Quinnipiac- Pennsylvania General Election

    vs. Clinton
    Carson 49% (–)
    Clinton 40% (–)

    Bush 46% (43%)
    Clinton 40% (40%)

    Fiorina 45% (–)
    Clinton 41% (–)

    Rubio 45% (47%)
    Clinton 42% (40%)

    Clinton 44% (45%)
    Trump 42% (40%)

    vs. Biden
    Carson 47% (–)
    Biden 42% (–)

    Biden 44% (–)
    Fiorina 43% (–)

    Biden 45% (41%)
    Rubio 43% (44%)

    Biden 45% (42%)
    Bush 42% (39%)

    Biden 50% (48%)
    Trump 40% (40%)

    vs. Sanders

    Carson 47% (–)
    Sanders 37% (–)

    Rubio 45% (45%)
    Sanders 39% (33%)

    Fiorina 44% (–)
    Sanders 40% (–)

    Bush 44% (44%)
    Sanders 42% (36%)

    Sanders 46% (44%)
    Trump 41% (41%)

    Quinnipiac- Ohio General Election

    vs. Clinton

    Carson 49% (–)
    Clinton 40% (–)

    Rubio 45% (42%)
    Clinton 41% (40%)

    Bush 43% (39%)
    Clinton 41% (41%)

    Fiorina 43% (–)
    Clinton 41% (–)

    Clinton 43% (43%)
    Trump 42% (38%)

    vs. Biden

    Carson 46% (–)
    Biden 42% (–)

    Biden 44% (–)
    Fiorina 42% (–)

    Biden 46% (42%)
    Rubio 41% (41%)

    Biden 46% (42%)
    Bush 37% (39%)

    Biden 49% (48%)
    Trump 38% (38%)

    vs. Sanders

    Carson 48% (–)
    Sanders 36% (–)

    Fiorina 43% (–)
    Sanders 39% (–)

    Rubio 43% (42%)
    Sanders 40% (34%)

    Bush 42% (42%)
    Sanders 40% (36%)

    Sanders 44% (42%)
    Trump 41% (40%)


    Quinnipiac- Florida General Election
    vs. Clinton

    Rubio 45% (51%)
    Clinton 44% (39%)

    Bush 44% (49%)
    Clinton 43% (38%)

    Clinton 45% (–)
    Carson 43% (–)

    Clinton 44% (–)
    Fiorina 42% (–)

    Clinton 46% (41%)
    Trump 41% (43%)

    vs. Biden

    Biden 46% (42%)
    Rubio 43% (48%)

    Biden 45% (–)
    Carson 42% (–)

    Biden 46% (38%)
    Bush 42% (51%)

    Biden 49% (–)
    Fiorina 38% (–)

    Biden 52% (45%)
    Trump 38% (42%)

    vs. Sanders

    Carson 46% (–)
    Sanders 40% (–)

    Rubio 46% (52%)
    Sanders 41% (36%)

    Bush 45% (54%)
    Sanders 41% (35%)

    Fiorina 42% (–)
    Sanders 41% (–)

    Sanders 46% (41%)
    Trump 41% (45%)

    http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/2016-presidential-swing-state-polls/release-detail?ReleaseID=2287
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 130,258
    Sandpit said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sol Campbell meanwhile has moved on from mayoral ambitions to try and become a Tory Peer saying "I want to be a Lord. I'm not sure what of, or the title , but the next goal is to be a peer"
    http://www.westhamonline.net/forum_flat.php?8124246||mc=o||

    That really shouldn't be one's goal in life. If he wants to be a politician he should earn some political respect first by standing for elected office somewhere.
    Fair point, mind you how many peers now have stood for elected office? Probably a minority
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Tim_B said:

    surbiton said:

    Tim_B said:

    Friday should be interesting. Obama is going to visit Roseburg, Oregon. The county commission have voted he shouldn't come, the parents of the victims don't want him to come, and the local populace is mad because he wants more gun control (it's a hunting area) and because he's politicizing the shootings, on his own admission.

    When a gun toting murderer killed school children, the American Right wanted School teachers to be armed.

    Presumably, when an 11 year old kills an 8 year old, all 8 year olds should be armed too ?

    There are people on the raving Right who could just say that.
    To remove any doubt, in view of your somewhat heated comments, I should point out that I am not and never have been a member of the NRA or any other gun organization, and I do not own a weapon of any kind, except a German Shepherd of course.
    Sorry ! But I have not suggested that in any way. It is from my part a sad commentary on the US, with a country where we are not just divided by an ocean but more than that.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    Great headline on ESPN -

    Rutgers University football - the university has ordered an internal probe into the football recruiting hostess program

    *titter*
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 130,258
    surbiton said:

    HYUFD said:

    Quinnipiac Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida

    Pennsylvania

    Donald Trump 23% (24%)
    Ben Carson 17% (13%)
    Marco Rubio 12% (10%)
    Carly Fiorina 8% (7%)
    Ted Cruz 6% (5%)
    Chris Christie 5% (2%)
    Jeb Bush 4% (6%)
    Mike Huckabee 4% (2%)
    John Kasich 3% (3%)
    All others 2% or below
    Sample: 427 registered Republicans.Dates: 9/25 – 105. Margin of error: +/- 4.7. Results from poll dated 8/7-18 are in parentheses.

    Ohio

    Donald Trump 23% (21%)
    Ben Carson 18% (6%)
    John Kasich 13% (27%)
    Ted Cruz 11% (7%)
    Carly Fiorina 10% (5%)
    Marco Rubio 7% (7%)
    Jeb Bush 4% (5%)
    Rand Paul 3% (2%)
    All others 2% or below
    Sample: 433 registered Republicans. Dates: 9/25 – 10/5. Margin of error: +/- 4.7.

    Florida

    Donald Trump 28% (21%)
    Ben Carson 16% (11%)
    Marco Rubio 14% (11%)
    Jeb Bush 12% (17%)
    Carly Fiorina 7% (7%)
    Ted Cruz 6% (7%)
    All others 2% or below


    Democrats

    Pennsylvania

    Clinton 36%
    Biden 25%
    Sanders 19%

    Ohio

    Clinton 40%
    Biden 21%
    Sanders 19%

    Florida

    Clinton 43%
    Sanders 19%
    Biden 19%

    http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/2016-presidential-swing-state-polls/release-detail?ReleaseID=2287

    Which States are winner-takes-all in the Republican primaries ?
    States from 1st March to 14th March are PR, states post 15th March WTA
    http://uspolitics.about.com/od/Election-2016/fl/2016-Republican-Primaries-How-Delegates-Will-be-Awarded.htm
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,903
    Scott_P said:

    @TelePolitics: Exclusive: Jeremy Corbyn snubs the Queen, saying he is too busy to be sworn in to the Privy Council http://t.co/EOmpOPeorg

    Bollocks. Why should he be conferred the privileges of membership if he won't be sworn in?

    No-one is 'too busy' to meet Her Majesty, unless they deliberately don't want to meet her. Corbyn's dissembling on this, like the national anthem signing, is disingenuous.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

    Tim_B said:

    Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Apparently, FIFA has an Ethics Committee.....

    It's next door to Hertfordshire.
    Oh, wait......
    You said Ethics
    THey have suspended Blatter for 90 days apparently
    Many thanks for your updates over the course of the investigation by the Feds.
    I incorrectly credited Tim T with it a number of threads ago.
    The posts you have made are very interesting reading.
    Thank you. That's very kind of you.

    Crediting TimT - you bastard!! :)
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 56,928
    surbiton said:

    MonikerDiCanio said:

    surbiton said:

    surbiton said:

    NickPalmer said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    DavidL said:

    Just watched Denis Healey, the best PM we never had.

    Labour really died when they failed to attract people like him into their leadership and ideas. He made many mistakes and some uncomfortable compromises but he was a giant. They don't make them like that anymore and Labour in particular is much the poorer for it.

    How would the media treat an ex-CP member aspiring to power nowadays?
    My personal experience for a long time has been that people treat youthful CP involvement as a curious past eccentricity, like saying you used to be a Zoroastrian or a Monopoly addict. It's at least 20 years since I met anyone who recoiled in horror.
    There is a serious note here. The CP were the only sizable organisation opposed to the Nazis. The rest were appeasing in one form or another.

    The documentary didn't mention him joining the Republicans in Spain against Franco. He was not an idealist only. He actually practised what he preached. He was a Socialist indeed but no pacifist !

    I am not sure why many expected him to join the SDP. He had Labour blood running through his veins.

    I intend to re-read the "The Time of My Life" - quite easily the best autobiography I have read.
    Healey was a Communist throughout the Soviet-Nazi Pact. What do you make of that?
    Not quite. He did resign from the CP on the fall of France. He mentions in "The Time of My Life" that he did regret his late resignation which he put it down to "inertia and indifference than from conviction"

    I don't think anybody at that time thought that the pact made Germany and the USSR friends. It was seen as buying time for the Soviets. And it did work. Since December 1941, the Germans were on the back foot, long before Johnny Come Lately arrived with the chewing gums !
    You need to read some of journals of that period. Comitern made it very clear that Germany was now an ally of Communism to the their members. It wasn't presented as a marriage of convenience.

    My grandfather was attacked by hard left organisers of wild cat strikes in the Glasgow dockyards during the Pact period - physically. They thought he was a ring leader among those who insisted that only strike they would support was an official union strike, during the war. They wanted to disrupt the capitalist war against "their" ally.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    edited October 2015
    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:

    @TelePolitics: Exclusive: Jeremy Corbyn snubs the Queen, saying he is too busy to be sworn in to the Privy Council http://t.co/EOmpOPeorg

    Bollocks. Why should he be conferred the privileges of membership if he won't be sworn in?

    No-one is 'too busy' to meet Her Majesty, unless they deliberately don't want to meet her. Corbyn's dissembling on this, like the national anthem signing, is disingenuous.
    No need to make a fuss about Corbyn's rudeness.

    But Her Majesty might find that she is too busy to agree to an Order in Council to appoint the unpleasant little man as a Privy Counsellor. It's not as though any counsel he could provide would be of any use to anyone.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    HYUFD said:

    Quinnipiac- Pennsylvania General Election

    vs. Clinton
    Carson 49% (–)
    Clinton 40% (–)

    Bush 46% (43%)
    Clinton 40% (40%)

    Fiorina 45% (–)
    Clinton 41% (–)

    Rubio 45% (47%)
    Clinton 42% (40%)

    Clinton 44% (45%)
    Trump 42% (40%)

    vs. Biden
    Carson 47% (–)
    Biden 42% (–)

    Biden 44% (–)
    Fiorina 43% (–)

    Biden 45% (41%)
    Rubio 43% (44%)

    Biden 45% (42%)
    Bush 42% (39%)

    Biden 50% (48%)
    Trump 40% (40%)

    vs. Sanders

    Carson 47% (–)
    Sanders 37% (–)

    Rubio 45% (45%)
    Sanders 39% (33%)

    Fiorina 44% (–)
    Sanders 40% (–)

    Bush 44% (44%)
    Sanders 42% (36%)

    Sanders 46% (44%)
    Trump 41% (41%)

    Quinnipiac- Ohio General Election

    vs. Clinton

    Carson 49% (–)
    Clinton 40% (–)

    Rubio 45% (42%)
    Clinton 41% (40%)

    Bush 43% (39%)
    Clinton 41% (41%)

    Fiorina 43% (–)
    Clinton 41% (–)

    Clinton 43% (43%)
    Trump 42% (38%)

    vs. Biden

    Carson 46% (–)
    Biden 42% (–)

    Biden 44% (–)
    Fiorina 42% (–)

    Biden 46% (42%)
    Rubio 41% (41%)

    Biden 46% (42%)
    Bush 37% (39%)

    Biden 49% (48%)
    Trump 38% (38%)

    vs. Sanders

    Carson 48% (–)
    Sanders 36% (–)

    Fiorina 43% (–)
    Sanders 39% (–)

    Rubio 43% (42%)
    Sanders 40% (34%)

    Bush 42% (42%)
    Sanders 40% (36%)

    Sanders 44% (42%)
    Trump 41% (40%)


    Quinnipiac- Florida General Election
    vs. Clinton

    Rubio 45% (51%)
    Clinton 44% (39%)

    Bush 44% (49%)
    Clinton 43% (38%)

    Clinton 45% (–)
    Carson 43% (–)

    Clinton 44% (–)
    Fiorina 42% (–)

    Clinton 46% (41%)
    Trump 41% (43%)

    vs. Biden

    Biden 46% (42%)
    Rubio 43% (48%)

    Biden 45% (–)
    Carson 42% (–)

    Biden 46% (38%)
    Bush 42% (51%)

    Biden 49% (–)
    Fiorina 38% (–)

    Biden 52% (45%)
    Trump 38% (42%)

    vs. Sanders

    Carson 46% (–)
    Sanders 40% (–)

    Rubio 46% (52%)
    Sanders 41% (36%)

    Bush 45% (54%)
    Sanders 41% (35%)

    Fiorina 42% (–)
    Sanders 41% (–)

    Sanders 46% (41%)
    Trump 41% (45%)

    http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/2016-presidential-swing-state-polls/release-detail?ReleaseID=2287

    In terms of column inches, that has to be one of the longest posts I have seen on PB :)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 130,258
    edited October 2015
    Cameron ranked as second most successful Tory leader of the past 100 years in electoral terms in new chart. Thatcher first, Baldwin third

    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2015/10/cameron-the-second-best-tory-leader-of-the-past-century.html
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,903
    edited October 2015
    HYUFD said:

    Sandpit said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sol Campbell meanwhile has moved on from mayoral ambitions to try and become a Tory Peer saying "I want to be a Lord. I'm not sure what of, or the title , but the next goal is to be a peer"
    http://www.westhamonline.net/forum_flat.php?8124246||mc=o||

    That really shouldn't be one's goal in life. If he wants to be a politician he should earn some political respect first by standing for elected office somewhere.
    Fair point, mind you how many peers now have stood for elected office? Probably a minority
    Most of them have achieved something in life beyond being good at kicking a ball around. The only sportsmen in the Lords are very high achievers indeed, or were given the honour for outside work. See Lord Coe, Baroness Grey-Thompson as examples. Coe was of course also a former MP. Sol Campbell does not fit with that illustrious company, if he wants the rest of the party - let alone the country - to take him seriously as a politician he should lose the self-important sense of entitlement and stand for elected office.
  • glwglw Posts: 10,511
    Malmesbury said:

    glw said:

    SeanT said:

    But how could you be a communist - like so many leading and mediocre Labourites, from Corbyn down - AFTER Stalin's purges, AFTER the Cultural Revolution, AFTER the Khmer Rouge and the Hungarian Represssion and the Gulags and the Terror?

    Isn't the usual bollocks for an excuse "that's not real communism".

    And it occurs to me that there are probably some National Socialists who make a similar "the NSDAP weren't real National Socialists".
    They exist - check out the Strasserites.
    Thanks.
  • EPGEPG Posts: 6,742
    HYUFD said:

    Quinnipiac Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida

    As I highlighted on previous thread the "front-runner" Bush is on 4 per cent among Republicans in large (and swing) states Pennsylvania and Ohio.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:

    @TelePolitics: Exclusive: Jeremy Corbyn snubs the Queen, saying he is too busy to be sworn in to the Privy Council http://t.co/EOmpOPeorg

    Bollocks. Why should he be conferred the privileges of membership if he won't be sworn in?

    No-one is 'too busy' to meet Her Majesty, unless they deliberately don't want to meet her. Corbyn's dissembling on this, like the national anthem signing, is disingenuous.
    No need to make a fuss about Corbyn's rudeness.

    But Her Majesty might find that she is too busy to agree to an Order in Council to appoint the unpleasant little man as a Privy Counsellor. It's not as though any counsel he could provide would be of any use to anyone.
    Simpler still to leave the ball in his court. Once he has found the time he can be inducted into the PC.
  • isamisam Posts: 42,614
    Mesut ozil and guitarist from blur involved in jewellery heist

    https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/651870489653198848

  • watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474
    edited October 2015
    Scott_P said:

    @TelePolitics: Exclusive: Jeremy Corbyn snubs the Queen, saying he is too busy to be sworn in to the Privy Council http://t.co/EOmpOPeorg

    Odious little man.

    If he can't be bothered to be sworn in, then he shouldn't be a member of the Privy Council. Saves us the bother of worrying as to which of his undesirable friends he's likely to be leaking information.
  • flightpath01flightpath01 Posts: 4,903
    edited October 2015
    watford30 said:

    Scott_P said:

    @TelePolitics: Exclusive: Jeremy Corbyn snubs the Queen, saying he is too busy to be sworn in to the Privy Council http://t.co/EOmpOPeorg

    Odious little man. Were we at war with another nation, he would be leading the quislings in their treachery.

    If he can't be bothered to be sworn in, then he shouldn't be a member of the Privy Council. Saves us the bother of worrying as to which of his undesirable friends he's likely to be leaking information.
    To polite. He is a twat.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,786
    FPT
    MonikerDiCanio said:


    What event led you to abandon the Communist Party?

    I was a Eurocommunist in my teens - the idea being to get the ideals without the totalitarianism (which is why SeanT ranting about Pol Pot etc. isn't too relevant). "From each according to ability, to each according to need" seemed to me exactly how one should try to live (I haven't changed that belief), and as far as possible I wanted to help organise society on that basis.

    It seemed possible for a while, and then it became evident that it wasn't going to work: too much bleak history in Eastern Europe casting its shadow. I'm not sure there was a specific event, merely that I grew up, looked around, and decided social democracy was a more viable ambition. I joined Labour on my 21st birthday.

    Incidentally, I don't think Corbyn was ever a Communist. Bit of a right-winger really. :-)
  • isamisam Posts: 42,614
    How utterly ridiculous... I really have seen it all now

    You can't be a Londoner if you were born in Grimsby!!

    https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/651873623905566720
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:

    @TelePolitics: Exclusive: Jeremy Corbyn snubs the Queen, saying he is too busy to be sworn in to the Privy Council http://t.co/EOmpOPeorg

    Bollocks. Why should he be conferred the privileges of membership if he won't be sworn in?

    No-one is 'too busy' to meet Her Majesty, unless they deliberately don't want to meet her. Corbyn's dissembling on this, like the national anthem signing, is disingenuous.
    No need to make a fuss about Corbyn's rudeness.

    But Her Majesty might find that she is too busy to agree to an Order in Council to appoint the unpleasant little man as a Privy Counsellor. It's not as though any counsel he could provide would be of any use to anyone.
    He should be sworn in without fuss, monarch or kneeling now. Of all the rows about Jeremy Corbyn, this is among the most trivial.
  • flightpath01flightpath01 Posts: 4,903
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:

    @TelePolitics: Exclusive: Jeremy Corbyn snubs the Queen, saying he is too busy to be sworn in to the Privy Council http://t.co/EOmpOPeorg

    Bollocks. Why should he be conferred the privileges of membership if he won't be sworn in?

    No-one is 'too busy' to meet Her Majesty, unless they deliberately don't want to meet her. Corbyn's dissembling on this, like the national anthem signing, is disingenuous.
    No need to make a fuss about Corbyn's rudeness.

    But Her Majesty might find that she is too busy to agree to an Order in Council to appoint the unpleasant little man as a Privy Counsellor. It's not as though any counsel he could provide would be of any use to anyone.
    But as Sandpit suggests... Corbyn is lying through his teeth. He is a twat of the highest order.
  • HaroldOHaroldO Posts: 1,185
    Macguire losing his mind on the sky news papers not ten minutes ago. The privy council is the establishment trying to stop change blah blah.
    All it is, is another old institution used for a new purpose. Macguire knows this but the 16 year old version of him is fighting its way out.
  • flightpath01flightpath01 Posts: 4,903
    edited October 2015
    NickPalmer said:

    FPT

    MonikerDiCanio said:


    What event led you to abandon the Communist Party?

    I was a Eurocommunist in my teens - the idea being to get the ideals without the totalitarianism (which is why SeanT ranting about Pol Pot etc. isn't too relevant). "From each according to ability, to each according to need" seemed to me exactly how one should try to live (I haven't changed that belief), and as far as possible I wanted to help organise society on that basis.

    It seemed possible for a while, and then it became evident that it wasn't going to work: too much bleak history in Eastern Europe casting its shadow. I'm not sure there was a specific event, merely that I grew up, looked around, and decided social democracy was a more viable ambition. I joined Labour on my 21st birthday.

    Incidentally, I don't think Corbyn was ever a Communist. Bit of a right-winger really. :-)
    Who gives a monkey's for your opinions? You voted for a prize twat to be leader of the labour party.
  • Hertsmere_PubgoerHertsmere_Pubgoer Posts: 3,476
    isam said:

    It seems Cam is the one person in history who can manage to be all things to all people

    By having such a ridiculous student left wing, that sees anyone that doesnt want the entire 3rd world imported to england as hitler, Cameron gets to be called a vicious right winger while actually behaving like a moderate lefty. The tory badge kissers just want their team in charge even if they are new labour, so accept whatever he says, while the opposition maintain his right wing credentials for him by being to the left of Ryan Giggs... The perfect storm

    I miss the like button.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    HYUFD said:

    Cameron ranked as second most successful Tory leader of the past 100 years in electoral terms in new chart. Thatcher first, Baldwin third

    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2015/10/cameron-the-second-best-tory-leader-of-the-past-century.html

    I know this is all based on some few measurable criteria, but Baldwin third, and both he and Bonar Law above Churchill, the greatest briton of all time?

    I know according to the criteria used that's the case, but I don't think it reflects reality.

    To be fair the article does allude to that a bit.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    NickPalmer said:

    FPT

    MonikerDiCanio said:


    What event led you to abandon the Communist Party?

    I was a Eurocommunist in my teens - the idea being to get the ideals without the totalitarianism (which is why SeanT ranting about Pol Pot etc. isn't too relevant). "From each according to ability, to each according to need" seemed to me exactly how one should try to live (I haven't changed that belief), and as far as possible I wanted to help organise society on that basis.

    It seemed possible for a while, and then it became evident that it wasn't going to work: too much bleak history in Eastern Europe casting its shadow. I'm not sure there was a specific event, merely that I grew up, looked around, and decided social democracy was a more viable ambition. I joined Labour on my 21st birthday.

    Incidentally, I don't think Corbyn was ever a Communist. Bit of a right-winger really. :-)
    Corbyn was never a Communist. To be a communist, one needs to be disciplined and accept party policy even if he/she is uncomfortable about it.

    Corbyn is more of an issues person, well meant though but without any thorough intellectual position. There isn't a major intellect on the left of the party today.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 29,805
    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:

    @TelePolitics: Exclusive: Jeremy Corbyn snubs the Queen, saying he is too busy to be sworn in to the Privy Council http://t.co/EOmpOPeorg

    Bollocks. Why should he be conferred the privileges of membership if he won't be sworn in?

    No-one is 'too busy' to meet Her Majesty, unless they deliberately don't want to meet her. Corbyn's dissembling on this, like the national anthem signing, is disingenuous.
    He does have a preternatural ability to make exactly the wrong decisions, unless there is some objective I have not heard of yet.

    Is Wile E Corbynote keeping time free to launch a hostile takeover of the Woodcraft Folk?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 130,258
    EPG said:

    HYUFD said:

    Quinnipiac Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida

    As I highlighted on previous thread the "front-runner" Bush is on 4 per cent among Republicans in large (and swing) states Pennsylvania and Ohio.
    Yes, I think Bush is done, there was a reason his brother became the nominee in 2000 and won the Texas governorship in 1994 while he lost Florida. His son, George P, is a better prospect though
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    NickPalmer said:

    FPT

    MonikerDiCanio said:


    What event led you to abandon the Communist Party?

    I was a Eurocommunist in my teens - the idea being to get the ideals without the totalitarianism (which is why SeanT ranting about Pol Pot etc. isn't too relevant). "From each according to ability, to each according to need" seemed to me exactly how one should try to live (I haven't changed that belief), and as far as possible I wanted to help organise society on that basis.

    It seemed possible for a while, and then it became evident that it wasn't going to work: too much bleak history in Eastern Europe casting its shadow. I'm not sure there was a specific event, merely that I grew up, looked around, and decided social democracy was a more viable ambition. I joined Labour on my 21st birthday.

    Incidentally, I don't think Corbyn was ever a Communist. Bit of a right-winger really. :-)
    Despite being a LD, I still have a soft spot for Bakunin. Those right wing bastards of the communists are just trying to replace one set of bosses with another.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 130,258
    Tim_B said:

    HYUFD said:

    Quinnipiac- Pennsylvania General Election

    vs. Clinton
    Carson 49% (–)
    Clinton 40% (–)

    Bush 46% (43%)
    Clinton 40% (40%)

    Fiorina 45% (–)
    Clinton 41% (–)

    Rubio 45% (47%)
    Clinton 42% (40%)

    Clinton 44% (45%)
    Trump 42% (40%)

    vs. Biden
    Carson 47% (–)
    Biden 42% (–)

    Biden 44% (–)
    Fiorina 43% (–)

    Biden 45% (41%)
    Rubio 43% (44%)

    Biden 45% (42%)
    Bush 42% (39%)

    Biden 50% (48%)
    Trump 40% (40%)

    vs. Sanders

    Carson 47% (–)
    Sanders 37% (–)

    Rubio 45% (45%)
    Sanders 39% (33%)

    Fiorina 44% (–)
    Sanders 40% (–)

    Bush 44% (44%)
    Sanders 42% (36%)

    Sanders 46% (44%)
    Trump 41% (41%)

    Quinnipiac- Ohio General Election

    vs. Clinton

    Carson 49% (–)
    Clinton 40% (–)

    Rubio 45% (42%)
    Clinton 41% (40%)

    Bush 43% (39%)
    Clinton 41% (41%)

    Fiorina 43% (–)
    Clinton 41% (–)

    Clinton 43% (43%)
    Trump 42% (38%)

    vs. Biden

    Carson 46% (–)
    Biden 42% (–)

    Biden 44% (–)
    Fiorina 42% (–)

    Biden 46% (42%)
    Rubio 41% (41%)

    Biden 46% (42%)
    Bush 37% (39%)

    Biden 49% (48%)
    Trump 38% (38%)

    vs. Sanders

    Carson 48% (–)
    Sanders 36% (–)

    Fiorina 43% (–)
    Sanders 39% (–)

    Rubio 43% (42%)
    Sanders 40% (34%)

    Bush 42% (42%)
    Sanders 40% (36%)

    Sanders 44% (42%)
    Trump 41% (40%)


    Quinnipiac- Florida General Election
    vs. Clinton

    Rubio 45% (51%)
    Clinton 44% (39%)

    Bush 44% (49%)
    Clinton 43% (38%)

    Clinton 45% (–)
    Carson 43% (–)

    Clinton 44% (–)
    Fiorina 42% (–)

    Clinton 46% (41%)
    Trump 41% (43%)

    vs. Biden

    Biden 46% (42%)
    Rubio 43% (48%)

    Biden 45% (–)
    Carson 42% (–)

    Biden 46% (38%)
    Bush 42% (51%)

    Biden 49% (–)
    Fiorina 38% (–)

    Biden 52% (45%)
    Trump 38% (42%)

    vs. Sanders

    Carson 46% (–)
    Sanders 40% (–)

    Rubio 46% (52%)
    Sanders 41% (36%)

    Bush 45% (54%)
    Sanders 41% (35%)

    Fiorina 42% (–)
    Sanders 41% (–)

    Sanders 46% (41%)
    Trump 41% (45%)

    http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/2016-presidential-swing-state-polls/release-detail?ReleaseID=2287

    In terms of column inches, that has to be one of the longest posts I have seen on PB :)
    Well there were a lot of figures there, wanted to ensure PBers did not miss anything!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 130,258
    Sandpit said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sandpit said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sol Campbell meanwhile has moved on from mayoral ambitions to try and become a Tory Peer saying "I want to be a Lord. I'm not sure what of, or the title , but the next goal is to be a peer"
    http://www.westhamonline.net/forum_flat.php?8124246||mc=o||

    That really shouldn't be one's goal in life. If he wants to be a politician he should earn some political respect first by standing for elected office somewhere.
    Fair point, mind you how many peers now have stood for elected office? Probably a minority
    Most of them have achieved something in life beyond being good at kicking a ball around. The only sportsmen in the Lords are very high achievers indeed, or were given the honour for outside work. See Lord Coe, Baroness Grey-Thompson as examples. Coe was of course also a former MP. Sol Campbell does not fit with that illustrious company, if he wants the rest of the party - let alone the country - to take him seriously as a politician he should lose the self-important sense of entitlement and stand for elected office.
    Or do some serious charity work, yes, perhaps start a sports foundation
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    HYUFD said:

    Cameron ranked as second most successful Tory leader of the past 100 years in electoral terms in new chart. Thatcher first, Baldwin third

    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2015/10/cameron-the-second-best-tory-leader-of-the-past-century.html

    Cameron won only one election if I recall and that just by 6 seats. Someone called Churchill is missing ? Macmillan ?
  • watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474
    edited October 2015
    HaroldO said:

    Macguire losing his mind on the sky news papers not ten minutes ago. The privy council is the establishment trying to stop change blah blah.
    All it is, is another old institution used for a new purpose. Macguire knows this but the 16 year old version of him is fighting its way out.

    Has it never occurred to Maguire that he's part of 'the establishment' too now?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,903
    isam said:

    How utterly ridiculous... I really have seen it all now

    You can't be a Londoner if you were born in Grimsby!!

    twitter.com/standardnews/status/651873623905566720

    Mr Complicated will find his life gets rather more, err, complicated with that little stunt.
    I hope for his sake he never has to travel to the USA, unless he has a predilection for small cells and full body searches.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Malmesbury said:

    surbiton said:

    MonikerDiCanio said:

    surbiton said:

    surbiton said:

    NickPalmer said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    DavidL said:

    Just watched Denis Healey, the best PM we never had.

    They don't make them like that anymore and Labour in particular is much the poorer for it.

    How would the media treat an ex-CP member aspiring to power nowadays?
    My personal experience for a long time has been that people treat youthful CP involvement as a curious past eccentricity, like saying you used to be a Zoroastrian or a Monopoly addict. It's at least 20 years since I met anyone who recoiled in horror.
    There is a serious note here. The CP were the only sizable organisation opposed to the Nazis. The rest were appeasing in one form or another.

    The documentary didn't mention him joining the Republicans in Spain against Franco. He was not an idealist only. He actually practised what he preached. He was a Socialist indeed but no pacifist !

    I am not sure why many expected him to join the SDP. He had Labour blood running through his veins.

    I intend to re-read the "The Time of My Life" - quite easily the best autobiography I have read.
    Healey was a Communist throughout the Soviet-Nazi Pact. What do you make of that?
    Not quite. He did resign from the CP on the fall of France. He mentions in "The Time of My Life" that he did regret his late resignation which he put it down to "inertia and indifference than from conviction"

    I don't think anybody at that time thought that the pact made Germany and the USSR friends. It was seen as buying time for the Soviets. And it did work. Since December 1941, the Germans were on the back foot, long before Johnny Come Lately arrived with the chewing gums !
    You need to read some of journals of that period. Comitern made it very clear that Germany was now an ally of Communism to the their members. It wasn't presented as a marriage of convenience.

    My grandfather was attacked by hard left organisers of wild cat strikes in the Glasgow dockyards during the Pact period - physically. They thought he was a ring leader among those who insisted that only strike they would support was an official union strike, during the war. They wanted to disrupt the capitalist war against "their" ally.
    Is that why hundreds of thousands of working class people thronged our various stadia in 1946 to watch a friendly Soviet football team ? It was their way of thanking the Russians. I also knew a few people who lived through that period. Their view of Russia is different. The Russians broke the Nazi back !
  • MattWMattW Posts: 29,805
    HYUFD said:

    Good speech from Cameron today, almost Blairlike.

    Sol Campbell meanwhile has moved on from mayoral ambitions to try and become a Tory Peer saying "I want to be a Lord. I'm not sure what of, or the title , but the next goal is to be a peer"
    http://www.westhamonline.net/forum_flat.php?8124246||mc=o||

    I read that as The Lord.

    Another JC in the mix.

    Time for bed.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 10,026
    fpt in response to Nick Palmer:

    Isn't this a bit of a problem? You're basically admitting that your values are those of the hard left. IMO it's not enough for Labour to say that such ideas don't work. Most of the public believe they are wrong in principle - that people should be rewarded proportionate to their contribution. It also shows a dismaying lack of interest in freedom.

    I do wonder if Labour wiping out the liberals was the worst thing that could have happened to this country and we'd have been better off with bleeding heart liberals as the main opposition to the dominant Tories of the last century. At least in the US they are dominant within the democrats.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    FPT
    FrankBooth said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    How utterly absurd it is to hear people whining pathetically that Corbyn's own words are being used against him. Not words Corbyn never used, but his own actual words.

    While at the same time there's been truly nasty people screaming, throwing eggs at, spitting at etc people just for supporting the government. I've been screamed at repeatedly the last few days. Today a woman came up to me and screamed in my face "get out of my city you're not welcome in this city". Which is funny because I live locally and am in Manchester all the time

    Has this vile behaviour been condemned by the people now at the top of Labour who've encouraged it for years? No, but someone else quoted words someone else chose to use? Oh how horrific.

    Except David Cameron is the prime minister and the lady who screamed at you is not. Not only did he deliberately tried to mislead people about Corbyn's views, he did it whilst maxing out on his phoney heart on sleeve sincerity.
    He didn't mislead anyone. Jeremy Corbyn actually said that it was a tragedy.

    You can try and argue the nuance all you please, Corbyn hasn't been doing so all these years. But don't try and pretend anyone other than Corbyn is misleading anyone. Corbyn is a vile man who said all this and just because you find it vile that Corbyn said it does not make it vile for Cameron to point out that Corbyn said it.

    Maybe if Labour had ejected Corbyn like they had Galloway; maybe if they had not nominated him for the leadership; maybe if they hadn't elected him then this wouldn't be an issue. But you're in denial if you think that the Labour Party can elect a security-threatening, terrorist-sympathising, Britain-hating individual without the PM calling them out on it.

    The only nastiness on display has been from the baying mob of TUC and Corbyn organised fanatics outside the gates. Not calling Corbyn out on what he actually said!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 130,258
    Tim_B said:

    HYUFD said:

    Cameron ranked as second most successful Tory leader of the past 100 years in electoral terms in new chart. Thatcher first, Baldwin third

    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2015/10/cameron-the-second-best-tory-leader-of-the-past-century.html

    I know this is all based on some few measurable criteria, but Baldwin third, and both he and Bonar Law above Churchill, the greatest briton of all time?

    I know according to the criteria used that's the case, but I don't think it reflects reality.

    To be fair the article does allude to that a bit.
    Indeed, it is entirely based on election wins and seats gained and rise in voteshare, on actual governance and leadership Churchill would clearly be top
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 130,258
    surbiton said:

    HYUFD said:

    Cameron ranked as second most successful Tory leader of the past 100 years in electoral terms in new chart. Thatcher first, Baldwin third

    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2015/10/cameron-the-second-best-tory-leader-of-the-past-century.html

    Cameron won only one election if I recall and that just by 6 seats. Someone called Churchill is missing ? Macmillan ?
    It is entirely based on rise in seats and voteshare under their leadership and elections won
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 10,026
    Riverside is my neighbouring ward. Quite an interesting one. The south side (opposite the Millenium Stadium) is poor, largely working class with a few young professionals in recent years. The north side (opposite the cricket ground) is the most affluent part of inner Cardiff and full of BBC types.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 130,258
    MattW said:

    HYUFD said:

    Good speech from Cameron today, almost Blairlike.

    Sol Campbell meanwhile has moved on from mayoral ambitions to try and become a Tory Peer saying "I want to be a Lord. I'm not sure what of, or the title , but the next goal is to be a peer"
    http://www.westhamonline.net/forum_flat.php?8124246||mc=o||

    I read that as The Lord.

    Another JC in the mix.

    Time for bed.
    Well I would not be that surprised if he had that ambition too!
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    HYUFD said:

    Tim_B said:

    HYUFD said:

    Cameron ranked as second most successful Tory leader of the past 100 years in electoral terms in new chart. Thatcher first, Baldwin third

    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2015/10/cameron-the-second-best-tory-leader-of-the-past-century.html

    I know this is all based on some few measurable criteria, but Baldwin third, and both he and Bonar Law above Churchill, the greatest briton of all time?

    I know according to the criteria used that's the case, but I don't think it reflects reality.

    To be fair the article does allude to that a bit.
    Indeed, it is entirely based on election wins and seats gained and rise in voteshare, on actual governance and leadership Churchill would clearly be top
    Churchill was great during the years 40-43, but not so impressive during the rest of his time as PM, and of course in 1940 he was appointed rather than elected.

    I think Cameron will rank with Baldwin and MacMillan as a great one nation PM. A lot of his colleagues are far more dodgy.

  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    HYUFD said:

    EPG said:

    HYUFD said:

    Quinnipiac Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida

    As I highlighted on previous thread the "front-runner" Bush is on 4 per cent among Republicans in large (and swing) states Pennsylvania and Ohio.
    Yes, I think Bush is done, there was a reason his brother became the nominee in 2000 and won the Texas governorship in 1994 while he lost Florida. His son, George P, is a better prospect though
    Bush's problems are first, his name, and second he just never caught on, or to use the phrase, never got traction.

    He is a big fan of Common Core, which Republicans hate. He likes to cite his education policy in Florida, where it's failing and a committee has just been set up to evaluate whether to continue it. That makes it problematic for him.

    So he can't really talk about his key policy plank. Also he is quiet even compared to Ben Carson who has at last mastered the art of making attention getting statements without them being dumb or demonstrably wrong, whereas Bush tries to - to use his expression - crawl like a turtle towards the nomination. He reminds me a bit of IDS, 'the quiet man'.

    It's early days and there's a long way to go. He might recover. Doesn't seem likely.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 3,983
    Thanks to whoever posted Mr Cameron's speech on the previous thread, I've just listened to it.

    It's good that he seems to be up for serious attempts to tackle serious problems. It's an agenda I could get behind. However, his party are backing him at the moment, but things can change very quickly as we know. And then what?
  • Hertsmere_PubgoerHertsmere_Pubgoer Posts: 3,476
    Tim_B said:

    Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

    Tim_B said:

    Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Apparently, FIFA has an Ethics Committee.....

    It's next door to Hertfordshire.
    Oh, wait......
    You said Ethics
    THey have suspended Blatter for 90 days apparently
    Many thanks for your updates over the course of the investigation by the Feds.
    I incorrectly credited Tim T with it a number of threads ago.
    The posts you have made are very interesting reading.
    Thank you. That's very kind of you.

    Crediting TimT - you bastard!! :)
    Tbf TimT did correct me straight away.
    May I say my thanks as a Limey for all that the Feds have done over FIFA and show what a useless bunch of twats Europeans have been over this.

  • isamisam Posts: 42,614
    Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

    isam said:

    It seems Cam is the one person in history who can manage to be all things to all people

    By having such a ridiculous student left wing, that sees anyone that doesnt want the entire 3rd world imported to england as hitler, Cameron gets to be called a vicious right winger while actually behaving like a moderate lefty. The tory badge kissers just want their team in charge even if they are new labour, so accept whatever he says, while the opposition maintain his right wing credentials for him by being to the left of Ryan Giggs... The perfect storm

    I miss the like button.
    I thank yow
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @JakeReesMogg: I see that Mr Corbyn is "refusing to meet the Queen". One can only assume that a weight has lifted from Her Majesty's shoulders.
  • isamisam Posts: 42,614
    Ah Brick Lane... A little piece of Bangladesh in East London. Such vibrancy and diversity

    https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/651879729838977024
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 130,258
    foxinsoxuk said:

    HYUFD said:

    Tim_B said:

    HYUFD said:

    Cameron ranked as second most successful Tory leader of the past 100 years in electoral terms in new chart. Thatcher first, Baldwin third

    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2015/10/cameron-the-second-best-tory-leader-of-the-past-century.html

    I know this is all based on some few measurable criteria, but Baldwin third, and both he and Bonar Law above Churchill, the greatest briton of all time?

    I know according to the criteria used that's the case, but I don't think it reflects reality.

    To be fair the article does allude to that a bit.
    Indeed, it is entirely based on election wins and seats gained and rise in voteshare, on actual governance and leadership Churchill would clearly be top
    Churchill was great during the years 40-43, but not so impressive during the rest of his time as PM, and of course in 1940 he was appointed rather than elected.

    I think Cameron will rank with Baldwin and MacMillan as a great one nation PM. A lot of his colleagues are far more dodgy.

    Yes, but had we not had Churchill we may well have been under Nazi rule by the fifties, rendering everything else redundant. (Churchill did win in 1951 too)
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    isam said:

    Ah Brick Lane... A little piece of Bangladesh in East London. Such vibrancy and diversity

    https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/651879729838977024

    That Nadiya is pretty good though, she can ice my buns anyday!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 130,258
    edited October 2015
    Tim_B said:

    HYUFD said:

    EPG said:

    HYUFD said:

    Quinnipiac Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida

    As I highlighted on previous thread the "front-runner" Bush is on 4 per cent among Republicans in large (and swing) states Pennsylvania and Ohio.
    Yes, I think Bush is done, there was a reason his brother became the nominee in 2000 and won the Texas governorship in 1994 while he lost Florida. His son, George P, is a better prospect though
    Bush's problems are first, his name, and second he just never caught on, or to use the phrase, never got traction.

    He is a big fan of Common Core, which Republicans hate. He likes to cite his education policy in Florida, where it's failing and a committee has just been set up to evaluate whether to continue it. That makes it problematic for him.

    So he can't really talk about his key policy plank. Also he is quiet even compared to Ben Carson who has at last mastered the art of making attention getting statements without them being dumb or demonstrably wrong, whereas Bush tries to - to use his expression - crawl like a turtle towards the nomination. He reminds me a bit of IDS, 'the quiet man'.

    It's early days and there's a long way to go. He might recover. Doesn't seem likely.
    Indeed, to me he has neither the gravitas of his father or the charisma of his brother and his pro immigration views don't help with the base in their present mood
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    HYUFD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    HYUFD said:

    Tim_B said:

    HYUFD said:

    Cameron ranked as second most successful Tory leader of the past 100 years in electoral terms in new chart. Thatcher first, Baldwin third

    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2015/10/cameron-the-second-best-tory-leader-of-the-past-century.html

    I know this is all based on some few measurable criteria, but Baldwin third, and both he and Bonar Law above Churchill, the greatest briton of all time?

    I know according to the criteria used that's the case, but I don't think it reflects reality.

    To be fair the article does allude to that a bit.
    Indeed, it is entirely based on election wins and seats gained and rise in voteshare, on actual governance and leadership Churchill would clearly be top
    Churchill was great during the years 40-43, but not so impressive during the rest of his time as PM, and of course in 1940 he was appointed rather than elected.

    I think Cameron will rank with Baldwin and MacMillan as a great one nation PM. A lot of his colleagues are far more dodgy.

    Yes, but had we not had Churchill we may well have been under Nazi rule by the fifties, rendering everything else redundant. (Churchill did win in 1951 too)
    Of course. Though in 51 he barely won, and lost the popular vote as I recall.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

    Tim_B said:

    Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Apparently, FIFA has an Ethics Committee.....

    It's next door to Hertfordshire.
    Oh, wait......
    You said Ethics
    THey have suspended Blatter for 90 days apparently
    Many thanks for your updates over the course of the investigation by the Feds.
    I incorrectly credited Tim T with it a number of threads ago.
    The posts you have made are very interesting reading.
    Be careful what you wish for - things are really rolling and the FBI is in full cry now.....

    The FBI investigation into Clinton's email has now extended to a second tech company.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/10/07/fbi-probe-hillary-clinton-emails-expands-to-second-tech-company/

    Employees at the company that maintained Hillary Clinton's private email server expressed concern among themselves about the way the former secretary of state's team directed them to manage data backups after the FBI started looking into the arrangements, according to emails obtained by a senator.

    http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/07/politics/hillary-clinton-emails-platte-river-networks/

    The FBI has seized four State Department computer servers as part of its probe into how classified information was compromised on former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email system, according to people familiar with the investigation.

    http://freebeacon.com/politics/fbi-seizes-four-state-department-servers-in-clinton-email-probe/

    A Connecticut company, which backed up Hillary Clinton‘s emails at the request of a Colorado firm, apparently surprised her aides by storing the emails on a “cloud” storage system designed to optimize data recovery.

    The firm, Datto Inc., said Wednesday that it turned over the contents of its storage to the FBI on Tuesday.

    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article37968711.html

  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,786
    FrankBooth - well, I wanted to reconcile the equality with freedom - that was the "Euro" part of it. It's 45 years ago now and a very different world.

    Flightpath: Moniker politely asked a question, so I replied. No monkeys involved.
  • Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,307
    Tim_B said:

    HYUFD said:

    EPG said:

    HYUFD said:

    Quinnipiac Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida

    As I highlighted on previous thread the "front-runner" Bush is on 4 per cent among Republicans in large (and swing) states Pennsylvania and Ohio.
    Yes, I think Bush is done, there was a reason his brother became the nominee in 2000 and won the Texas governorship in 1994 while he lost Florida. His son, George P, is a better prospect though
    Bush's problems are first, his name, and second he just never caught on, or to use the phrase, never got traction.

    He is a big fan of Common Core, which Republicans hate. He likes to cite his education policy in Florida, where it's failing and a committee has just been set up to evaluate whether to continue it. That makes it problematic for him.

    So he can't really talk about his key policy plank. Also he is quiet even compared to Ben Carson who has at last mastered the art of making attention getting statements without them being dumb or demonstrably wrong, whereas Bush tries to - to use his expression - crawl like a turtle towards the nomination. He reminds me a bit of IDS, 'the quiet man'.

    It's early days and there's a long way to go. He might recover. Doesn't seem likely.
    Question is, if not Jeb and if not Donald, is one of the dead men going to re-emerge from currently single figure ratings?
  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    NickPalmer said:

    FrankBooth - well, I wanted to reconcile the equality with freedom - that was the "Euro" part of it. It's 45 years ago now and a very different world.

    Flightpath: Moniker politely asked a question, so I replied. No monkeys involved.

    Thanks for your reply. Your unfailing politeness and intelligence is enviable.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 130,258
    foxinsoxuk said:

    HYUFD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    HYUFD said:

    Tim_B said:

    HYUFD said:

    Cameron ranked as second most successful Tory leader of the past 100 years in electoral terms in new chart. Thatcher first, Baldwin third

    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2015/10/cameron-the-second-best-tory-leader-of-the-past-century.html

    I know this is all based on some few measurable criteria, but Baldwin third, and both he and Bonar Law above Churchill, the greatest briton of all time?

    I know according to the criteria used that's the case, but I don't think it reflects reality.

    To be fair the article does allude to that a bit.
    Indeed, it is entirely based on election wins and seats gained and rise in voteshare, on actual governance and leadership Churchill would clearly be top
    Churchill was great during the years 40-43, but not so impressive during the rest of his time as PM, and of course in 1940 he was appointed rather than elected.

    I think Cameron will rank with Baldwin and MacMillan as a great one nation PM. A lot of his colleagues are far more dodgy.

    Yes, but had we not had Churchill we may well have been under Nazi rule by the fifties, rendering everything else redundant. (Churchill did win in 1951 too)
    Of course. Though in 51 he barely won, and lost the popular vote as I recall.
    True, but the National Liberals were his allies and their total plus the Liberal total and Tory total surpassed Labour's
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    HYUFD said:

    Sandpit said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sol Campbell meanwhile has moved on from mayoral ambitions to try and become a Tory Peer saying "I want to be a Lord. I'm not sure what of, or the title , but the next goal is to be a peer"
    http://www.westhamonline.net/forum_flat.php?8124246||mc=o||

    That really shouldn't be one's goal in life. If he wants to be a politician he should earn some political respect first by standing for elected office somewhere.
    Fair point, mind you how many peers now have stood for elected office? Probably a minority
    How many have touted for a peerage without any semblance of a contribution to make, an exploitable talent to use or hint of intelligence? The man's a prick and as such is qualified only for a job in JC's shadow cabinet.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,884
    flightpath01 said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:

    @TelePolitics: Exclusive: Jeremy Corbyn snubs the Queen, saying he is too busy to be sworn in to the Privy Council http://t.co/EOmpOPeorg

    Bollocks. Why should he be conferred the privileges of membership if he won't be sworn in?

    No-one is 'too busy' to meet Her Majesty, unless they deliberately don't want to meet her. Corbyn's dissembling on this, like the national anthem signing, is disingenuous.
    No need to make a fuss about Corbyn's rudeness.

    But Her Majesty might find that she is too busy to agree to an Order in Council to appoint the unpleasant little man as a Privy Counsellor. It's not as though any counsel he could provide would be of any use to anyone.
    But as Sandpit suggests... Corbyn is lying through his teeth. He is a twat of the highest order.
    Jeremy Corbyn does indeed bring to mind the John Cooper-Clarke poem, currently being used in part as a trail for the Beeb's upcoming Poetry weekend, which has the glorious passage:


    Like a death at a birthday party,
    you ruin all the fun.
    Like a sucked and spat out Smartie,
    you’re no use to anyone.


    and which ends


    Your dirty name gets passed about when something goes amiss.
    Your attitudes are platitudes,
    just make me wanna piss.

    What kind of creature bore you?
    Was it some kind of bat?
    They can’t find a good word for you,
    but I can...

    TWAT.
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:

    @TelePolitics: Exclusive: Jeremy Corbyn snubs the Queen, saying he is too busy to be sworn in to the Privy Council http://t.co/EOmpOPeorg

    Bollocks. Why should he be conferred the privileges of membership if he won't be sworn in?

    No-one is 'too busy' to meet Her Majesty, unless they deliberately don't want to meet her. Corbyn's dissembling on this, like the national anthem signing, is disingenuous.
    KM's swivelling on this on "The Papers" was wondrous to behold. Pretending that dissing the nation and the Queen meant nothing to Joe Public. As you will judge I am no monarchist but I respect the Queen (if not many in her family) and am aware that my republican tendency is a minority taste.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 32,598
    SeanT said:

    fpt for surbiton

    QED. It was perhaps understandable to be communist in the 1930s, confronted with Hitler and Fascism (understandable though still hugely silly and misguided, I'd say).

    But how could you be a communist - like so many leading and mediocre Labourites, from Corbyn down - AFTER Stalin's purges, AFTER the Cultural Revolution, AFTER the Khmer Rouge and the Hungarian Represssion and the Gulags and the Terror?

    How could you possibly do that, without being, to put it politely, a total c*nt?

    Proves my point. Left wing politics isn't logical, it's visceral. You don't become left wing because you're convinced by the facts, you are tribally left wing and you find the facts to fit.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 32,598
    Tim_B said:

    HYUFD said:

    EPG said:

    HYUFD said:

    Quinnipiac Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida

    As I highlighted on previous thread the "front-runner" Bush is on 4 per cent among Republicans in large (and swing) states Pennsylvania and Ohio.
    Yes, I think Bush is done, there was a reason his brother became the nominee in 2000 and won the Texas governorship in 1994 while he lost Florida. His son, George P, is a better prospect though
    Bush's problems are first, his name, and second he just never caught on, or to use the phrase, never got traction.

    He is a big fan of Common Core, which Republicans hate. He likes to cite his education policy in Florida, where it's failing and a committee has just been set up to evaluate whether to continue it. That makes it problematic for him.

    So he can't really talk about his key policy plank. Also he is quiet even compared to Ben Carson who has at last mastered the art of making attention getting statements without them being dumb or demonstrably wrong, whereas Bush tries to - to use his expression - crawl like a turtle towards the nomination. He reminds me a bit of IDS, 'the quiet man'.

    It's early days and there's a long way to go. He might recover. Doesn't seem likely.
    Bit of a stretch to say his name's a problem. If he wasn't a Bush he wouldn't even be a candidate.
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:

    @TelePolitics: Exclusive: Jeremy Corbyn snubs the Queen, saying he is too busy to be sworn in to the Privy Council http://t.co/EOmpOPeorg

    Bollocks. Why should he be conferred the privileges of membership if he won't be sworn in?

    No-one is 'too busy' to meet Her Majesty, unless they deliberately don't want to meet her. Corbyn's dissembling on this, like the national anthem signing, is disingenuous.
    No need to make a fuss about Corbyn's rudeness.

    But Her Majesty might find that she is too busy to agree to an Order in Council to appoint the unpleasant little man as a Privy Counsellor. It's not as though any counsel he could provide would be of any use to anyone.
    Unless, nod to Boris, she was thinking of buying Phil a vest for Christmas.
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    flightpath01 said:

    watford30 said:

    Scott_P said:

    @TelePolitics: Exclusive: Jeremy Corbyn snubs the Queen, saying he is too busy to be sworn in to the Privy Council http://t.co/EOmpOPeorg

    Odious little man. Were we at war with another nation, he would be leading the quislings in their treachery.

    If he can't be bothered to be sworn in, then he shouldn't be a member of the Privy Council. Saves us the bother of worrying as to which of his undesirable friends he's likely to be leaking information.
    To polite. He is a twat.
    of the first order
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    NickPalmer said:

    FPT

    MonikerDiCanio said:


    What event led you to abandon the Communist Party?

    I was a Eurocommunist in my teens - the idea being to get the ideals without the totalitarianism (which is why SeanT ranting about Pol Pot etc. isn't too relevant). "From each according to ability, to each according to need" seemed to me exactly how one should try to live (I haven't changed that belief), and as far as possible I wanted to help organise society on that basis.

    It seemed possible for a while, and then it became evident that it wasn't going to work: too much bleak history in Eastern Europe casting its shadow. I'm not sure there was a specific event, merely that I grew up, looked around, and decided social democracy was a more viable ambition. I joined Labour on my 21st birthday.

    Incidentally, I don't think Corbyn was ever a Communist. Bit of a right-winger really. :-)
    most people mature as they get older. You seem to be struggling to make progress
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 5,208
    HYUFD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    HYUFD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    HYUFD said:

    Tim_B said:

    HYUFD said:

    Cameron ranked as second most successful Tory leader of the past 100 years in electoral terms in new chart. Thatcher first, Baldwin third

    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2015/10/cameron-the-second-best-tory-leader-of-the-past-century.html

    I know this is all based on some few measurable criteria, but Baldwin third, and both he and Bonar Law above Churchill, the greatest briton of all time?

    I know according to the criteria used that's the case, but I don't think it reflects reality.

    To be fair the article does allude to that a bit.
    Indeed, it is entirely based on election wins and seats gained and rise in voteshare, on actual governance and leadership Churchill would clearly be top
    Churchill was great during the years 40-43, but not so impressive during the rest of his time as PM, and of course in 1940 he was appointed rather than elected.

    I think Cameron will rank with Baldwin and MacMillan as a great one nation PM. A lot of his colleagues are far more dodgy.

    Yes, but had we not had Churchill we may well have been under Nazi rule by the fifties, rendering everything else redundant. (Churchill did win in 1951 too)
    Of course. Though in 51 he barely won, and lost the popular vote as I recall.
    True, but the National Liberals were his allies and their total plus the Liberal total and Tory total surpassed Labour's
    And there were a few Unionists elected unopposed in NI. If there had been contests, there would have big Unionist majorities in those seats.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    Y0kel said:

    Tim_B said:

    HYUFD said:

    EPG said:

    HYUFD said:

    Quinnipiac Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida

    As I highlighted on previous thread the "front-runner" Bush is on 4 per cent among Republicans in large (and swing) states Pennsylvania and Ohio.
    Yes, I think Bush is done, there was a reason his brother became the nominee in 2000 and won the Texas governorship in 1994 while he lost Florida. His son, George P, is a better prospect though
    Bush's problems are first, his name, and second he just never caught on, or to use the phrase, never got traction.

    He is a big fan of Common Core, which Republicans hate. He likes to cite his education policy in Florida, where it's failing and a committee has just been set up to evaluate whether to continue it. That makes it problematic for him.

    So he can't really talk about his key policy plank. Also he is quiet even compared to Ben Carson who has at last mastered the art of making attention getting statements without them being dumb or demonstrably wrong, whereas Bush tries to - to use his expression - crawl like a turtle towards the nomination. He reminds me a bit of IDS, 'the quiet man'.

    It's early days and there's a long way to go. He might recover. Doesn't seem likely.
    Question is, if not Jeb and if not Donald, is one of the dead men going to re-emerge from currently single figure ratings?
    I like Carly - her risk is her corporate career details and can she explain the layoffs etc. She won both debates. She takes away Clinton's main item - the phoney 'war on women'.

    Like everyone else I thought Trump was bound to implode or crash and burn, but it hasn't happened. His weakness is policy and as a debater. When policy time comes that's when he'll maybe start to stumble. Also his honesty numbers are bad.

    Carson is the wild card here - a female black professor at Penn called him a coon on TV recently. So he seems to be stirring things up. His comments - politically incorrect but accurate - on the collapse of the black nuclear family and black on black crime have got much attention.

    Poring through current polls doesn't help - this is a serendipitous and pseudo-random process and utterly impossible to predict at present - we're all just guessing.

    The S.E.C. Primary will cause some fall out.

    On the Democratic side, there are 3 in the Dem debate -Clinton, O'Malley and Sanders. PLUS Biden if he announces even the day of the debate. It will be moderated by Rachel Maddow, a way leftie from execrable MsNBC (CNN at least tries to be a good news network). Remember how tough the Fox Republican debate questioning was? This won't be like that. Clinton will do just fine.
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    antifrank said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:

    @TelePolitics: Exclusive: Jeremy Corbyn snubs the Queen, saying he is too busy to be sworn in to the Privy Council http://t.co/EOmpOPeorg

    Bollocks. Why should he be conferred the privileges of membership if he won't be sworn in?

    No-one is 'too busy' to meet Her Majesty, unless they deliberately don't want to meet her. Corbyn's dissembling on this, like the national anthem signing, is disingenuous.
    No need to make a fuss about Corbyn's rudeness.

    But Her Majesty might find that she is too busy to agree to an Order in Council to appoint the unpleasant little man as a Privy Counsellor. It's not as though any counsel he could provide would be of any use to anyone.
    He should be sworn in without fuss, monarch or kneeling now. Of all the rows about Jeremy Corbyn, this is among the most trivial.
    You make your own argument against your proposition by ranking JC's stupidities
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    Also a sign Hillary is worried - Bill is turning up on late night talk shows
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    surbiton said:

    NickPalmer said:

    FPT

    MonikerDiCanio said:


    What event led you to abandon the Communist Party?

    I was a Eurocommunist in my teens - the idea being to get the ideals without the totalitarianism (which is why SeanT ranting about Pol Pot etc. isn't too relevant). "From each according to ability, to each according to need" seemed to me exactly how one should try to live (I haven't changed that belief), and as far as possible I wanted to help organise society on that basis.

    It seemed possible for a while, and then it became evident that it wasn't going to work: too much bleak history in Eastern Europe casting its shadow. I'm not sure there was a specific event, merely that I grew up, looked around, and decided social democracy was a more viable ambition. I joined Labour on my 21st birthday.

    Incidentally, I don't think Corbyn was ever a Communist. Bit of a right-winger really. :-)
    Corbyn was never a Communist. To be a communist, one needs to be disciplined and accept party policy even if he/she is uncomfortable about it.

    Corbyn is more of an issues person, well meant though but without any thorough intellectual position. There isn't a major intellect on the left of the party today.
    Major intellect? Tell it straight - they're all stupid! I think that's a bit extreme; "most" maybe, "a significant number" certainly.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 32,598
    NickPalmer said:

    FPT

    MonikerDiCanio said:


    What event led you to abandon the Communist Party?

    I was a Eurocommunist in my teens - the idea being to get the ideals without the totalitarianism (which is why SeanT ranting about Pol Pot etc. isn't too relevant). "From each according to ability, to each according to need" seemed to me exactly how one should try to live (I haven't changed that belief), and as far as possible I wanted to help organise society on that basis.

    It seemed possible for a while, and then it became evident that it wasn't going to work: too much bleak history in Eastern Europe casting its shadow. I'm not sure there was a specific event, merely that I grew up, looked around, and decided social democracy was a more viable ambition. I joined Labour on my 21st birthday.

    Incidentally, I don't think Corbyn was ever a Communist. Bit of a right-winger really. :-)
    In the words of the incomparable Tim Curry, 'Communism was just a red herring'
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JsvFwOLWyC8

    There's only one real everlasting political conflict - the populace vs. those who would wield and abuse power over them. That power in the hands of the few can manifest itself in kings, corporations, banks, billionaires, or states - the latter being one of the most deadly and pernicious.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    Jay Leno appears on the Tonight Show -

    a lot of people think the Republican field will narrow to Jeb and Trump - a race between the tortoise and the bad hair

    If Bernie Sanders wins, he'll be the first socialist elected president since 2008.
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    MattW said:

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:

    @TelePolitics: Exclusive: Jeremy Corbyn snubs the Queen, saying he is too busy to be sworn in to the Privy Council http://t.co/EOmpOPeorg

    Bollocks. Why should he be conferred the privileges of membership if he won't be sworn in?

    No-one is 'too busy' to meet Her Majesty, unless they deliberately don't want to meet her. Corbyn's dissembling on this, like the national anthem signing, is disingenuous.
    He does have a preternatural ability to make exactly the wrong decisions, unless there is some objective I have not heard of yet.

    Is Wile E Corbynote keeping time free to launch a hostile takeover of the Woodcraft Folk?
    JC doesn't do "hostile"
Sign In or Register to comment.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2025