He left the impression that he'd promised it, and his supporters used social media to spread the message that he'd promised it. Youngsters probably still think he promised it, for that matter.
Maybe Corbyn doesn't actually plan to renationalise everything, end all PFI, whack up taxes, tax robots (one of the maddest ideas yet), and disarm the country. Perhaps we all misheard him and his supporters have it wrong?
He can be. There are good reasons for a certain level of appeal irrespective of dire opponents. But oh gods the over the top praise he gets. I know it's partly a counter to perceived over the top criticism, but Christ.
Mrs May isn’t watching Corbyn’s speech. She’s at the cricket.
That sums up the complacency of Tories frankly. This stuff may happen within months.
I don't see how or why the Tory government would collapse any time soon, given that the likely outcome - if the polls are right - is Corbyn as PM.
They will cling on til 2022. They have to, for the sake of the country.
JC is going to need a few by elections triggered by tory MPs dying. Sadly the current crop seem less given to the pleasures of booze, ciggies and auto erotic asphyxiation than their illustrious predecessors so the actuarial odds are against him.
The chances of May fucking up the DUP arrangement must be significant as everything she touches turns to diarrhea.
It's amusing seeing the panic that the prospect of an impending election has on some posters, who don't seem to realise that the election that is leading us down the wrong path took place last year.
The Andrew Marr Show ✔@MarrShow "I did not make a commitment that we would write it off" says @jeremycorbyn on student debt #marr 09:55 - 23 Jul 2017
There were no seats available on the train.....the number of poor kids going to university is lower than ever....Corbyn has never told a lie in his life.
Erm, you mean like hard left activists threatening female journalists?
It's easy to explain:
There is intolerance which is good, and to be commended. Then there is intolerance is bad, and which should be condemned. Bad intolerance should not be tolerated, whereas good intolerance should be tolerated. Intolerance can be tolerated when it comes from certain segments of society, whilst it should not be tolerated if it comes from another. All intleration from some segments of society is intolerable, whilst all intoleration from other segments should be tolerated, because their intoleration is the result of past intoleration by others.
The Tories seem singularly incapable of engaging with Corbyn. The first thing they need to do is dial it down a notch and listen. All this talk of the end of the world, Venezuela, danger is completely self defeating.
Reminds me of the Tories in the run up to 1997 and Labour in the run up to 2010.
Source? I think you are thinking of Tory Scaremongerers
Corbyn's own words during the campaign: "And I don't see why those that had the historical misfortune to be at university during the £9,000 period should be burdened excessively compared to those that went before or those that come after. I will deal with it."
Quite what "deal with it" means is open to interpretation, but it was later watered down to reducing the debt, or limiting interest payments, etc etc.
The Tories seem singularly incapable of engaging with Corbyn. The first thing they need to do is dial it down a notch and listen. All this talk of the end of the world, Venezuela, danger is completely self defeating.
Reminds me of the Tories in the run up to 1997 and Labour in the run up to 2010.
Sorry but Corbyn is a far worse prospect than either Blair or Brown. He isn't even in the same ballpark. Corbyn will do damage to this country which will take decades to recover from. He's not a moderate social democrat, he's a far left luddite.
The Tories seem singularly incapable of engaging with Corbyn. The first thing they need to do is dial it down a notch and listen. All this talk of the end of the world, Venezuela, danger is completely self defeating.
Reminds me of the Tories in the run up to 1997 and Labour in the run up to 2010.
No the problem last time was the Tories scared off their base with the dementia tax and let Corbyn off the hook.
If the Tories are to win next time they will have to fire up their base and hit Corbyn hard on tax etc as they hit Kinnock in 1992
He left the impression that he'd promised it, and his supporters used social media to spread the message that he'd promised it. Youngsters probably still think he promised it, for that matter.
Maybe Corbyn doesn't actually plan to renationalise everything, end all PFI, whack up taxes, tax robots (one of the maddest ideas yet), and disarm the country. Perhaps we all misheard him and his supporters have it wrong?
You have (deliberately I assume) misheard the detail. For example as each rail franchise is up for renewal it is taken back so instead of paying when the trains arent running as with the stupid Southern Contract taxpayers get better VFM and Richard Branson does not get their hard earned for his rebuild.
etc etc
Sorry but it all adds up.
The way to defeat Corbyn is to do some Political thinking and get something positive to say to the electorate.
Mrs May isn’t watching Corbyn’s speech. She’s at the cricket.
That sums up the complacency of Tories frankly. This stuff may happen within months.
I don't see how or why the Tory government would collapse any time soon, given that the likely outcome - if the polls are right - is Corbyn as PM.
They will cling on til 2022. They have to, for the sake of the country.
I think they will for that reason, but that being the only reason will prevent the change needed to win again and the job us Corbyn's for the taking unless he self harms.
If Corbyn does win we would have to cheer for Sanders/Warren and Melenchon victories soon after ironically if all our brightest and best and those with assets are not to flee to New York and Paris
Source? I think you are thinking of Tory Scaremongerers
Corbyn's own words during the campaign: "And I don't see why those that had the historical misfortune to be at university during the £9,000 period should be burdened excessively compared to those that went before or those that come after. I will deal with it."
Quite what "deal with it" means is open to interpretation, but it was later watered down to reducing the debt, or limiting interest payments, etc etc.
At the time - in the same interview - he said: "“There is a block of those that currently have a massive debt, and I’m looking at ways that we could reduce that, ameliorate that, lengthen the period of paying it off, or some other means of reducing that debt burden.”
He added: “I don’t have the simple answer for it at this stage – I don’t think anybody would expect me to, because this election was called unexpectedly; we had two weeks to prepare all of this. But I’m very well aware of that problem.
“And I don’t see why those that had the historical misfortune to be at university during the £9,000 period should be burdened excessively compared to those that went before or those that come after. I will deal with it.”
He left the impression that he'd promised it, and his supporters used social media to spread the message that he'd promised it. Youngsters probably still think he promised it, for that matter.
Maybe Corbyn doesn't actually plan to renationalise everything, end all PFI, whack up taxes, tax robots (one of the maddest ideas yet), and disarm the country. Perhaps we all misheard him and his supporters have it wrong?
You have (deliberately I assume) misheard the detail. For example as each rail franchise is up for renewal it is taken back so instead of paying when the trains arent running as with the stupid Southern Contract taxpayers get better VFM and Richard Branson does not get their hard earned for his rebuild.
etc etc
Sorry but it all adds up.
The way to defeat Corbyn is to do some Political thinking and get something positive to say to the electorate.
Not paying for trains that aren't running pays for the rest of the shopping list?
He left the impression that he'd promised it, and his supporters used social media to spread the message that he'd promised it. Youngsters probably still think he promised it, for that matter.
Maybe Corbyn doesn't actually plan to renationalise everything, end all PFI, whack up taxes, tax robots (one of the maddest ideas yet), and disarm the country. Perhaps we all misheard him and his supporters have it wrong?
You have (deliberately I assume) misheard the detail. For example as each rail franchise is up for renewal it is taken back so instead of paying when the trains arent running as with the stupid Southern Contract taxpayers get better VFM and Richard Branson does not get their hard earned for his rebuild.
etc etc
Sorry but it all adds up.
The way to defeat Corbyn is to do some Political thinking and get something positive to say to the electorate.
Thinking? That's not their style. Much better to shout how bad and unfair everything is and complain at the world when it fails to agree with them.
Source? I think you are thinking of Tory Scaremongerers
Corbyn's own words during the campaign: "And I don't see why those that had the historical misfortune to be at university during the £9,000 period should be burdened excessively compared to those that went before or those that come after. I will deal with it."
Quite what "deal with it" means is open to interpretation, but it was later watered down to reducing the debt, or limiting interest payments, etc etc.
The Andrew Marr Show ✔@MarrShow "I did not make a commitment that we would write it off" says @jeremycorbyn on student debt #marr 09:55 - 23 Jul 2017
Source? I think you are thinking of Tory Scaremongerers
Corbyn's own words during the campaign: "And I don't see why those that had the historical misfortune to be at university during the £9,000 period should be burdened excessively compared to those that went before or those that come after. I will deal with it."
Quite what "deal with it" means is open to interpretation, but it was later watered down to reducing the debt, or limiting interest payments, etc etc.
The Andrew Marr Show ✔@MarrShow "I did not make a commitment that we would write it off" says @jeremycorbyn on student debt #marr 09:55 - 23 Jul 2017
If it was a mistake and he'd been misreported (which I agree is arguable, he was waffling somewhat incoherently), then he could have corrected the false impression immediately. He didn't, which was cynical and dishonest of him. Meanwhile, this 'false' impression was being used by his supporters:
Has anyone totted up the cost of all these Labour promises yet ?
You are obsessed that there is a huge cost.
Investment generates growth
The Manifesto was largely fully costed What else did he PROMISE
Every Labour representative talking about the ‘fully costed’ manifesto does not mean that it stands up to scrutiny - indeed scrutiny is something which has been sadly lacking to date.
If it was a mistake and he'd been misreported (which I agree is arguable, he was waffling somewhat incoherently), then he could have corrected the false impression immediately. He didn't, which was cynical and dishonest of him. Meanwhile, this 'false' impression was being used by his supporters:
And didn't someone yesterday claim when may made comments that were misinterpreted that was her fault?
I thought that bit harsh myself, but labour cleverly worded what they'd do and plenty will have gotten the wrong impression. He gas grown as a leader - into a normal one, who obfuscated, implies and half promises. Good on one sense, but he should have dropped the idea he is different as a leader by now.
No doubt there's another £100billion or so of spending to be announced yet.
What was the first £100 Bn over and above the fully costed manifesto.
Methinks its a fig box of your imagination
It's difficult to be sure. Partly because they may nationalise Construction as well as utilities and appear not to be able to say whether they will simply steal these companies or pay the market rate.
How big is the construction industry? F**** enormous I would say.
PFI alone was £50bn, depending on whether you believe the Shadow Chancellor or the Labour press release.
value of all Construction work in 2016 = £137 billion
Absolutely nothing in Corbyn's speech on how he will create a socialist Utopia which will go beyond even Attlee, on a level of personal income tax created by Margaret Thatcher and continued by Tony Blair. The money available to him will be no higher than the level of Corporation Tax under Gordon Brown. Corbyn is blatantly dishonest in building up such hopes on sand. Cults of personality and manias have a tendency to backfire onto its original recipent.
No it does not. The water companies are a £60+ billion cost alone.
Becomes an Asset on the Govts Balance Sheet.
Why do you want other countries to own our most vital infrastructure.
Why do you want to spend £60+ billion on water companies? If we have £60+ billion lying around I would hope that we can find better things to invest in.
Source? I think you are thinking of Tory Scaremongerers
Corbyn's own words during the campaign: "And I don't see why those that had the historical misfortune to be at university during the £9,000 period should be burdened excessively compared to those that went before or those that come after. I will deal with it."
Quite what "deal with it" means is open to interpretation, but it was later watered down to reducing the debt, or limiting interest payments, etc etc.
The Andrew Marr Show ✔@MarrShow "I did not make a commitment that we would write it off" says @jeremycorbyn on student debt #marr 09:55 - 23 Jul 2017
The only good thing about Labour's naked communism is that those Tory supporters who thought it was clever to sit out GE2017 or go elsewhere will have to decide where they stand at the next election - back an imperfect Tory party or allow a communist takeover of the United Kingdom.
Source? I think you are thinking of Tory Scaremongerers
Corbyn's own words during the campaign: "And I don't see why those that had the historical misfortune to be at university during the £9,000 period should be burdened excessively compared to those that went before or those that come after. I will deal with it."
Quite what "deal with it" means is open to interpretation, but it was later watered down to reducing the debt, or limiting interest payments, etc etc.
The Andrew Marr Show ✔@MarrShow "I did not make a commitment that we would write it off" says @jeremycorbyn on student debt #marr 09:55 - 23 Jul 2017
Before and after the election sort of makes all the difference, doesn't it. Like a front page splash on a newspaper proclaiming X is guilty a day before X's court case and then a retraction printed two weeks later on p.23.
Before and after the election sort of makes all the difference, doesn't it. Like a front page splash on a newspaper proclaiming X is guilty a day before X's court case and then a retraction printed two weeks later on p.23.
What about this fella, how is one of Corbyn's ministers?
A Labour Party candidate told voters during the election campaign that Jeremy Corbyn would write off tuition fee debts for thousands of students, it has emerged.
There has been a fierce row in recent weeks over whether the Labour leader vowed to abolish the historic debts, which are now understood to be worth £100 billion.
Source? I think you are thinking of Tory Scaremongerers
Corbyn's own words during the campaign: "And I don't see why those that had the historical misfortune to be at university during the £9,000 period should be burdened excessively compared to those that went before or those that come after. I will deal with it."
Quite what "deal with it" means is open to interpretation, but it was later watered down to reducing the debt, or limiting interest payments, etc etc.
The Andrew Marr Show ✔@MarrShow "I did not make a commitment that we would write it off" says @jeremycorbyn on student debt #marr 09:55 - 23 Jul 2017
No, but he said he'd deal with it.
Oh dear seriously was election before 23rd July?
Thankfully not as that was before KABOOMs KABOOM moment
The only good thing about Labour's naked communism is that those Tory supporters who thought it was clever to sit out GE2017 or go elsewhere will have to decide where they stand at the next election - back an imperfect Tory party or allow a communist takeover of the United Kingdom.
Given how much the tory vote increased, I'm not sure if so many returners would save them. Some seats on the right places might be rewon, but how many labour moderates stayed away thinking it would be a dis aster und er Corbyn? Not as many as predicted, bur some and they might be back - Watson shows how the moderates are now fervent again, by necessity
What you miss about Cameron and Osborne is they fundamentally governed for London (which had a positive impact on macro statistics).
A true One NationTorymanages to bridge the differing needs of the country and the metropolis. With the Big Society Cameron got close but didn't have the courage to push it through.
I like some of their policies, especially on the social side (the economics were not great as they didn't fix the underlying problems - all credit to @Alanbrooke for calling that early). But their mindset and focus on one group in society was all wrong
Bullocks.
Look at the excellent Northern Powerhouse work begun by Osborne and Cameron for starters.
It was a good concept but life is about more than economics
One more thing to remember: Corbyn and the Jezbollah have had an incredible run of luck, to end up where they are. From Jez becoming leader to TMay basically losing an unlosable election, every time the dice have fallen, remarkably, in his favour. This is partly because he is under-estimated as a campaigner, but mainly because of sheer dumb luck: he came along when lots of people fancied a bit of old geezer leftwingery in a vest.
This luck will run out. There are several huge obstacles coming down the road. Not the least of them is Brexit itself. Labour's divide is massive, but concealed. That cannot last.
Also, there's his horrible supporters. He really does have a crazy and unpleasant bunch of followers. At some point they will go too far.
And voters will simply tire of the vest.
Etc. Etc. Etc.
Tories need to hold their nerve. It's Zulu all over again, and the mad, ululating fuzzy wuzzies might have the numbers, but the Tories have Martini-Henry rifles, if they can just remember how to use them.
It'll all be alright in the end thinking is precisely why we are in this position today, and why the GE went so horribly tits up for the Cons.
What about this fella, how is one of Corbyn's ministers?
A Labour Party candidate told voters during the election campaign that Jeremy Corbyn would write off tuition fee debts for thousands of students, it has emerged.
There has been a fierce row in recent weeks over whether the Labour leader vowed to abolish the historic debts, which are now understood to be worth £100 billion.
No doubt there's another £100billion or so of spending to be announced yet.
What was the first £100 Bn over and above the fully costed manifesto.
Methinks its a fig box of your imagination
The student debt write-off was £100bn by itself.
Didnt promise that though as you well know
The Tories didn't promise £350m for the NHS either, and - one instance aside, I think - neither did the Leave campaign. No matter: the expectation is there.
What about this fella, how is one of Corbyn's ministers?
A Labour Party candidate told voters during the election campaign that Jeremy Corbyn would write off tuition fee debts for thousands of students, it has emerged.
There has been a fierce row in recent weeks over whether the Labour leader vowed to abolish the historic debts, which are now understood to be worth £100 billion.
To be fair, this is smart: 2017 may be the year when politics finally caught up with the crash of 2008
It may well be the year which leads a crash like that of 2008.
In 50-100 years time, when the histories are written, this will be seen as the post-crash era. We are far from emerging from it.
In retrospect I think that the mid-2010s will come to be seen as the third major turning point in social and political history of the post war era, along with 1979 and 1945. It is clear that, irrespective of whether Corbyn wins or not, people are turning against the insecurity, inequality and denigration of all things public that has characterised the last 30+ years, just as they turned against the corporatism and abuses of union power in the 1970s.
Brexit and Corbyn are manifestations of this, as is the Tory scramble to copy some of Corbyn's ideas, such a reductions in tuition fees. This is very reminiscent of the Callaghan government's abandonment of Keynesianism in the 1970s.
Weighed down by the impossible task of delivering on the Brexiteers' promises, not to mention the worst political leadership in modern times, it is very, very hard to see a way through for the Tories. The philosophy which has guided them since the mid 1970s is crumbling and it is not within their power to turn the tide.
No doubt there's another £100billion or so of spending to be announced yet.
What was the first £100 Bn over and above the fully costed manifesto.
Methinks its a fig box of your imagination
The student debt write-off was £100bn by itself.
Didnt promise that though as you well know
The Tories didn't promise £350m for the NHS either, and - one instance aside, I think - neither did the Leave campaign. No matter: the expectation is there.
DID THE TORIES PROMISE TO STEAL GRANNIES HOUSE!!!!
Now thats a great idea I seem to remember a lot on here arguing
No doubt there's another £100billion or so of spending to be announced yet.
What was the first £100 Bn over and above the fully costed manifesto.
Methinks its a fig box of your imagination
The student debt write-off was £100bn by itself.
Didnt promise that though as you well know
The Tories didn't promise £350m for the NHS either, and - one instance aside, I think - neither did the Leave campaign. No matter: the expectation is there.
DID THE TORIES PROMISE TO STEAL GRANNIES HOUSE!!!!
Now thats a great idea I seem to remember a lot on here arguing
Serious question - what are the odds of the Tories being able to keep Corbyn from an overall majority, so he at least needs SNP / Lib Dem support to govern? The SNP talk a lefty game, but in practice they're FAR to the right of this kind of economic lunacy.
My God, at this rate we're going to be hoping for the outcome to match the scare story that helped the Tories so much in 2015 - a Labour PM in Nicola Sturgeon's pocket!
The interim leader was recorded saying: "Although I'm neutral in the leadership I also believe that Richard Leonard has everything that we need to win in 2021. I really do."
One more thing to remember: Corbyn and the Jezbollah have had an incredible run of luck, to end up where they are. From Jez becoming leader to TMay basically losing an unlosable election, every time the dice have fallen, remarkably, in his favour. This is partly because he is under-estimated as a campaigner, but mainly because of sheer dumb luck: he came along when lots of people fancied a bit of old geezer leftwingery in a vest.
This luck will run out. There are several huge obstacles coming down the road. Not the least of them is Brexit itself. Labour's divide is massive, but concealed. That cannot last.
Also, there's his horrible supporters. He really does have a crazy and unpleasant bunch of followers. At some point they will go too far.
And voters will simply tire of the vest.
Etc. Etc. Etc.
Tories need to hold their nerve. It's Zulu all over again, and the mad, ululating fuzzy wuzzies might have the numbers, but the Tories have Martini-Henry rifles, if they can just remember how to use them.
DID THE TORIES PROMISE TO STEAL GRANNIES HOUSE!!!!
Now thats a great idea I seem to remember a lot on here arguing
Well you are wrong again. I don't recall "a lot on here" arguing it was "a great idea", quite the opposite. And even those who thought that there was some merit on evening out the current approach thought that a general election campaign was a poor time to make such an announcement.
One more thing to remember: Corbyn and the Jezbollah have had an incredible run of luck, to end up where they are. From Jez becoming leader to TMay basically losing an unlosable election, every time the dice have fallen, remarkably, in his favour. This is partly because he is under-estimated as a campaigner, but mainly because of sheer dumb luck: he came along when lots of people fancied a bit of old geezer leftwingery in a vest.
This luck will run out. There are several huge obstacles coming down the road. Not the least of them is Brexit itself. Labour's divide is massive, but concealed. That cannot last.
Also, there's his horrible supporters. He really does have a crazy and unpleasant bunch of followers. At some point they will go too far.
And voters will simply tire of the vest.
Etc. Etc. Etc.
Tories need to hold their nerve. It's Zulu all over again, and the mad, ululating fuzzy wuzzies might have the numbers, but the Tories have Martini-Henry rifles, if they can just remember how to use them.
The Zulus had rifles at Rorke's Drift too (well, some of them did).
I expect that you're right: it's the political equivalent of a summer fad. Stalin meets deeley boppers, if you like.
However, I wouldn't be entirely sure. Firstly, Labour has changed already, and while that change might not be permanent it is leaving a bigger and bigger mark. The 2022 intake could well be much more Corbynite than the 2017 one was.
Brexit might split Labour but it also might not. The deed will probably be done by the GE, if parliament runs its course, in which case arguments about Hard and Soft Brexits become matters for recrimination rather than future policy: there'll be an echo of the debate but it won't have the same intensity - and while there will no doubt be a Rejoin campaign supported in principle by, perhaps, a majority of members, it's unlikely to be a front-rank issue. The country will be well bored of the EU argument by then.
On balance, I expect that you're right: in the natural course of events, Corbyn and/or his supporters will go too far at some point and the public will see them for what they are. Or alternatively, the lack of ability of the likes of Abbott, Raynor, Long Bailey and even Corbyn himself, when not on the stump, might cause a revolt (though we've been there before). But the natural course of events hasn't proven the most reliable guide as of late.
On Jeremy Corbyn's proposal for rent curbs, Labour's general election co-ordinator Andrew Gwynne says that cities such as New York have rent controls "and if New York has them then London can have them".
I'm no expert but I'm fairly sure that New York's rent controls are not a good example.
Serious question - what are the odds of the Tories being able to keep Corbyn from an overall majority, so he at least needs SNP / Lib Dem support to govern? The SNP talk a lefty game, but in practice they're FAR to the right of this kind of economic lunacy.
My God, at this rate we're going to be hoping for the outcome to match the scare story that helped the Tories so much in 2015 - a Labour PM in Nicola Sturgeon's pocket!
If Corbyn does win I would rather he wins outright without further independence shenanigans.
Then he and McDonnell alone would be responsible for the mess they will make of the UK when the time comes for Labour to seek re election and the Tory opposition can focus all their fire on them while minor parties can pick away at them at the side
Serious question - what are the odds of the Tories being able to keep Corbyn from an overall majority, so he at least needs SNP / Lib Dem support to govern? The SNP talk a lefty game, but in practice they're FAR to the right of this kind of economic lunacy.
My God, at this rate we're going to be hoping for the outcome to match the scare story that helped the Tories so much in 2015 - a Labour PM in Nicola Sturgeon's pocket!
Agreed, the SNP should be called SDP.
I don't know why Tories are having a nervous breakdown. He has to win about 40 Tory seats to have a majority similar to what John Major had, i.e. a lot more than Northampton North and the 2017 manifesto was well to the right of 1983 or 1987.
If we want to stop the executive having near-absolute power when a party wins a majority of 50-100 seats, so-called elected dictatorship, we should bring in PR.
Brexit might split Labour but it also might not. The deed will probably be done by the GE, if parliament runs its course, in which case arguments about Hard and Soft Brexits become matters for recrimination rather than future policy: there'll be an echo of the debate but it won't have the same intensity - and while there will no doubt be a Rejoin campaign supported in principle by, perhaps, a majority of members, it's unlikely to be a front-rank issue. The country will be well bored of the EU argument by then.
The obvious way to use it as a wedge issue against the left is to cancel it.
All those thinking that Labour look well-placed to win most seats at the next election (this includes me) should note that they are currently odds against to do so on Betfair.
I'd have thought they should be something like a 1.7 shot, but clearly the market disagrees with me.
One more thing to remember: Corbyn and the Jezbollah have had an incredible run of luck, to end up where they are. From Jez becoming leader to TMay basically losing an unlosable election, every time the dice have fallen, remarkably, in his favour. This is partly because he is under-estimated as a campaigner, but mainly because of sheer dumb luck: he came along when lots of people fancied a bit of old geezer leftwingery in a vest.
This luck will run out. There are several huge obstacles coming down the road. Not the least of them is Brexit itself. Labour's divide is massive, but concealed. That cannot last.
Also, there's his horrible supporters. He really does have a crazy and unpleasant bunch of followers. At some point they will go too far.
And voters will simply tire of the vest.
Etc. Etc. Etc.
Tories need to hold their nerve. It's Zulu all over again, and the mad, ululating fuzzy wuzzies might have the numbers, but the Tories have Martini-Henry rifles, if they can just remember how to use them.
It'll all be alright in the end thinking is precisely why we are in this position today, and why the GE went so horribly tits up for the Cons.
I'm the opposite of complacent. The thought of Corbyn winning horrifies me, which is why I am back posting here. As Cyclefree says, Tories must start planning how to beat him, and now.
What I AM saying is that there is complacency on the Corbyn side. I get a sense the Left thinks they've got the next one in the bag. They have the momentum, in all ways. I reckon they are wrong.
And now I am off to have oysters at Sheekeys, before seafood is nationalised and champagne abolished. Later.
As things stand, it is Corbyn with a vision for the future, which many people want to believe. What have the Tories got to offer? Would anyone, including many of the PBtories, actually believe them?
The record of the Tories and the end result of the Blair/Brown years is abysmal in most people's experience. Corbyn and Mcdonnell do not have a record, except for objecting to the policies which many have been felt to be failures.
It becomes a matter of trust, can anyone honestly look at any of the Tory front bench and say that they will follow them to the ends of the earth or would they they think that pulling the chain and flushing them away would be a much kinder option?
"Talk of the risks of a run on the pound, which would increase inflation, rings hollow when it comes from the mouths of those who have spent the last year extolling the value for exporters of devaluation.
The real problem for the Conservative Government is that it is difficult to attack the huge risks Mr Corbyn’s agenda poses to Britain’s economy when they are proposing to tear up economic arrangements, such as the single market and customs union, that have underpinned our open economy for a generation.
To fight this new incarnation of socialism, you need to start from first principles. You need to explain patiently and persistently why enterprise creates jobs, why profits drive investment and why free and open markets raise incomes — and why Mr Corbyn’s plans would achieve the exact opposite. For even in Mr Corbyn’s world, two plus two still does not equal five."
One of the issues for the Tory party is Corbyn has a 'reasonable' way of talking. If you take odd comments in isolation, then they sound sensible.
His frequent use of the 'we have to have a dialogue with these people' is and example. It is hard to argue against and by definition dialogue is the best route.
However dialogue is useless without something to back it up, so it is no more than a meaningless and trite sound bite.
How has the last few years dialogue with PRNK gone? Made much progress? The situation there is not of Trumps making, he inherited it.
Dialogue is a part of the solution, initially it came via John Major with the IRA, not Jeremy Corbyn. It has to be the right time for both parties. There is little joy in having dialogue with a party who is spending the rest of the time terrorising, raping, pillaging or committing whatever cyber crime they like against you.
"Talk of the risks of a run on the pound, which would increase inflation, rings hollow when it comes from the mouths of those who have spent the last year extolling the value for exporters of devaluation.
The real problem for the Conservative Government is that it is difficult to attack the huge risks Mr Corbyn’s agenda poses to Britain’s economy when they are proposing to tear up economic arrangements, such as the single market and customs union, that have underpinned our open economy for a generation.
To fight this new incarnation of socialism, you need to start from first principles. You need to explain patiently and persistently why enterprise creates jobs, why profits drive investment and why free and open markets raise incomes — and why Mr Corbyn’s plans would achieve the exact opposite. For even in Mr Corbyn’s world, two plus two still does not equal five."
All those thinking that Labour look well-placed to win most seats at the next election (this includes me) should note that they are currently odds against to do so on Betfair.
I'd have thought they should be something like a 1.7 shot, but clearly the market disagrees with me.
Thanks. I can't get odds off oddschecker, only an ad. for Ladbrokes who appear to be offering 2.0 on Labour most seats and I don't have an a/c with Betfair.
2.0 isn't convincing value ... 2.5 might be.
A week is a long time in politics and we're talking about four years. Or until the Brexshit hits the fan.
"Talk of the risks of a run on the pound, which would increase inflation, rings hollow when it comes from the mouths of those who have spent the last year extolling the value for exporters of devaluation.
The real problem for the Conservative Government is that it is difficult to attack the huge risks Mr Corbyn’s agenda poses to Britain’s economy when they are proposing to tear up economic arrangements, such as the single market and customs union, that have underpinned our open economy for a generation.
To fight this new incarnation of socialism, you need to start from first principles. You need to explain patiently and persistently why enterprise creates jobs, why profits drive investment and why free and open markets raise incomes — and why Mr Corbyn’s plans would achieve the exact opposite. For even in Mr Corbyn’s world, two plus two still does not equal five."
The Tory Brexit right created the conditions in which Corbyn and the far left could thrive. Cake and Eat It worked in June 2016, it could well work at the next general election.
As things stand, it is Corbyn with a vision for the future, which many people want to believe. What have the Tories got to offer? Would anyone, including many of the PBtories, actually believe them?
The record of the Tories and the end result of the Blair/Brown years is abysmal in most people's experience. Corbyn and Mcdonnell do not have a record, except for objecting to the policies which many have been felt to be failures.
It becomes a matter of trust, can anyone honestly look at any of the Tory front bench and say that they will follow them to the ends of the earth or would they they think that pulling the chain and flushing them away would be a much kinder option?
Would I follow them to the ends of the Earth? No.
Do I think they (and the Lib Dems) have done a fair job since 2010? Yes.
Would I be hit by a Corbyn-led government? Undoubtedly.
One more thing to remember: Corbyn and the Jezbollah have had an incredible run of luck, to end up where they are. From Jez becoming leader to TMay basically losing an unlosable election, every time the dice have fallen, remarkably, in his favour. This is partly because he is under-estimated as a campaigner, but mainly because of sheer dumb luck: he came along when lots of people fancied a bit of old geezer leftwingery in a vest.
This luck will run out. There are several huge obstacles coming down the road. Not the least of them is Brexit itself. Labour's divide is massive, but concealed. That cannot last.
Also, there's his horrible supporters. He really does have a crazy and unpleasant bunch of followers. At some point they will go too far.
And voters will simply tire of the vest.
Etc. Etc. Etc.
Tories need to hold their nerve. It's Zulu all over again, and the mad, ululating fuzzy wuzzies might have the numbers, but the Tories have Martini-Henry rifles, if they can just remember how to use them.
The Zulus had rifles at Rorke's Drift too (well, some of them did).
I expect that you're right: it's the political equivalent of a summer fad. Stalin meets deeley boppers, if you like.
However, I wouldn't be entirely sure. Firstly, Labour has changed already, and while that change might not be permanent it is leaving a bigger and bigger mark. The 2022 intake could well be much more Corbynite than the 2017 one was.
Brexit might split Labour but it also might not. The deed will probably be done by the GE, if parliament runs its course, in which case arguments about Hard and Soft Brexits become matters for recrimination rather than future policy: there'll be an echo of the debate but it won't have the same intensity - and while there will no doubt be a Rejoin campaign supported in principle by, perhaps, a majority of members, it's unlikely to be a front-rank issue. The country will be well bored of the EU argument by then.
On balance, I expect that you're right: in the natural course of events, Corbyn and/or his supporters will go too far at some point and the public will see them for what they are. Or alternatively, the lack of ability of the likes of Abbott, Raynor, Long Bailey and even Corbyn himself, when not on the stump, might cause a revolt (though we've been there before). But the natural course of events hasn't proven the most reliable guide as of late.
The problem the Tories have is that there is no-one remotely credible on their side either.
Jeremy Corbyn unveils sweeping housing plans to end Britain's 'social cleansing' scandal
Whats not to like?
Discuss.
I am off to watch Jezza highlights over and over again till 2021/2
The way some Labour supporters condemned Jezza because of his past words and actions before the election, yet now support him, is both laughable and contemptible.
Brexit might split Labour but it also might not. The deed will probably be done by the GE, if parliament runs its course, in which case arguments about Hard and Soft Brexits become matters for recrimination rather than future policy: there'll be an echo of the debate but it won't have the same intensity - and while there will no doubt be a Rejoin campaign supported in principle by, perhaps, a majority of members, it's unlikely to be a front-rank issue. The country will be well bored of the EU argument by then.
The obvious way to use it as a wedge issue against the left is to cancel it.
Absolutely nothing in Corbyn's speech on how he will create a socialist Utopia which will go beyond even Attlee, on a level of personal income tax created by Margaret Thatcher and continued by Tony Blair. The money available to him will be no higher than the level of Corporation Tax under Gordon Brown. Corbyn is blatantly dishonest in building up such hopes on sand. Cults of personality and manias have a tendency to backfire onto its original recipent.
The triumph of Cake And Eat It in 2016 showed that there is no need for detail. You make promises and cry Project Fear when called out. If people want to believe you, they will.
No doubt there's another £100billion or so of spending to be announced yet.
What was the first £100 Bn over and above the fully costed manifesto.
Methinks its a fig box of your imagination
The student debt write-off was £100bn by itself.
Didnt promise that though as you well know
The Tories didn't promise £350m for the NHS either, and - one instance aside, I think - neither did the Leave campaign. No matter: the expectation is there.
The Leave campaign insinuated that £350m might be available for the NHS, but pledged only £100m - which got virtually bugger all traction.
May, Mrs. Trunchbull and Lord Salisbury totalled ignored that obvious line of attack.
"Talk of the risks of a run on the pound, which would increase inflation, rings hollow when it comes from the mouths of those who have spent the last year extolling the value for exporters of devaluation.
The real problem for the Conservative Government is that it is difficult to attack the huge risks Mr Corbyn’s agenda poses to Britain’s economy when they are proposing to tear up economic arrangements, such as the single market and customs union, that have underpinned our open economy for a generation.
To fight this new incarnation of socialism, you need to start from first principles. You need to explain patiently and persistently why enterprise creates jobs, why profits drive investment and why free and open markets raise incomes — and why Mr Corbyn’s plans would achieve the exact opposite. For even in Mr Corbyn’s world, two plus two still does not equal five."
That's why I think a run on the pound comments won't be damaging for Labour.
It is likely we get a Brexit related run on the pound circa March 2019 or March 2021 which the Tories will get the blame for.
Yep, it turns out that the Tory Brexit Right is the best friend the Labour Brexit Left has ever had. They have provided Corbyn and Co with all the excuses they need should they actually take office. Like the Brexit Right, the Brexit Left will blame everyone but themselves when the promises they have made start to turn to dust. It would be wonderfully, gloriously funny if it did not mean the country will be utterly buggered.
Comments
It may well be the year which leads a crash like that of 2008.
"I did not make a commitment that we would write it off" says @jeremycorbyn on student debt #marr
09:55 - 23 Jul 2017
A curse on Cameron AND May AND the Brexiteers for putting the country in this kind of danger.
The chances of May fucking up the DUP arrangement must be significant as everything she touches turns to diarrhea.
Reminds me of the Tories in the run up to 1997 and Labour in the run up to 2010.
Corbyn's own words during the campaign: "And I don't see why those that had the historical misfortune to be at university during the £9,000 period should be burdened excessively compared to those that went before or those that come after. I will deal with it."
Quite what "deal with it" means is open to interpretation, but it was later watered down to reducing the debt, or limiting interest payments, etc etc.
If the Tories are to win next time they will have to fire up their base and hit Corbyn hard on tax etc as they hit Kinnock in 1992
etc etc
Sorry but it all adds up.
The way to defeat Corbyn is to do some Political thinking and get something positive to say to the electorate.
"“There is a block of those that currently have a massive debt, and I’m looking at ways that we could reduce that, ameliorate that, lengthen the period of paying it off, or some other means of reducing that debt burden.”
He added: “I don’t have the simple answer for it at this stage – I don’t think anybody would expect me to, because this election was called unexpectedly; we had two weeks to prepare all of this. But I’m very well aware of that problem.
“And I don’t see why those that had the historical misfortune to be at university during the £9,000 period should be burdened excessively compared to those that went before or those that come after. I will deal with it.”
https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/no-corbyn-did-not-pledge-to-abolish-student-debt
"I did not make a commitment that we would write it off" says @jeremycorbyn on student debt #marr
09:55 - 23 Jul 2017
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/labour-party/jeremy-corbyn/news/86362/jeremy-corbyn-labour-could-write
If it was a mistake and he'd been misreported (which I agree is arguable, he was waffling somewhat incoherently), then he could have corrected the false impression immediately. He didn't, which was cynical and dishonest of him. Meanwhile, this 'false' impression was being used by his supporters:
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/key-ally-of-jeremy-corbyn-caught-on-video-making-pledge-to-wipe-off-student-debts-a3595646.html
The 'corrections' only came after the election, as in this classic:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3979528/angela-rayner-admits-labours-aim-of-abolishing-student-debt-would-cost-100billion-and-they-dont-know-where-the-money-would-come-from/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-41413587
I thought that bit harsh myself, but labour cleverly worded what they'd do and plenty will have gotten the wrong impression. He gas grown as a leader - into a normal one, who obfuscated, implies and half promises. Good on one sense, but he should have dropped the idea he is different as a leader by now.
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/913025673501044736
Will need to add cries of Oh Jeremy Corbyn.
Why do you want other countries to own our most vital infrastructure.
Flogging a dead horse springs to mind
https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/no-corbyn-did-not-pledge-to-abolish-student-debt
A Labour Party candidate told voters during the election campaign that Jeremy Corbyn would write off tuition fee debts for thousands of students, it has emerged.
There has been a fierce row in recent weeks over whether the Labour leader vowed to abolish the historic debts, which are now understood to be worth £100 billion.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/labour-tuition-fee-debt-jeremy-corbyn_uk_597719a5e4b0c95f375e31aa
Thankfully not as that was before KABOOMs KABOOM moment
https://twitter.com/brokenbottleboy/status/912938314638008320
Have you lost the ability to read
Grubby, normal politics.
Brexit and Corbyn are manifestations of this, as is the Tory scramble to copy some of Corbyn's ideas, such a reductions in tuition fees. This is very reminiscent of the Callaghan government's abandonment of Keynesianism in the 1970s.
Weighed down by the impossible task of delivering on the Brexiteers' promises, not to mention the worst political leadership in modern times, it is very, very hard to see a way through for the Tories. The philosophy which has guided them since the mid 1970s is crumbling and it is not within their power to turn the tide.
Now thats a great idea I seem to remember a lot on here arguing
My God, at this rate we're going to be hoping for the outcome to match the scare story that helped the Tories so much in 2015 - a Labour PM in Nicola Sturgeon's pocket!
https://twitter.com/STVNews/status/913029294510686209
I expect that you're right: it's the political equivalent of a summer fad. Stalin meets deeley boppers, if you like.
However, I wouldn't be entirely sure. Firstly, Labour has changed already, and while that change might not be permanent it is leaving a bigger and bigger mark. The 2022 intake could well be much more Corbynite than the 2017 one was.
Brexit might split Labour but it also might not. The deed will probably be done by the GE, if parliament runs its course, in which case arguments about Hard and Soft Brexits become matters for recrimination rather than future policy: there'll be an echo of the debate but it won't have the same intensity - and while there will no doubt be a Rejoin campaign supported in principle by, perhaps, a majority of members, it's unlikely to be a front-rank issue. The country will be well bored of the EU argument by then.
On balance, I expect that you're right: in the natural course of events, Corbyn and/or his supporters will go too far at some point and the public will see them for what they are. Or alternatively, the lack of ability of the likes of Abbott, Raynor, Long Bailey and even Corbyn himself, when not on the stump, might cause a revolt (though we've been there before). But the natural course of events hasn't proven the most reliable guide as of late.
On Jeremy Corbyn's proposal for rent curbs, Labour's general election co-ordinator Andrew Gwynne says that cities such as New York have rent controls "and if New York has them then London can have them".
I'm no expert but I'm fairly sure that New York's rent controls are not a good example.
Then he and McDonnell alone would be responsible for the mess they will make of the UK when the time comes for Labour to seek re election and the Tory opposition can focus all their fire on them while minor parties can pick away at them at the side
I don't know why Tories are having a nervous breakdown. He has to win about 40 Tory seats to have a majority similar to what John Major had, i.e. a lot more than Northampton North and the 2017 manifesto was well to the right of 1983 or 1987.
If we want to stop the executive having near-absolute power when a party wins a majority of 50-100 seats, so-called elected dictatorship, we should bring in PR.
But we don't believe in scapegoating
I'd have thought they should be something like a 1.7 shot, but clearly the market disagrees with me.
Socialism only gets one more go IMO
Whats not to like?
Discuss.
I am off to watch Jezza highlights over and over again till 2021/2
The record of the Tories and the end result of the Blair/Brown years is abysmal in most people's experience. Corbyn and Mcdonnell do not have a record, except for objecting to the policies which many have been felt to be failures.
It becomes a matter of trust, can anyone honestly look at any of the Tory front bench and say that they will follow them to the ends of the earth or would they they think that pulling the chain and flushing them away would be a much kinder option?
"Talk of the risks of a run on the pound, which would increase inflation, rings hollow when it comes from the mouths of those who have spent the last year extolling the value for exporters of devaluation.
The real problem for the Conservative Government is that it is difficult to attack the huge risks Mr Corbyn’s agenda poses to Britain’s economy when they are proposing to tear up economic arrangements, such as the single market and customs union, that have underpinned our open economy for a generation.
To fight this new incarnation of socialism, you need to start from first principles. You need to explain patiently and persistently why enterprise creates jobs, why profits drive investment and why free and open markets raise incomes — and why Mr Corbyn’s plans would achieve the exact opposite. For even in Mr Corbyn’s world, two plus two still does not equal five."
https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/evening-standard-comment-don-t-focus-on-the-left-s-past-but-their-plans-now-a3645091.html
His frequent use of the 'we have to have a dialogue with these people' is and example. It is hard to argue against and by definition dialogue is the best route.
However dialogue is useless without something to back it up, so it is no more than a meaningless and trite sound bite.
How has the last few years dialogue with PRNK gone? Made much progress? The situation there is not of Trumps making, he inherited it.
Dialogue is a part of the solution, initially it came via John Major with the IRA, not Jeremy Corbyn. It has to be the right time for both parties. There is little joy in having dialogue with a party who is spending the rest of the time terrorising, raping, pillaging or committing whatever cyber crime they like against you.
It is likely we get a Brexit related run on the pound circa March 2019 or March 2021 which the Tories will get the blame for.
2.0 isn't convincing value ... 2.5 might be.
A week is a long time in politics and we're talking about four years. Or until the Brexshit hits the fan.
Do I think they (and the Lib Dems) have done a fair job since 2010? Yes.
Would I be hit by a Corbyn-led government? Undoubtedly.
Discuss.
The right-wing head-bangers are in control
What speech terms from the market appeared?
Miliband 10/1
But quite a few others too.
https://twitter.com/LadPolitics/status/913021515125465095
Replying to @LadPolitics
Significant redistribution of income away from Ladbrokes and into punters' pockets
May, Mrs. Trunchbull and Lord Salisbury totalled ignored that obvious line of attack.
I cunningly managed to avoid all the winners.
Proof, were it needed, the Conservatives are better for prosperity than Labour.
As was, as ever will be.
Don't Know always does far better in those questions that people imagine.