With the so called intelligentsia of the Labour party preparing to accept Corbyn and so committing sepuku of their party, the thinking rank and file will have nowhere to go except UKIP.
Bringing back clause 4 shows that Corbyn wants a defenceless Britain with open borders to it's many enemies, who state openly that they want to destroy Britain and democracy from within. But then the new fuhrer, Corbyn, has already stated that he is best of friends with Hisbolah (Iran), and Hamas (Iran and ISIS): by his friends shall he be known.
You'll forgive me if I don't take the opinion of a man who was genuinely predecting in excess of 30 UKIP MP's at the last election too seriously.
Not my opinion, me old mate, but the opinion and belief of your new fuhrer, Corbyn.
Good point, I'm renowned for my support of Corbyn. P.S. Do you have any concept of how ridiculous your use of "fuhrer" makes you look?
On topic, I am with SO on this. I cannot get past Corbyn's support for those who use violence, glory in it, who explicitly want to overthrow democracy and replace it by a theocracy, who loathe liberal values.
These were not the values of Old Labour either.
If the Labour Party choose him as leader, then they are sending the clearest possible signal that they are not a serious political party, they are not even like Syriza but more like Golden Dawn, they are no longer liberal, they are no longer progressive - in the true meanings of those words. If the Deputy Leader candidates serve under him, then they associate themselves with those views. They ought to have more self-respect and more respect for those voters who would like to have a sensible social democratic alternative in this country.
Edit: Old Labour for all its faults would not have supported terrorists either.
This toadying up to Islam both in domestic and foreign policy has done Labour enormous harm. It has allowed the Conservatives to hoover up the jewish, sikh and hindu vote.
All three groups are hyper aware of Islam and what it means at home and abroad. They see a labour party that not only refuses to condemn, but actively sucks up to it.
Many of these groups would be characterised as socially deeply conservative, and economically most certainly net contributors. But the Conservative Party has always had difficulty attracting them.
Once that taboo has been broken, it is not going to be easy to for Labour to get them back, they are now not voting as immigrants, but as an integrated socially and economically successful middle class in their own interests.
With the so called intelligentsia of the Labour party preparing to accept Corbyn and so committing sepuku of their party, the thinking rank and file will have nowhere to go except UKIP.
Bringing back clause 4 shows that Corbyn wants a defenceless Britain with open borders to it's many enemies, who state openly that they want to destroy Britain and democracy from within. But then the new fuhrer, Corbyn, has already stated that he is best of friends with Hisbolah (Iran), and Hamas (Iran and ISIS): by his friends shall he be known.
Ridiculous. Iran and ISIS are mortal enemies of each other.
"So if Cameron sent his son to Eton and The Mirror reported on and criticized that decision, you'd be outraged."
It's rather worse than that. If a newspaper reported that Cameron had robbed a charity to send his child to Eton (pixilated photo of young Cameron) plus photos of well heeled pupils in their lavish surroundings then yes I'd be equally outraged
The Mail is not suggesting that the chauffeur robbed the charity. It says that the child got a bursary from the school but then questions why the charity is reported to have made payments to the school of thousands of pounds, which the founder is unable to answer. It reports someone describing the child as being sensible and well adjusted which must cause her much distress, obviously.
There are legitimate questions to be asked about the charity's use of its money: whether that money was being used to further its charitable objectives - the only proper use - or whether it was being used to provide benefits, very valuable ones, for its staff. Incidentally, I hope CB paid tax on her valuable staff perks, such as a chauffeur.
On topic, I am with SO on this. I cannot get past Corbyn's support for those who use violence, glory in it, who explicitly want to overthrow democracy and replace it by a theocracy, who loathe liberal values.
These were not the values of Old Labour either.
If the Labour Party choose him as leader, then they are sending the clearest possible signal that they are not a serious political party, they are not even like Syriza but more like Golden Dawn, they are no longer liberal, they are no longer progressive - in the true meanings of those words. If the Deputy Leader candidates serve under him, then they associate themselves with those views. They ought to have more self-respect and more respect for those voters who would like to have a sensible social democratic alternative in this country.
Edit: Old Labour for all its faults would not have supported terrorists either.
With the so called intelligentsia of the Labour party preparing to accept Corbyn and so committing sepuku of their party, the thinking rank and file will have nowhere to go except UKIP.
Bringing back clause 4 shows that Corbyn wants a defenceless Britain with open borders to it's many enemies, who state openly that they want to destroy Britain and democracy from within. But then the new fuhrer, Corbyn, has already stated that he is best of friends with Hisbolah (Iran), and Hamas (Iran and ISIS): by his friends shall he be known.
Ridiculous. Iran and ISIS are mortal enemies of each other.
Maybe, but Hamas excepts help from both sources, and that's not so ridiculous.
With the so called intelligentsia of the Labour party preparing to accept Corbyn and so committing sepuku of their party, the thinking rank and file will have nowhere to go except UKIP.
Bringing back clause 4 shows that Corbyn wants a defenceless Britain with open borders to it's many enemies, who state openly that they want to destroy Britain and democracy from within. But then the new fuhrer, Corbyn, has already stated that he is best of friends with Hisbolah (Iran), and Hamas (Iran and ISIS): by his friends shall he be known.
Ridiculous. Iran and ISIS are mortal enemies of each other.
The narcissism of small differences. Both illiberal, both anti-democratic, both anti-Western, both sponsors of terrorism.
It would be funny if Suzanne Evans took over from Farage and Jezza became Labour leader with Watson as deputy. I suspect Labour would still accuse Ukip of misogyny without recognising the hypocrisy.
Especially as Yvette has been complaining about the Tories trying to even up the ratio of peers in the HoL.
Do they not notice the hypocrisy or do they think we won't? I find it insulting.
Come on, Labour, I haven't lost faith in you completely. You can still elect Liz, she has the requisite number of ovaries.
the piggies need to get back to the trough, how could anybody ever vote for the odious unprincipled , money grubbing Lib Dems. They are beneath contempt.
Two things. Firstly, knighthoods do not, as far as I'm aware, come with salaries. Secondly, anyone can be offered a knighthood: that is totally different from *accepting* a knighthood.
Still pathetic , a pair of losers getting baubles.
A grand tradition for the defeated, sacked or forcibly retired. Alexander was a very loyal member of the coalition, so not surprised he'd be offered one, but I guess Cable gets one as reward for being a former Cabinet Minister? Davey and the rest will feel left out.
kle4, it is still pathetic, baubles for crawlers, Alexander could not have got further up George's yahoo if he had been jet propelled.
I have the feeling corbyn is getting more and more confident in his position. Seems hes tapped into the energetic activist left, and theres enough of them to overwhelm the demoralised mainstream labour membership.
Mr. Slackbladder, not necessarily. Still possible Burnham/Cooper will win. Still a problem then, though, as there'll be, as you say, a large, energetic activist left with which to contend.
Mr. Slackbladder, not necessarily. Still possible Burnham/Cooper will win. Still a problem then, though, as there'll be, as you say, a large, energetic activist left with which to contend.
The Tories managed to make use of its activist right as outriders on the web in places like ConHome and Guido.
"Mr. Roger, because possession of ovaries is as impressive as possession of testicles, and just as relevant."
To a gruff Yorkshireman I'd imagine that breasts and ovaries were the antithesis of a selling point unique or otherwise (does Headingly allow women into the pavillion ye?t)
However to most voters who see gender as more than just testicles and ovaries a female political leader against a sea of grey suits is not just a USP but a massive SP.
''I'm taking this to mean the Deputy Leader candidates think Corbyn's going to win '' --- more fool them if they want to 'serve'. The lure of the greasy pole for this bunch of nobodies is clearly proving too strong.
The leadership candidates would be mad to accept any office.
The Establishment will know there is no chance of any Corbyn victory in 2020. However there will be some concerns that there will now be only one dominant party of government continuing the 1979 economic consensus. They need every now and again a change of government, to hoodwink the voters that their once every 5 year mark , makes any difference.
There is no doubt now that there would be more differences between a Corbyn led Labour Party and New Labour than there ever were between New Labour and a John Major/David Cameron led Tory Party. On the reintroduction of clause 4, a pacifist foreign policy, higher taxes for the rich, more spending, renationalisations and a pro immigrant line Corbyn would move Labour closer to the platform of the Greens and TUSC and may even outflank the SNP on the left, the Tories would be the centrist party by default with UKIP free to take up much of the right and eat further into the white working class.
On topic, I am with SO on this. I cannot get past Corbyn's support for those who use violence, glory in it, who explicitly want to overthrow democracy and replace it by a theocracy, who loathe liberal values.
These were not the values of Old Labour either.
If the Labour Party choose him as leader, then they are sending the clearest possible signal that they are not a serious political party, they are not even like Syriza but more like Golden Dawn, they are no longer liberal, they are no longer progressive - in the true meanings of those words. If the Deputy Leader candidates serve under him, then they associate themselves with those views. They ought to have more self-respect and more respect for those voters who would like to have a sensible social democratic alternative in this country.
Edit: Old Labour for all its faults would not have supported terrorists either.
This toadying up to Islam both in domestic and foreign policy has done Labour enormous harm. It has allowed the Conservatives to hoover up the jewish, sikh and hindu vote.
All three groups are hyper aware of Islam and what it means at home and abroad. They see a labour party that not only refuses to condemn, but actively sucks up to it.
Many of these groups would be characterised as socially deeply conservative, and economically most certainly net contributors. But the Conservative Party has always had difficulty attracting them.
Once that taboo has been broken, it is not going to be easy to for Labour to get them back, they are now not voting as immigrants, but as an integrated socially and economically successful middle class in their own interests.
I think Labour have lost Jewish voters for good, and Ken Livingstone bears more responsibility for this than anybody.
They're not at that point with Hindu or Sikh voters. The Conservatives made inroads among both groups, but Labour still lead.
If the father did nothing wrong and the child did nothing wrong why name them? What would be wrong with saying that the charity is believed to have contributed to the school fees of the child of beelzibub's chauffeur's?
No names and certainly no pixilated photo. Try putting yourself into the position of the young girl.
Eagle is right. If Corbyn wins the most democratic leadership election the party has ever had, one where his candidacy brought in thousands of new members, they just have to make it work as best they can. It would be outrageous if they sabotaged him without giving him a fair shot. He will be the choice of the Labour Party and if they can't accept being part of his party they should join another one.
On topic, I am with SO on this. I cannot get past Corbyn's support for those who use violence, glory in it, who explicitly want to overthrow democracy and replace it by a theocracy, who loathe liberal values.
These were not the values of Old Labour either.
If the Labour Party choose him as leader, then they are sending the clearest possible signal that they are not a serious political party, they are not even like Syriza but more like Golden Dawn, they are no longer liberal, they are no longer progressive - in the true meanings of those words. If the Deputy Leader candidates serve under him, then they associate themselves with those views. They ought to have more self-respect and more respect for those voters who would like to have a sensible social democratic alternative in this country.
David Cameron pays tribute to the Saudis. The difference is not in the sphere of absolute morality, but geopolitical pragmatism.
With the so called intelligentsia of the Labour party preparing to accept Corbyn and so committing sepuku of their party, the thinking rank and file will have nowhere to go except UKIP.
Bringing back clause 4 shows that Corbyn wants a defenceless Britain with open borders to it's many enemies, who state openly that they want to destroy Britain and democracy from within. But then the new fuhrer, Corbyn, has already stated that he is best of friends with Hisbolah (Iran), and Hamas (Iran and ISIS): by his friends shall he be known.
Ridiculous. Iran and ISIS are mortal enemies of each other.
The narcissism of small differences. Both illiberal, both anti-democratic, both anti-Western, both sponsors of terrorism.
That seems like the lumping of Iraq and North Korea as the axis of evil. There are major differences between them, although both are anti-Western enough for Corbyn to consider them his friends.
If the father did nothing wrong and the child did nothing wrong why name them? What would be wrong with saying that the charity is believed to have contributed to the school fees of the child of beelzibub's chauffeur's?
No names and certainly no pixilated photo. Try putting yourself into the position of the young girl.
I agree with Roger . The Daily Mail is a pox on society. Its a disgusting rag that is a menace to true journalism.
The Establishment will know there is no chance of any Corbyn victory in 2020. However there will be some concerns that there will now be only one dominant party of government continuing the 1979 economic consensus. They need every now and again a change of government, to hoodwink the voters that their once every 5 year mark , makes any difference.
First you say there is no chance of a Corbyn victory, and then you say elections are an 'illusion' and make no difference anyway? In actual fact some elections, 1945, 1970 (in terms of the EEC), 1979 have all made dramatic changes in our national course
Mr. Slackbladder, not necessarily. Still possible Burnham/Cooper will win. Still a problem then, though, as there'll be, as you say, a large, energetic activist left with which to contend.
The Tories managed to make use of its activist right as outriders on the web in places like ConHome and Guido.
Mr. Slackbladder, not necessarily. Still possible Burnham/Cooper will win. Still a problem then, though, as there'll be, as you say, a large, energetic activist left with which to contend.
The Tories managed to make use of its activist right as outriders on the web in places like ConHome and Guido.
But the key is not to actually give the fringes of a political party, or those outside. In this election, they clearly do.
It would be like the tories allowing UKIP voters and supporters to swamp their internal elections. Youll end up with Bill Cash wanting to bring back hanging or something
Mr. City, could also present the SNP with the opportunity to be the 'real' opposition, or present themselves as such.
Miliband's intellectual self-confidence was not justified when it comes to changing the leadership election rules.
No, the party Corbyn poses a threat to is not the Tories, but the SNP. A Corbyn led Labour could win back swathes of seats in the Central belt the SNP gained in May
Mr. City, could also present the SNP with the opportunity to be the 'real' opposition, or present themselves as such.
Miliband's intellectual self-confidence was not justified when it comes to changing the leadership election rules.
I agree Morris In regard to Scotland, but how that helps any English opposition is a differing perspective. If partisan Conservatives could kill Labour by voting for Corbyn, they might rue the day eventually when the new opposition eventually emerges from the rubble. In that the opposition might not be parliamentary.
It would be funny if Suzanne Evans took over from Farage and Jezza became Labour leader with Watson as deputy. I suspect Labour would still accuse Ukip of misogyny without recognising the hypocrisy.
Especially as Yvette has been complaining about the Tories trying to even up the ratio of peers in the HoL.
Do they not notice the hypocrisy or do they think we won't? I find it insulting.
Come on, Labour, I haven't lost faith in you completely. You can still elect Liz, she has the requisite number of ovaries.
the piggies need to get back to the trough, how could anybody ever vote for the odious unprincipled , money grubbing Lib Dems. They are beneath contempt.
Two things. Firstly, knighthoods do not, as far as I'm aware, come with salaries. Secondly, anyone can be offered a knighthood: that is totally different from *accepting* a knighthood.
Still pathetic , a pair of losers getting baubles.
A grand tradition for the defeated, sacked or forcibly retired. Alexander was a very loyal member of the coalition, so not surprised he'd be offered one, but I guess Cable gets one as reward for being a former Cabinet Minister? Davey and the rest will feel left out.
kle4, it is still pathetic, baubles for crawlers, Alexander could not have got further up George's yahoo if he had been jet propelled.
Good morning Mr Turnip Head. Meantime you are oh so objective about Alex and Nichola.
Well quite. Parties ebb and flow - for whatever reason lots like Corbynism - old Lefties like himself and youngsters who haven't seen it fail horribly before.
Eagle is right. If Corbyn wins the most democratic leadership election the party has ever had, one where his candidacy brought in thousands of new members, they just have to make it work as best they can. It would be outrageous if they sabotaged him without giving him a fair shot. He will be the choice of the Labour Party and if they can't accept being part of his party they should join another one.
Corbyn's four city tour of Scotland this week could impact the result of the SLAB leadership contest. With Kezia and John McT set against Corbyn and Ken backing him, the scene is set for a lively last week of voting in Scotland. Ken is still sounding up beat:
Should Ken win this will be a humiliating result for the SLAB machine, the bookies and many of the political commentators.
A knock on impact of last week's council elections in Glasgow is a call for the Glasgow Council leader to step down - as ever SLAB is battling its main enemy - itself:
" Half of Matheson’s councillors even signed a demand for an extraordinary general meeting (EGM) to vote in a new leader, prompting Labour HQ to step in and suppress the rebellion. However Scottish Secretary Brian Roy is understood to have reassured the rebels last week that Matheson is on his way out. "
With the so called intelligentsia of the Labour party preparing to accept Corbyn and so committing sepuku of their party, the thinking rank and file will have nowhere to go except UKIP.
Bringing back clause 4 shows that Corbyn wants a defenceless Britain with open borders to it's many enemies, who state openly that they want to destroy Britain and democracy from within. But then the new fuhrer, Corbyn, has already stated that he is best of friends with Hisbolah (Iran), and Hamas (Iran and ISIS): by his friends shall he be known.
You'll forgive me if I don't take the opinion of a man who was genuinely predecting in excess of 30 UKIP MP's at the last election too seriously.
Not my opinion, me old mate, but the opinion and belief of your new fuhrer, Corbyn.
Good point, I'm renowned for my support of Corbyn. P.S. Do you have any concept of how ridiculous your use of "fuhrer" makes you look?
Ahah!! Saddened exposed as a firm member of the Arbeitvolk; poor fool.
Mr. Slackbladder, not necessarily. Still possible Burnham/Cooper will win. Still a problem then, though, as there'll be, as you say, a large, energetic activist left with which to contend.
The Tories managed to make use of its activist right as outriders on the web in places like ConHome and Guido.
But the key is not to actually give the fringes of a political party, or those outside. In this election, they clearly do.
It would be like the tories allowing UKIP voters and supporters to swamp their internal elections. Youll end up with Bill Cash wanting to bring back hanging or something
In 2001 one IDS backer in the Tory leadership race was expelled after it turned out he was Nick Griffin's father
If the Labour Party choose him as leader, then they are sending the clearest possible signal that they are not a serious political party, they are not even like Syriza but more like Golden Dawn, they are no longer liberal, they are no longer progressive - in the true meanings of those words.
Labour are hardly liberal or progressive at the best of times. Under Corbyn they'd show their true colours. The party of dinosaurs for dinosaurs. Time for that extinction event.
Remember folks, you have still 3 days to pay just £3..!
Mr. Slackbladder, not necessarily. Still possible Burnham/Cooper will win. Still a problem then, though, as there'll be, as you say, a large, energetic activist left with which to contend.
The Tories managed to make use of its activist right as outriders on the web in places like ConHome and Guido.
But the key is not to actually give the fringes of a political party, or those outside. In this election, they clearly do.
It would be like the tories allowing UKIP voters and supporters to swamp their internal elections. Youll end up with Bill Cash wanting to bring back hanging or something
With the so called intelligentsia of the Labour party preparing to accept Corbyn and so committing sepuku of their party, the thinking rank and file will have nowhere to go except UKIP.
Bringing back clause 4 shows that Corbyn wants a defenceless Britain with open borders to it's many enemies, who state openly that they want to destroy Britain and democracy from within. But then the new fuhrer, Corbyn, has already stated that he is best of friends with Hisbolah (Iran), and Hamas (Iran and ISIS): by his friends shall he be known.
I think UKIP, the LibDems and the Conservatives would all benefit from a Corbyn victory. In UKIP's case, it would might open up swathes of the North where Labour had been a one party state for so long. In the case of the LibDems, it might mean they got a certain portion of their tactical votes back in places like South West London. The obvious losers would be the Greens, as now there would be two parties going after the batshit cray vote.
UKIP going even more lefty and anti black, coloured, asian muslim etc (I'm sure it is a very long list of minorities they are anti) in order to hoover up all these alleged working class racists will only take them so far.
If the father did nothing wrong and the child did nothing wrong why name them? What would be wrong with saying that the charity is believed to have contributed to the school fees of the child of beelzibub's chauffeur's?
No names and certainly no pixilated photo. Try putting yourself into the position of the young girl.
No need for a photo of the girl certainly. But there is a public interest in the possible misuse of public money by a charity which was able to bypass normal rules because of its access to ministers. You seem to want to suppress a story because, well why exactly
With the so called intelligentsia of the Labour party preparing to accept Corbyn and so committing sepuku of their party, the thinking rank and file will have nowhere to go except UKIP.
Bringing back clause 4 shows that Corbyn wants a defenceless Britain with open borders to it's many enemies, who state openly that they want to destroy Britain and democracy from within. But then the new fuhrer, Corbyn, has already stated that he is best of friends with Hisbolah (Iran), and Hamas (Iran and ISIS): by his friends shall he be known.
I think UKIP, the LibDems and the Conservatives would all benefit from a Corbyn victory. In UKIP's case, it would might open up swathes of the North where Labour had been a one party state for so long. In the case of the LibDems, it might mean they got a certain portion of their tactical votes back in places like South West London. The obvious losers would be the Greens, as now there would be two parties going after the batshit cray vote.
UKIP going even more lefty and anti black, coloured, asian muslim etc (I'm sure it is a very long list of minorities they are anti) in order to hoover up all these alleged working class racists will only take them so far.
Anther piece of rubbish written by @flightpath01. Although it's true that UKIP is firmly against Islam as a political force.
With the so called intelligentsia of the Labour party preparing to accept Corbyn and so committing sepuku of their party, the thinking rank and file will have nowhere to go except UKIP.
Bringing back clause 4 shows that Corbyn wants a defenceless Britain with open borders to it's many enemies, who state openly that they want to destroy Britain and democracy from within. But then the new fuhrer, Corbyn, has already stated that he is best of friends with Hisbolah (Iran), and Hamas (Iran and ISIS): by his friends shall he be known.
Ridiculous. Iran and ISIS are mortal enemies of each other.
The narcissism of small differences. Both illiberal, both anti-democratic, both anti-Western, both sponsors of terrorism.
That seems like the lumping of Iraq and North Korea as the axis of evil. There are major differences between them, although both are anti-Western enough for Corbyn to consider them his friends.
And that last is precisely the point. He is on the side of anything anti-Western. The late Robert Conquest had exactly the measure of people like him: useful idiots.
When there is no effective opposition or no chance of a change through voting. The opposition eventually moves from parliamentary politics to resistance or dissent, expressed in action.
As could be seen by farmers and hauliers in 2000 for example.
On topic, I am with SO on this. I cannot get past Corbyn's support for those who use violence, glory in it, who explicitly want to overthrow democracy and replace it by a theocracy, who loathe liberal values.
These were not the values of Old Labour either.
If the Labour Party choose him as leader, then they are sending the clearest possible signal that they are not .
Edit: Old Labour for all its faults would not have supported terrorists either.
This toadying up to Islam both in domestic and foreign policy has done Labour enormous harm. It has allowed the Conservatives to hoover up the jewish, sikh and hindu vote.
All three groups are hyper aware of Islam and what it means at home and abroad. They see a labour party that not only refuses to condemn, but actively sucks up to it.
Many of these groups would be characterised as socially deeply conservative, and economically most certainly net contributors. But the Conservative Party has always had difficulty attracting them.
Once that taboo has been broken, it is not going to be easy to for Labour to get them back, they are now not voting as immigrants, but as an integrated socially and economically successful middle class in their own interests.
I think Labour have lost Jewish voters for good, and Ken Livingstone bears more responsibility for this than anybody.
They're not at that point with Hindu or Sikh voters. The Conservatives made inroads among both groups, but Labour still lead.
Bit too much identity politics there for my liking. Religion (or indeed atheism!) is an important part of many peoples identity, but I think that religious factors in this temporal voting trend are exagerrated. The reason that Jews, Hindus, Sikhs and Bhuddists are trending Conservative while Muslims are much less likely to do so has much more to do with social class and private sector employment. There is also a degree less toxicity from the Tories.
British Muslims in middle class private sector jobs are more Tory inclined (TSE). This is Britain where class trumps both race and religion, and the reason we are trending right over the last 40 years is that we are increasingly middle class.
I suspect that the March About Anything brigade will continue to fill this gap for the Tories. Tories don't tend to embark on mass protests - a key difference in 2000s.
When there is no effective opposition or no chance of a change through voting. The opposition eventually moves from parliamentary politics to resistance or dissent, expressed in action.
As could be seen by farmers and hauliers in 2000 for example.
Corbyn's four city tour of Scotland this week could impact the result of the SLAB leadership contest. With Kezia and John McT set against Corbyn and Ken backing him, the scene is set for a lively last week of voting in Scotland. Ken is still sounding up beat:
Should Ken win this will be a humiliating result for the SLAB machine, the bookies and many of the political commentators.
A knock on impact of last week's council elections in Glasgow is a call for the Glasgow Council leader to step down - as ever SLAB is battling its main enemy - itself:
" Half of Matheson’s councillors even signed a demand for an extraordinary general meeting (EGM) to vote in a new leader, prompting Labour HQ to step in and suppress the rebellion. However Scottish Secretary Brian Roy is understood to have reassured the rebels last week that Matheson is on his way out. "
I have to confess that if I had simply guessed I would have expected it to be the other way around with Kezia supporting Corbyn and Ken more of a Brownite supporting Cooper or Burnham.
SLAB are in a terrible place. I think that a disunited Labour party with little prospect of power under Corbyn would not gain seats back. SLAB need a serious chance of a Labour government and Corbyn does not provide it.
With the so called intelligentsia of the Labour party preparing to accept Corbyn and so committing sepuku of their party, the thinking rank and file will have nowhere to go except UKIP.
Bringing back clause 4 shows that Corbyn wants a defenceless Britain with open borders to it's many enemies, who state openly that they want to destroy Britain and democracy from within. But then the new fuhrer, Corbyn, has already stated that he is best of friends with Hisbolah (Iran), and Hamas (Iran and ISIS): by his friends shall he be known.
Ridiculous. Iran and ISIS are mortal enemies of each other.
The narcissism of small differences. Both illiberal, both anti-democratic, both anti-Western, both sponsors of terrorism.
"My word. The pickle Labour are in seems to get worse and worse."
The pickle is the choice. In my opinion the worst choice by a distance is Burnham. He is just a very average labour MP. Another Ed but without the charisma.
The others at least have a USP which will attract some new voters. But Corbyn and Kendall are far too divisive which only leaves Cooper.
My very strong feeling is that when Labour come to vote their desire for power will conquer all and they'll arrive at the same conclusion I have. So Cooper by a distance.
With the so called intelligentsia of the Labour party preparing to accept Corbyn and so committing sepuku of their party, the thinking rank and file will have nowhere to go except UKIP.
Bringing back clause 4 shows that Corbyn wants a defenceless Britain with open borders to it's many enemies, who state openly that they want to destroy Britain and democracy from within. But then the new fuhrer, Corbyn, has already stated that he is best of friends with Hisbolah (Iran), and Hamas (Iran and ISIS): by his friends shall he be known.
I think UKIP, the LibDems and the Conservatives would all benefit from a Corbyn victory. In UKIP's case, it would might open up swathes of the North where Labour had been a one party state for so long. In the case of the LibDems, it might mean they got a certain portion of their tactical votes back in places like South West London. The obvious losers would be the Greens, as now there would be two parties going after the batshit cray vote.
UKIP going even more lefty and anti black, coloured, asian muslim etc (I'm sure it is a very long list of minorities they are anti) in order to hoover up all these alleged working class racists will only take them so far.
UKIP aren't anti-black, nor would they need to become anti-black to win over Labour voters. A Corbyn victory would make UKIP very competitive in Northern Labour seats where they were a strong second, with a big Conservative vote still to squeeze,.
Corbyn's four city tour of Scotland this week could impact the result of the SLAB leadership contest. With Kezia and John McT set against Corbyn and Ken backing him, the scene is set for a lively last week of voting in Scotland. Ken is still sounding up beat:
Should Ken win this will be a humiliating result for the SLAB machine, the bookies and many of the political commentators.
A knock on impact of last week's council elections in Glasgow is a call for the Glasgow Council leader to step down - as ever SLAB is battling its main enemy - itself:
" Half of Matheson’s councillors even signed a demand for an extraordinary general meeting (EGM) to vote in a new leader, prompting Labour HQ to step in and suppress the rebellion. However Scottish Secretary Brian Roy is understood to have reassured the rebels last week that Matheson is on his way out. "
With the so called intelligentsia of the Labour party preparing to accept Corbyn and so committing sepuku of their party, the thinking rank and file will have nowhere to go except UKIP.
Bringing back clause 4 shows that Corbyn wants a defenceless Britain with open borders to it's many enemies, who state openly that they want to destroy Britain and democracy from within. But then the new fuhrer, Corbyn, has already stated that he is best of friends with Hisbolah (Iran), and Hamas (Iran and ISIS): by his friends shall he be known.
I think UKIP, the LibDems and the Conservatives would all benefit from a Corbyn victory. In UKIP's case, it would might open up swathes of the North where Labour had been a one party state for so long. In the case of the LibDems, it might mean they got a certain portion of their tactical votes back in places like South West London. The obvious losers would be the Greens, as now there would be two parties going after the batshit cray vote.
UKIP going even more lefty and anti black, coloured, asian muslim etc (I'm sure it is a very long list of minorities they are anti) in order to hoover up all these alleged working class racists will only take them so far.
Anther piece of rubbish written by @flightpath01. Although it's true that UKIP is firmly against Islam as a political force.
For what other reason should all these swathes of what are euphemistically called the White Working Class vote UKIP ? Farage want to abolish the NHS - is that something they are clamouring for?
I suspect that the March About Anything brigade will continue to fill this gap for the Tories. Tories don't tend to embark on mass protests - a key difference in 2000s.
When there is no effective opposition or no chance of a change through voting. The opposition eventually moves from parliamentary politics to resistance or dissent, expressed in action.
As could be seen by farmers and hauliers in 2000 for example.
Plato
The Countyside Alliance and pro Support for Fox Hunting were quite effective in getting people on the streets. The Hauliers and farmers had the government completely in disarray in 2000.
The Unions can do none of what they achieved with current and proposed legislation. So the dissent will be not from them .
I suspect that the March About Anything brigade will continue to fill this gap for the Tories. Tories don't tend to embark on mass protests - a key difference in 2000s.
When there is no effective opposition or no chance of a change through voting. The opposition eventually moves from parliamentary politics to resistance or dissent, expressed in action.
As could be seen by farmers and hauliers in 2000 for example.
Plato
The Countyside Alliance and pro Support for Fox Hunting were quite effective in getting people on the streets. The Hauliers and farmers had the government completely in disarray in 2000.
The Unions can do none of what they achieved with current and proposed legislation. So the dissent will be not from them .
Corbyn's four city tour of Scotland this week could impact the result of the SLAB leadership contest. With Kezia and John McT set against Corbyn and Ken backing him, the scene is set for a lively last week of voting in Scotland. Ken is still sounding up beat:
Should Ken win this will be a humiliating result for the SLAB machine, the bookies and many of the political commentators.
A knock on impact of last week's council elections in Glasgow is a call for the Glasgow Council leader to step down - as ever SLAB is battling its main enemy - itself:
" Half of Matheson’s councillors even signed a demand for an extraordinary general meeting (EGM) to vote in a new leader, prompting Labour HQ to step in and suppress the rebellion. However Scottish Secretary Brian Roy is understood to have reassured the rebels last week that Matheson is on his way out. "
I suspect that the March About Anything brigade will continue to fill this gap for the Tories. Tories don't tend to embark on mass protests - a key difference in 2000s.
When there is no effective opposition or no chance of a change through voting. The opposition eventually moves from parliamentary politics to resistance or dissent, expressed in action.
As could be seen by farmers and hauliers in 2000 for example.
Plato
The Countyside Alliance and pro Support for Fox Hunting were quite effective in getting people on the streets. The Hauliers and farmers had the government completely in disarray in 2000.
The Unions can do none of what they achieved with current and proposed legislation. So the dissent will be not from them .
Many Tories went on the pro hunting march in 2002 and there were also numerous anti EU and anti Euro marches too
It would be funny if Suzanne Evans took over from Farage and Jezza became Labour leader with Watson as deputy. I suspect Labour would still accuse Ukip of misogyny without recognising the hypocrisy.
Especially as Yvette has been complaining about the Tories trying to even up the ratio of peers in the HoL.
Do they not notice the hypocrisy or do they think we won't? I find it insulting.
Come on, Labour, I haven't lost faith in you completely. You can still elect Liz, she has the requisite number of ovaries.
the piggies need to get back to the trough, how could anybody ever vote for the odious unprincipled , money grubbing Lib Dems. They are beneath contempt.
Two things. Firstly, knighthoods do not, as far as I'm aware, come with salaries. Secondly, anyone can be offered a knighthood: that is totally different from *accepting* a knighthood.
Still pathetic , a pair of losers getting baubles.
A grand tradition for the defeated, sacked or forcibly retired. Alexander was a very loyal member of the coalition, so not surprised he'd be offered one, but I guess Cable gets one as reward for being a former Cabinet Minister? Davey and the rest will feel left out.
kle4, it is still pathetic, baubles for crawlers, Alexander could not have got further up George's yahoo if he had been jet propelled.
I think my description should have read 'grand tradition' in order to properly convey my meaning a bit better.
Corbyn's four city tour of Scotland this week could impact the result of the SLAB leadership contest. With Kezia and John McT set against Corbyn and Ken backing him, the scene is set for a lively last week of voting in Scotland. Ken is still sounding up beat:
Should Ken win this will be a humiliating result for the SLAB machine, the bookies and many of the political commentators.
A knock on impact of last week's council elections in Glasgow is a call for the Glasgow Council leader to step down - as ever SLAB is battling its main enemy - itself:
" Half of Matheson’s councillors even signed a demand for an extraordinary general meeting (EGM) to vote in a new leader, prompting Labour HQ to step in and suppress the rebellion. However Scottish Secretary Brian Roy is understood to have reassured the rebels last week that Matheson is on his way out. "
I have to confess that if I had simply guessed I would have expected it to be the other way around with Kezia supporting Corbyn and Ken more of a Brownite supporting Cooper or Burnham.
SLAB are in a terrible place. I think that a disunited Labour party with little prospect of power under Corbyn would not gain seats back. SLAB need a serious chance of a Labour government and Corbyn does not provide it.
Sadly as Kezia is being advised by John McT and Blair McD, she's being dragged into fighting Blairism's last stand with Kendal. Should Ken pull it off Ladbrokes are going to look like a bunch of numpties with their last odds before closing the book being Kezia 1/50 and Ken 12/1.
Agree that Corbyn wouldn't help SLAB gain seats - I think he'd be more comfortable doing business with the SNP than a toxic SLAB.
"My word. The pickle Labour are in seems to get worse and worse."
The pickle is the choice. In my opinion the worst choice by a distance is Burnham. He is just a very average labour MP. Another Ed but without the charisma.
The others at least have a USP which will attract some new voters. But Corbyn and Kendall are far too divisive which only leaves Cooper.
My very strong feeling is that when Labour come to vote their desire for power will conquer all and they'll arrive at the same conclusion I have. So Cooper by a distance.
Absolute rubbish, Burnham has polled best amongst the public in every poll so far, he is the only candidate who can unite the party while also posing some threat to the Tories. Cooper polls disastrously, indeed in some polls she polls worse than Corbyn, let alone Burnham and Kendall
That article immediately establishes itself as untrustworthy the way it flicks back and forth between religion and race. While many of us have concerns about religious extremism, race-baiting is just unacceptable.
Corbyn's four city tour of Scotland this week could impact the result of the SLAB leadership contest. With Kezia and John McT set against Corbyn and Ken backing him, the scene is set for a lively last week of voting in Scotland. Ken is still sounding up beat:
Should Ken win this will be a humiliating result for the SLAB machine, the bookies and many of the political commentators.
A knock on impact of last week's council elections in Glasgow is a call for the Glasgow Council leader to step down - as ever SLAB is battling its main enemy - itself:
" Half of Matheson’s councillors even signed a demand for an extraordinary general meeting (EGM) to vote in a new leader, prompting Labour HQ to step in and suppress the rebellion. However Scottish Secretary Brian Roy is understood to have reassured the rebels last week that Matheson is on his way out. "
I have to confess that if I had simply guessed I would have expected it to be the other way around with Kezia supporting Corbyn and Ken more of a Brownite supporting Cooper or Burnham.
SLAB are in a terrible place. I think that a disunited Labour party with little prospect of power under Corbyn would not gain seats back. SLAB need a serious chance of a Labour government and Corbyn does not provide it.
In Scotland alone Corbyn is the best choice for Labour. He could win back significant numbers of seats from the SNP in the Central Belt, being a party with a serious chance of government did SLab a fat lot of good in May didn't it!
I suspect that the March About Anything brigade will continue to fill this gap for the Tories. Tories don't tend to embark on mass protests - a key difference in 2000s.
When there is no effective opposition or no chance of a change through voting. The opposition eventually moves from parliamentary politics to resistance or dissent, expressed in action.
As could be seen by farmers and hauliers in 2000 for example.
Plato
The Countyside Alliance and pro Support for Fox Hunting were quite effective in getting people on the streets. The Hauliers and farmers had the government completely in disarray in 2000.
The Unions can do none of what they achieved with current and proposed legislation. So the dissent will be not from them .
Many Tories went on the pro hunting march in 2002 and there were also numerous anti EU and anti Euro marches too
It was said that when the Countryside Alliance marched in London, the place was left with not a gate open, or a piece of litter dropped.
On topic, I am with SO on this. I cannot get past Corbyn's support for those who use violence, glory in it, who explicitly want to overthrow democracy and replace it by a theocracy, who loathe liberal values.
These were not the values of Old Labour either.
If the Labour Party choose him as leader, then they are sending the clearest possible signal that they are not .
Edit: Old Labour for all its faults would not have supported terrorists either.
This toadying up to Islam both in domestic and foreign policy has done Labour enormous harm. It has allowed the Conservatives to hoover up the jewish, sikh and hindu vote.
All three groups are hyper aware of Islam and what it means at home and abroad. They see a labour party that not only refuses to condemn, but actively sucks up to it.
Many of these groups would be characterised as socially deeply conservative, and economically most certainly net contributors. But the Conservative Party has always had difficulty attracting them.
Once that taboo has been broken, it is not going to be easy to for Labour to get them back, they are now not voting as immigrants, but as an integrated socially and economically successful middle class in their own interests.
I think Labour have lost Jewish voters for good, and Ken Livingstone bears more responsibility for this than anybody.
They're not at that point with Hindu or Sikh voters. The Conservatives made inroads among both groups, but Labour still lead.
Bit too much identity politics there for my liking. Religion (or indeed atheism!) is an important part of many peoples identity, but I think that religious factors in this temporal voting trend are exagerrated. The reason that Jews, Hindus, Sikhs and Bhuddists are trending Conservative while Muslims are much less likely to do so has much more to do with social class and private sector employment. There is also a degree less toxicity from the Tories.
British Muslims in middle class private sector jobs are more Tory inclined (TSE). This is Britain where class trumps both race and religion, and the reason we are trending right over the last 40 years is that we are increasingly middle class.
The middle class is not rightwing but centrist (and leftwing in urban areas), Enoch Powell had far more support amongst the working class than he ever did with the middle class
Sky News Newsdesk @SkyNewsBreak 4m4 minutes ago Police in Hertfordshire say they found 18 people in a lorry who are believed to have entered the UK illegally on Saturday
Roger Da Costa @rog_ukip Aug 3 We use to have a Police Force and Border Force. Now we have a Police Service and Border Agency.
A Border Agency that all but lays out the welcoming mat with a cuppa tea.
cyclefree- "The narcissism of small differences. Both illiberal, both anti-democratic, both anti-Western, both sponsors of terrorism."
Luckyguy "What a wilfully ignorant thing to say."
I agree'. It's the lack of nuance and understanding of the politics of the Middle East that has led us here. Until we lose the idea of 'baddies' (them) and 'goodies' (us) we will continue to move through this fog of misunderstanding and ignorance
With the so called intelligentsia of the Labour party preparing to accept Corbyn and so committing sepuku of their party, the thinking rank and file will have nowhere to go except UKIP.
Bringing back clause 4 shows that Corbyn wants a defenceless Britain with open borders to it's many enemies, who state openly that they want to destroy Britain and democracy from within. But then the new fuhrer, Corbyn, has already stated that he is best of friends with Hisbolah (Iran), and Hamas (Iran and ISIS): by his friends shall he be known.
I think UKIP, the LibDems and the Conservatives would all benefit from a Corbyn victory. In UKIP's case, it would might open up swathes of the North where Labour had been a one party state for so long. In the case of the LibDems, it might mean they got a certain portion of their tactical votes back in places like South West London. The obvious losers would be the Greens, as now there would be two parties going after the batshit cray vote.
UKIP going even more lefty and anti black, coloured, asian muslim etc (I'm sure it is a very long list of minorities they are anti) in order to hoover up all these alleged working class racists will only take them so far.
Anther piece of rubbish written by @flightpath01. Although it's true that UKIP is firmly against Islam as a political force.
For what other reason should all these swathes of what are euphemistically called the White Working Class vote UKIP ? Farage want to abolish the NHS - is that something they are clamouring for?
Because they won't vote Conservative, and a far-left Labour Party is unappealing to them.
I suspect that the March About Anything brigade will continue to fill this gap for the Tories. Tories don't tend to embark on mass protests - a key difference in 2000s.
When there is no effective opposition or no chance of a change through voting. The opposition eventually moves from parliamentary politics to resistance or dissent, expressed in action.
As could be seen by farmers and hauliers in 2000 for example.
Plato
The Countyside Alliance and pro Support for Fox Hunting were quite effective in getting people on the streets. The Hauliers and farmers had the government completely in disarray in 2000.
The Unions can do none of what they achieved with current and proposed legislation. So the dissent will be not from them .
Plato that is true.
However we have had only one period in the last one hundred years, when the Conservative Party Supporters felt they had no chance in a GE of a majority that was the 1997 to 2003 period. The left of center has had that feeling a lot more.
People like Corbyn because he says what he means and mean what he says...
@paulwaugh: Corbyn spokesperson: 'Jeremy is not saying he wants to return to the old clause IV, nor does he want a big 'moment' such as that."
He has not ruled it out either, "I think we should talk about what the objectives of the party are, whether that's restoring the Clause IV as it was originally written or it's a different one, but I think we shouldn't shy away from public participation, public investment in industry and public control of the railways," he said. "I'm interested in the idea that we have a more inclusive, clearer set of objectives. I would want us to have a set of objectives which does include public ownership of some necessary things such as rail." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33839819
Mr. City, could also present the SNP with the opportunity to be the 'real' opposition, or present themselves as such.
Miliband's intellectual self-confidence was not justified when it comes to changing the leadership election rules.
No, the party Corbyn poses a threat to is not the Tories, but the SNP. A Corbyn led Labour could win back swathes of seats in the Central belt the SNP gained in May
Eagle is right. If Corbyn wins the most democratic leadership election the party has ever had, one where his candidacy brought in thousands of new members, they just have to make it work as best they can. It would be outrageous if they sabotaged him without giving him a fair shot. He will be the choice of the Labour Party and if they can't accept being part of his party they should join another one.
No Eagle is wrong - all she is being is self serving. Like the rest. Corbyn should never have been on the ballot. He had no support in the parliamentary labour party. It shows how unfit labour are that they put him there with a system in place that allowed entryists to vote for him. It would be insane of any rational Labour MP to serve under Corbyn. The real damage is done no matter what the result. The loony left will have to have packed the vote for Corbyn to win and the only alternatives have shown themselves to be worse than useless and will have to deal with a totally split party. Corbyn wants to split the party of course.
Corbyn's four city tour of Scotland this week could impact the result of the SLAB leadership contest. With Kezia and John McT set against Corbyn and Ken backing him, the scene is set for a lively last week of voting in Scotland. Ken is still sounding up beat:
Should Ken win this will be a humiliating result for the SLAB machine, the bookies and many of the political commentators.
A knock on impact of last week's council elections in Glasgow is a call for the Glasgow Council leader to step down - as ever SLAB is battling its main enemy - itself:
" Half of Matheson’s councillors even signed a demand for an extraordinary general meeting (EGM) to vote in a new leader, prompting Labour HQ to step in and suppress the rebellion. However Scottish Secretary Brian Roy is understood to have reassured the rebels last week that Matheson is on his way out. "
I have to confess that if I had simply guessed I would have expected it to be the other way around with Kezia supporting Corbyn and Ken more of a Brownite supporting Cooper or Burnham.
SLAB are in a terrible place. I think that a disunited Labour party with little prospect of power under Corbyn would not gain seats back. SLAB need a serious chance of a Labour government and Corbyn does not provide it.
Sadly as Kezia is being advised by John McT and Blair McD, she's being dragged into fighting Blairism's last stand with Kendal. Should Ken pull it off Ladbrokes are going to look like a bunch of numpties with their last odds before closing the book being Kezia 1/50 and Ken 12/1.
Agree that Corbyn wouldn't help SLAB gain seats - I think he'd be more comfortable doing business with the SNP than a toxic SLAB.
SLAB would be a branch of Corbyn led Labour so of course he wants SLAB to win. Indeed, in Scotland he has been touring with a message of 'Come back to Labour and we'll unite to fight austerity' urging those who defected to the SNP to return to SLAB under his leadership http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/jeremy-corbyn-come-back-labour-6184153
A Corbyn-Macintosh leadership of UK Labour and SLAB respectively could be a real threat to the SNP in the Central Belt
On topic, I am with SO on this. I cannot get past Corbyn's support for those who use violence, glory in it, who explicitly want to overthrow democracy and replace it by a theocracy, who loathe liberal values.
These were not the values of Old Labour either.
If the Labour Party choose him as leader, then they are sending the clearest possible signal that they are not .
Edit: Old Labour for all its faults would not have supported terrorists either.
This toadying up to Islam both in domestic and foreign policy has done Labour enormous harm. It has allowed the Conservatives to hoover up the jewish, sikh and hindu vote.
All three groups are hyper aware of Islam and what it means at home and abroad. They see a labour party that not only refuses to condemn, but actively sucks up to it.
Many of these groups would be characterised as socially deeply conservative, and economically most certainly net contributors. But the Conservative Party has always had difficulty attracting them.
Once that taboo has been broken, it is not going to be easy to for Labour to get them back, they are now not voting as immigrants, but as an integrated socially and economically successful middle class in their own interests.
I think Labour have lost Jewish voters for good, and Ken Livingstone bears more responsibility for this than anybody.
They're not at that point with Hindu or Sikh voters. The Conservatives made inroads among both groups, but Labour still lead.
Bit
The middle class is not rightwing but centrist (and leftwing in urban areas), Enoch Powell had far more support amongst the working class than he ever did with the middle class
I would agree with that, but I think the centre has moved right over the last 3 decades or so. Middle class centrists overwhelmingly rely on state schools, state universities and the NHS, which is where the right lose touch.
I suspect that the March About Anything brigade will continue to fill this gap for the Tories. Tories don't tend to embark on mass protests - a key difference in 2000s.
When there is no effective opposition or no chance of a change through voting. The opposition eventually moves from parliamentary politics to resistance or dissent, expressed in action.
As could be seen by farmers and hauliers in 2000 for example.
Plato
The Countyside Alliance and pro Support for Fox Hunting were quite effective in getting people on the streets. The Hauliers and farmers had the government completely in disarray in 2000.
The Unions can do none of what they achieved with current and proposed legislation. So the dissent will be not from them .
Plato that is true.
However we have had only one period in the last one hundred years, when the Conservative Party Supporters felt they had no chance in a GE of a majority that was the 1997 to 2003 period. The left of center has had that feeling a lot more.
Corbyn seems to be pretty consistent and rational about his views. The issue is that his views are really quite a long way from those that have been advocated by Labour since the departure of Foot. His views almost seem to be those of a separate party. I'm sure there is some appeal in what he says to segments of the populace, but if it turns out that Corbynism isn't sufficiently popular to achieve electoral success then there's an extraordinarily long road back to the centre ground.
Mr. City, could also present the SNP with the opportunity to be the 'real' opposition, or present themselves as such.
Miliband's intellectual self-confidence was not justified when it comes to changing the leadership election rules.
No, the party Corbyn poses a threat to is not the Tories, but the SNP. A Corbyn led Labour could win back swathes of seats in the Central belt the SNP gained in May
Eagle is right. If Corbyn wins the most democratic leadership election the party has ever had, one where his candidacy brought in thousands of new members, they just have to make it work as best they can. It would be outrageous if they sabotaged him without giving him a fair shot. He will be the choice of the Labour Party and if they can't accept being part of his party they should join another one.
No Eagle is wrong - all she is being is self serving. Like the rest. Corbyn should never have been on the ballot. He had no support in the parliamentary labour party. It shows how unfit labour are that they put him there with a system in place that allowed entryists to vote for him. It would be insane of any rational Labour MP to serve under Corbyn. The real damage is done no matter what the result. The loony left will have to have packed the vote for Corbyn to win and the only alternatives have shown themselves to be worse than useless and will have to deal with a totally split party. Corbyn wants to split the party of course.
The best they can do is serve under him and undermine him at every opportunity (quietly) and then defenestrate him as soon as possible.
Ducking the Lab deputy leadership would be abdicating that responsibility, albeit that that is not usually the role of the deputy leader.
Incidentally at the start of the campaign I would have thought Watson and Corbyn would get on OK. But surely Watson is now far more centrist?
Mr. City, could also present the SNP with the opportunity to be the 'real' opposition, or present themselves as such.
Miliband's intellectual self-confidence was not justified when it comes to changing the leadership election rules.
No, the party Corbyn poses a threat to is not the Tories, but the SNP. A Corbyn led Labour could win back swathes of seats in the Central belt the SNP gained in May
Eagle is right. If Corbyn wins the most democratic leadership election the party has ever had, one where his candidacy brought in thousands of new members, they just have to make it work as best they can. It would be outrageous if they sabotaged him without giving him a fair shot. He will be the choice of the Labour Party and if they can't accept being part of his party they should join another one.
No Eagle is wrong - all she is being is self serving. Like the rest. Corbyn should never have been on the ballot. He had no support in the parliamentary labour party. It shows how unfit labour are that they put him there with a system in place that allowed entryists to vote for him. It would be insane of any rational Labour MP to serve under Corbyn. The real damage is done no matter what the result. The loony left will have to have packed the vote for Corbyn to win and the only alternatives have shown themselves to be worse than useless and will have to deal with a totally split party. Corbyn wants to split the party of course.
Part of the problem Labour has suffered from in recent years, certainly in Scotland, is 'control freakery' and being seen to disallow genuine debate. Of course Corbyn should be on the ballot in a democratic society if he represents the views of a significant proportion of Labour members
Corbyn seems to be pretty consistent and rational about his views. The issue is that his views are really quite a long way from those that have been advocated by Labour since the departure of Foot. His views almost seem to be those of a separate party. I'm sure there is some appeal in what he says to segments of the populace, but if it turns out that Corbynism isn't sufficiently popular to achieve electoral success then there's an extraordinarily long road back to the centre ground.
On some issues, eg renationalisation of rail and energy utilities, higher taxes for the rich etc polls suggest Corbyn is the centre ground
New Observer has some other "interesting" articles and opinions!
Hasn't Marselleis had a large Maghrebi population for a long time? Many having fled before and after the Algerian war.
Yes, many French muslims have been born and raised in France. Some of their parents were born here.
Incidentally the article - outside the headline - says "Western Europe".
It also says "According to the latest city statistics, 41.8 percent of those aged 18 and under are “of foreign descent”—this means that, given continued immigration and natural reproduction rates, Marseilles will be majority nonwhite within fifteen years".
OK so we've got 15 years till the "extermination of the white race" guys!!
Corbyn seems to be pretty consistent and rational about his views. The issue is that his views are really quite a long way from those that have been advocated by Labour since the departure of Foot. His views almost seem to be those of a separate party. I'm sure there is some appeal in what he says to segments of the populace, but if it turns out that Corbynism isn't sufficiently popular to achieve electoral success then there's an extraordinarily long road back to the centre ground.
On some issues, eg renationalisation of rail and energy utilities, higher taxes for the rich etc polls suggest Corbyn is the centre ground
But have been repeatedly and overwhelmingly rejected at every election for over twenty years.
Corbyn seems to be pretty consistent and rational about his views. The issue is that his views are really quite a long way from those that have been advocated by Labour since the departure of Foot. His views almost seem to be those of a separate party. I'm sure there is some appeal in what he says to segments of the populace, but if it turns out that Corbynism isn't sufficiently popular to achieve electoral success then there's an extraordinarily long road back to the centre ground.
On some issues, eg renationalisation of rail and energy utilities, higher taxes for the rich etc polls suggest Corbyn is the centre ground
Sure - the popular centre perhaps, but nationalisation hasn't been thought of as the centre ground for a long, long time politically. These areas are somewhat anathema to economic credibility too, and Labour hardly need to stray further in that area.
I suspect that the March About Anything brigade will continue to fill this gap for the Tories. Tories don't tend to embark on mass protests - a key difference in 2000s.
When there is no effective opposition or no chance of a change through voting. The opposition eventually moves from parliamentary politics to resistance or dissent, expressed in action.
As could be seen by farmers and hauliers in 2000 for example.
Plato
The Countyside Alliance and pro Support for Fox Hunting were quite effective in getting people on the streets. The Hauliers and farmers had the government completely in disarray in 2000.
The Unions can do none of what they achieved with current and proposed legislation. So the dissent will be not from them .
Plato that is true.
However we have had only one period in the last one hundred years, when the Conservative Party Supporters felt they had no chance in a GE of a majority that was the 1997 to 2003 period. The left of center has had that feeling a lot more.
1966, 1945
1966 they were back in power in 1970 1945 back in power 1951.
Hardly a feeling that the could not win , not like 97 to 2003.
On topic, I am with SO on this. I cannot get past Corbyn's support for those who use violence, glory in it, who explicitly want to overthrow democracy and replace it by a theocracy, who loathe liberal values.
These were not the values of Old Labour either.
If the Labour Party choose him as leader, then they are sending the clearest possible signal that they are not .
Edit: Old Labour for all its faults would not have supported terrorists either.
This toadying up to Islam both in domestic and foreign policy has done Labour enormous harm. It has allowed the Conservatives to hoover up the jewish, sikh and hindu vote.
All three groups are hyper aware of Islam and what it means at home and abroad. They see a labour party that not only refuses to condemn, but actively sucks up to it.
Many of these groups would be characterised as socially deeply conservative, and economically most certainly net contributors. But the Conservative Party has always had difficulty attracting them.
Once that taboo has been broken, it is not going to be easy to for Labour to get them back, they are now not voting as immigrants, but as an integrated socially and economically successful middle class in their own interests.
I think Labour have lost Jewish voters for good, and Ken Livingstone bears more responsibility for this than anybody.
They're not at that point with Hindu or Sikh voters. The Conservatives made inroads among both groups, but Labour still lead.
Bit
The middle class is not rightwing but centrist (and leftwing in urban areas), Enoch Powell had far more support amongst the working class than he ever did with the middle class
I would agree with that, but I think the centre has moved right over the last 3 decades or so. Middle class centrists overwhelmingly rely on state schools, state universities and the NHS, which is where the right lose touch.
On some issues, gay marriage and so on the centre has moved left. Most voters want a strong economy and strong public services, that is not leftwing but nor is it rightwing really either
With the so called intelligentsia of the Labour party preparing to accept Corbyn and so committing sepuku of their party, the thinking rank and file will have nowhere to go except UKIP.
Bringing back clause 4 shows that Corbyn wants a defenceless Britain with open borders to it's many enemies, who state openly that they want to destroy Britain and democracy from within. But then the new fuhrer, Corbyn, has already stated that he is best of friends with Hisbolah (Iran), and Hamas (Iran and ISIS): by his friends shall he be known.
I think UKIP, the LibDems and the Conservatives would all benefit from a Corbyn victory. In UKIP's case, it would might open up swathes of the North where Labour had been a one party state for so long. In the case of the LibDems, it might mean they got a certain portion of their tactical votes back in places like South West London. The obvious losers would be the Greens, as now there would be two parties going after the batshit cray vote.
UKIP going even more lefty and anti black, coloured, asian muslim etc (I'm sure it is a very long list of minorities they are anti) in order to hoover up all these alleged working class racists will only take them so far.
Anther piece of rubbish written by @flightpath01. Although it's true that UKIP is firmly against Islam as a political force.
For what other reason should all these swathes of what are euphemistically called the White Working Class vote UKIP ? Farage want to abolish the NHS - is that something they are clamouring for?
Because they won't vote Conservative, and a far-left Labour Party is unappealing to them.
But they will vote for public schoolboy Farage? Why would they not vote Labour... like always? And by that I mean in significant numbers? And if Farage adopts lefty policies to attract them...? Why would others, not of the Left, then vote UKIP? Is UKIP left or right? Or racist? How many WWC, ie racists, will vote UKIP in these Labour 'heartlands'? I look forward to Farage reinventing himself as Donald Trump (or was it the other way round?).
Corbyn seems to be pretty consistent and rational about his views. The issue is that his views are really quite a long way from those that have been advocated by Labour since the departure of Foot. His views almost seem to be those of a separate party. I'm sure there is some appeal in what he says to segments of the populace, but if it turns out that Corbynism isn't sufficiently popular to achieve electoral success then there's an extraordinarily long road back to the centre ground.
On some issues, eg renationalisation of rail and energy utilities, higher taxes for the rich etc polls suggest Corbyn is the centre ground
But have been repeatedly and overwhelmingly rejected at every election for over twenty years.
Some of his views are popular, that does not make them the centre ground.
The public continue to support the death penalty, doesn't make that the centre ground.
They also support a complete ban on immigration for two years according to that YouGov(?) graphic a week ago.
Comments
All three groups are hyper aware of Islam and what it means at home and abroad. They see a labour party that not only refuses to condemn, but actively sucks up to it.
Many of these groups would be characterised as socially deeply conservative, and economically most certainly net contributors. But the Conservative Party has always had difficulty attracting them.
Once that taboo has been broken, it is not going to be easy to for Labour to get them back, they are now not voting as immigrants, but as an integrated socially and economically successful middle class in their own interests.
Iran and ISIS are mortal enemies of each other.
"......the Ludlow Cowmuck Guild doesn't have quite the same cachet"
Sure it's not sour grapes? Rumour has it you were blackballed.......
There are legitimate questions to be asked about the charity's use of its money: whether that money was being used to further its charitable objectives - the only proper use - or whether it was being used to provide benefits, very valuable ones, for its staff. Incidentally, I hope CB paid tax on her valuable staff perks, such as a chauffeur.
Reminds me of England at the cricket World Cup.
The labour party has eaten itself
"Mr. Roger, because possession of ovaries is as impressive as possession of testicles, and just as relevant."
To a gruff Yorkshireman I'd imagine that breasts and ovaries were the antithesis of a selling point unique or otherwise (does Headingly allow women into the pavillion ye?t)
However to most voters who see gender as more than just testicles and ovaries a female political leader against a sea of grey suits is not just a USP but a massive SP.
The leadership candidates would be mad to accept any office.
I've never been to Headingley, so couldn't say.
I agree that a small number of voters would go all gooey for a female leader. But most? I don't think so.
Mr. Jonathan, interesting comparison, though I don't think ConHome ever described Cameroons as a 'virus'.
However there will be some concerns that there will now be only one dominant party of government continuing the 1979 economic consensus.
They need every now and again a change of government, to hoodwink the voters that their once every 5 year mark , makes any difference.
They're not at that point with Hindu or Sikh voters. The Conservatives made inroads among both groups, but Labour still lead.
Miliband's intellectual self-confidence was not justified when it comes to changing the leadership election rules.
If the father did nothing wrong and the child did nothing wrong why name them? What would be wrong with saying that the charity is believed to have contributed to the school fees of the child of beelzibub's chauffeur's?
No names and certainly no pixilated photo. Try putting yourself into the position of the young girl.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/09/is-there-hope-for-labour-in-scotland
You are bonkers
It would be like the tories allowing UKIP voters and supporters to swamp their internal elections. Youll end up with Bill Cash wanting to bring back hanging or something
In regard to Scotland, but how that helps any English opposition is a differing perspective.
If partisan Conservatives could kill Labour by voting for Corbyn, they might rue the day eventually when the new opposition eventually emerges from the rubble.
In that the opposition might not be parliamentary.
Meantime you are oh so objective about Alex and Nichola.
Unions?
http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/ken-macintosh-confident-over-scottish-labour-race-1-3853165
Should Ken win this will be a humiliating result for the SLAB machine, the bookies and many of the political commentators.
A knock on impact of last week's council elections in Glasgow is a call for the Glasgow Council leader to step down - as ever SLAB is battling its main enemy - itself:
" Half of Matheson’s councillors even signed a demand for an extraordinary general meeting (EGM) to vote in a new leader, prompting Labour HQ to step in and suppress the rebellion. However Scottish Secretary Brian Roy is understood to have reassured the rebels last week that Matheson is on his way out. "
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13583720.Matheson_set_to_quit_within_days_as_Glasgow_council_leader/?ref=mr&lp=1
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/1507390.stm
Remember folks, you have still 3 days to pay just £3..!
The opposition eventually moves from parliamentary politics to resistance or dissent, expressed in action.
As could be seen by farmers and hauliers in 2000 for example.
British Muslims in middle class private sector jobs are more Tory inclined (TSE). This is Britain where class trumps both race and religion, and the reason we are trending right over the last 40 years is that we are increasingly middle class.
SLAB are in a terrible place. I think that a disunited Labour party with little prospect of power under Corbyn would not gain seats back. SLAB need a serious chance of a Labour government and Corbyn does not provide it.
"My word. The pickle Labour are in seems to get worse and worse."
The pickle is the choice. In my opinion the worst choice by a distance is Burnham. He is just a very average labour MP. Another Ed but without the charisma.
The others at least have a USP which will attract some new voters. But Corbyn and Kendall are far too divisive which only leaves Cooper.
My very strong feeling is that when Labour come to vote their desire for power will conquer all and they'll arrive at the same conclusion I have. So Cooper by a distance.
@antifrank I agree, I cannot see why Betfair still has Burnham as favourite.
Farage want to abolish the NHS - is that something they are clamouring for?
The Countyside Alliance and pro Support for Fox Hunting were quite effective in getting people on the streets.
The Hauliers and farmers had the government completely in disarray in 2000.
The Unions can do none of what they achieved with current and proposed legislation.
So the dissent will be not from them .
Istanbul is a European city.
Agree that Corbyn wouldn't help SLAB gain seats - I think he'd be more comfortable doing business with the SNP than a toxic SLAB.
That article immediately establishes itself as untrustworthy the way it flicks back and forth between religion and race. While many of us have concerns about religious extremism, race-baiting is just unacceptable.
That article is titled "The Extermination of the White Race".
Do you think that's acceptable language MikeK?
Sky News Newsdesk @SkyNewsBreak 4m4 minutes ago
Police in Hertfordshire say they found 18 people in a lorry who are believed to have entered the UK illegally on Saturday
Roger Da Costa @rog_ukip Aug 3
We use to have a Police Force and Border Force. Now we have a Police Service and Border Agency.
A Border Agency that all but lays out the welcoming mat with a cuppa tea.
Do you think that's acceptable language MikeK?
Of course he does.
@paulwaugh: Corbyn spokesperson:
'Jeremy is not saying he wants to return to the old clause IV, nor does he want a big 'moment' such as that."
cyclefree- "The narcissism of small differences. Both illiberal, both anti-democratic, both anti-Western, both sponsors of terrorism."
Luckyguy "What a wilfully ignorant thing to say."
I agree'. It's the lack of nuance and understanding of the politics of the Middle East that has led us here. Until we lose the idea of 'baddies' (them) and 'goodies' (us) we will continue to move through this fog of misunderstanding and ignorance
Sarajevo is 79% Bosnian Muslim.
New Observer has some other "interesting" articles and opinions!
Hasn't Marselleis had a large Maghrebi population for a long time? Many having fled before and after the Algerian war.
Do you guys actually think? I'm just pointing out what other people publish.
However we have had only one period in the last one hundred years, when the Conservative Party Supporters felt they had no chance in a GE of a majority that was the 1997 to 2003 period.
The left of center has had that feeling a lot more.
"I'm interested in the idea that we have a more inclusive, clearer set of objectives. I would want us to have a set of objectives which does include public ownership of some necessary things such as rail."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33839819
Corbyn should never have been on the ballot. He had no support in the parliamentary labour party. It shows how unfit labour are that they put him there with a system in place that allowed entryists to vote for him. It would be insane of any rational Labour MP to serve under Corbyn.
The real damage is done no matter what the result. The loony left will have to have packed the vote for Corbyn to win and the only alternatives have shown themselves to be worse than useless and will have to deal with a totally split party. Corbyn wants to split the party of course.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/jeremy-corbyn-come-back-labour-6184153
A Corbyn-Macintosh leadership of UK Labour and SLAB respectively could be a real threat to the SNP in the Central Belt
Let's take a step back Mike.
You want to position UKIP as an electable, moderate force.
Yet you back up your claim - and it clearly is your claim - about Marseille and "what we can expect" by linking to a deeply inflammatory article.
If you read it, you clearly thought we might want to.
If you'd thought it was offensive and we should read it, you would surely have prefixed the link differently.
Ducking the Lab deputy leadership would be abdicating that responsibility, albeit that that is not usually the role of the deputy leader.
Incidentally at the start of the campaign I would have thought Watson and Corbyn would get on OK. But surely Watson is now far more centrist?
New Observer has some other "interesting" articles and opinions!
Hasn't Marselleis had a large Maghrebi population for a long time? Many having fled before and after the Algerian war.
Yes, many French muslims have been born and raised in France. Some of their parents were born here.
Incidentally the article - outside the headline - says "Western Europe".
It also says "According to the latest city statistics, 41.8 percent of those aged 18 and under are “of foreign descent”—this means that, given continued immigration and natural reproduction rates, Marseilles will be majority nonwhite within fifteen years".
OK so we've got 15 years till the "extermination of the white race" guys!!
1945 back in power 1951.
Hardly a feeling that the could not win , not like 97 to 2003.
Is UKIP left or right? Or racist? How many WWC, ie racists, will vote UKIP in these Labour 'heartlands'?
I look forward to Farage reinventing himself as Donald Trump (or was it the other way round?).
The public continue to support the death penalty, doesn't make that the centre ground.
They also support a complete ban on immigration for two years according to that YouGov(?) graphic a week ago.
Again, not the centre ground.