Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Deputy Labour leader Tom Watson feels the heat after publicly

SystemSystem Posts: 6,389
edited August 6 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Deputy Labour leader Tom Watson feels the heat after publicly attacking Jezza on antisemitism

Perhaps the biggest development within Labour’s antisemitism row over the weekend has been the assertion by the deputy leader, Tom Watson, that he does not follow the Corbyn line.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • RobDRobD Posts: 33,964
    First (again)!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 33,964
    edited August 6
    Appointed deputy chair of the party in 2011, elected deputy leader in 2015. Hadn't realised that he's not actually sackable.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 4,636
    MPs should ignore twitter. Much of it is complete disinformation anyway. And many of the people who actually are people are bonkers and certainly not representative of anything.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 21,491
    I pretty much despise Watson for his behaviour towards others, and especially his paedo-sniffing general activities.

    It's therefore slightly odd to feel that he's on the right side of this issue, tinged with a certain amount of schadenfreude that he is now victim of the sort of campaigning he has used against others.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 31,005

    I pretty much despise Watson for his behaviour towards others, and especially his paedo-sniffing general activities.

    It's therefore slightly odd to feel that he's on the right side of this issue, tinged with a certain amount of schadenfreude that he is now victim of the sort of campaigning he has used against others.

    The Nonce-Finder General pursued by a mindless braying mob......what could be more fitting?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 21,379
    It’s an open question which is greater: the crazed hysteria of the Corbynites or the crazed hysteria of the Leavers.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 348
    rkrkrk said:

    MPs should ignore twitter. Much of it is complete disinformation anyway. And many of the people who actually are people are bonkers and certainly not representative of anything.

    ... or boycott it. It is made for loud-mouthed, bonkers obsessives and lazy journalists. The sewer of the Internet.

  • FishingFishing Posts: 348

    It’s an open question which is greater: the crazed hysteria of the Corbynites or the crazed hysteria of the Leavers.

    You don't think that Remainers show any signs of hysteria at all? The Emergency Budget that wasn't? The idea that our leaving would somehow trigger World War 3?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 31,005

    It’s an open question which is greater: the crazed hysteria of the Corbynites or the crazed hysteria of the Leavers.

    Whilst Remainers are models of sober mature reflection......
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 21,491
    Fishing said:

    rkrkrk said:

    MPs should ignore twitter. Much of it is complete disinformation anyway. And many of the people who actually are people are bonkers and certainly not representative of anything.

    ... or boycott it. It is made for loud-mouthed, bonkers obsessives and lazy journalists. The sewer of the Internet.

    It'd be interesting to know if any of them get anything useful out of it, for instance knowing about constituent's needs. I somehow doubt it as the signal to noise ratio is poor.

    But it could be that MPs get, as well as negatives, a comfortable echo chamber.

    I doubt that's helpful either.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 4,883
    Fishing said:

    ... It is made for loud-mouthed, bonkers obsessives

    Twitter? It sounds more like PB.COM post June 2016 :D :D :D
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 4,883

    It’s an open question which is greater: the crazed hysteria of the Corbynites or the crazed hysteria of the Leavers.

    The Corbynistas appear to be obsessives, Leavers seem to be (mostly) fantasists.

    They are not really comparable
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 21,491
    I've just looked at that site, and just noticed its tagline: "Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed. Everything else is public relations."

    Whilst there may be a little truth in that, there' s a whole host of wrongness swimming merrily in a lovely hole of wrong.

    (as an aside, there seems to be some debate over whether Orwell actualy said that quote: http://blogs.umb.edu/quoteunquote/2012/09/25/even-if-it-looks-sounds-walks-and-quacks-like-an-orwell-quote-it-still-might-not-be-an-orwell-quote/ )
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 21,379
    Fishing said:

    It’s an open question which is greater: the crazed hysteria of the Corbynites or the crazed hysteria of the Leavers.

    You don't think that Remainers show any signs of hysteria at all? The Emergency Budget that wasn't? The idea that our leaving would somehow trigger World War 3?
    Ah, another example of a Leaver who believes their own lies. The idea that Leaving would triggger Word War 3 was entirely a Leave newspaper invention.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 21,379

    It’s an open question which is greater: the crazed hysteria of the Corbynites or the crazed hysteria of the Leavers.

    Whilst Remainers are models of sober mature reflection......
    Remainers have not so far hopped from hate figure to hate figure or sought to undermine every aspect of the civic infrastructure that they have come into contact with.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 31,005

    It’s an open question which is greater: the crazed hysteria of the Corbynites or the crazed hysteria of the Leavers.

    Whilst Remainers are models of sober mature reflection......
    Remainers have not so far hopped from hate figure to hate figure or sought to undermine every aspect of the civic infrastructure that they have come into contact with.
    Just democracy and the outcome of a plebiscite....
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 31,005

    Fishing said:

    ... It is made for loud-mouthed, bonkers obsessives

    Twitter? It sounds more like PB.COM post June 2016 :D :D :D
    Or during SINDYREF......
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 21,379

    It’s an open question which is greater: the crazed hysteria of the Corbynites or the crazed hysteria of the Leavers.

    Whilst Remainers are models of sober mature reflection......
    Remainers have not so far hopped from hate figure to hate figure or sought to undermine every aspect of the civic infrastructure that they have come into contact with.
    Just democracy and the outcome of a plebiscite....
    Citations needed. Meanwhile I could find examples on site from the weekend of Leavers complaining that the governor of the Bank of England is doing his job.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 5,747

    I pretty much despise Watson for his behaviour towards others, and especially his paedo-sniffing general activities.

    It's therefore slightly odd to feel that he's on the right side of this issue, tinged with a certain amount of schadenfreude that he is now victim of the sort of campaigning he has used against others.

    Spot on.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 21,491

    I pretty much despise Watson for his behaviour towards others, and especially his paedo-sniffing general activities.

    It's therefore slightly odd to feel that he's on the right side of this issue, tinged with a certain amount of schadenfreude that he is now victim of the sort of campaigning he has used against others.

    Spot on.
    I do wonder what he could actually do about this. I get the impression that he hasn't said this for political position (*) because it's clear which way the wind in the party is blowing. He's said it because he believes it.

    If that's the case, then it would be hard for him to withdraw the comments, or water them down even if he wanted.

    I don't think this is going to blow over: the Twitter mob are too loud. So what next?

    (*) I'm slightly surprised to find myself saying that about an arch-plotter.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 9,312

    Fishing said:

    It’s an open question which is greater: the crazed hysteria of the Corbynites or the crazed hysteria of the Leavers.

    You don't think that Remainers show any signs of hysteria at all? The Emergency Budget that wasn't? The idea that our leaving would somehow trigger World War 3?
    Ah, another example of a Leaver who believes their own lies. The idea that Leaving would triggger Word War 3 was entirely a Leave newspaper invention.
    To be fair, it was David Cameron who warned of a third world war. It is hard to read his speech any other way.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 21,379

    Fishing said:

    It’s an open question which is greater: the crazed hysteria of the Corbynites or the crazed hysteria of the Leavers.

    You don't think that Remainers show any signs of hysteria at all? The Emergency Budget that wasn't? The idea that our leaving would somehow trigger World War 3?
    Ah, another example of a Leaver who believes their own lies. The idea that Leaving would triggger Word War 3 was entirely a Leave newspaper invention.
    To be fair, it was David Cameron who warned of a third world war. It is hard to read his speech any other way.
    He warned of the risk of further military conflict in Europe. It was an entirely fair point that Leavers first traduced and then took their traduction as history.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 21,491

    Fishing said:

    It’s an open question which is greater: the crazed hysteria of the Corbynites or the crazed hysteria of the Leavers.

    You don't think that Remainers show any signs of hysteria at all? The Emergency Budget that wasn't? The idea that our leaving would somehow trigger World War 3?
    Ah, another example of a Leaver who believes their own lies. The idea that Leaving would triggger Word War 3 was entirely a Leave newspaper invention.
    To be fair, it was David Cameron who warned of a third world war. It is hard to read his speech any other way.
    Really? Care to expand?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 21,379
    A poll that will not be breathlessly retweeted by the usual suspects:

  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 21,379
    Note, the Sweden Democrats who are in third place in that poll can be laid at 1.8 for most seats. Some other polls have shown them leading but it’s hard to justify their current price.
  • daodaodaodao Posts: 692
    edited August 6

    I pretty much despise Watson for his behaviour towards others, and especially his paedo-sniffing general activities.

    It's therefore slightly odd to feel that he's on the right side of this issue, tinged with a certain amount of schadenfreude that he is now victim of the sort of campaigning he has used against others.

    Spot on.
    Watson is a scheming b.s.a.d and wrong on this issue too. Corbyn by contrast is principled and it is because of his anti-racist principles that he does not support the inclusion of some of the examples in the IHRA definition of anti-semitism, however unpopular that makes him to some people. I am not stating that I agree with Corbyn's view, but I do support his right to take this view, and it is not an existential threat to the Labour party, as Watson has claimed.

    I am fed up with continued discussion of this minor issue, and the way that many in the media are using it to hound the Labour party and Corbyn in particular. There are much more important matters to focus on, such as the disgraceful behaviour of the Home Office, put in place by a certain T.May, towards those (particularly those with children) whose residency/immigration papers are perceived to be not quite in order. At least Trump is honest about his approach.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 9,312
    edited August 6

    Fishing said:

    It’s an open question which is greater: the crazed hysteria of the Corbynites or the crazed hysteria of the Leavers.

    You don't think that Remainers show any signs of hysteria at all? The Emergency Budget that wasn't? The idea that our leaving would somehow trigger World War 3?
    Ah, another example of a Leaver who believes their own lies. The idea that Leaving would triggger Word War 3 was entirely a Leave newspaper invention.
    To be fair, it was David Cameron who warned of a third world war. It is hard to read his speech any other way.
    Really? Care to expand?
    Expand on what? You can google the speech. You could try searching for David Cameron or Number 10 denying that was intended. Alas, I must depart for the Post Office to pick up a parcel that could not be delivered.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 2,351

    I don't think this is going to blow over: the Twitter mob are too loud. So what next?

    This will rage all summer. Then the #jc9 (including Willsman) will win the NEC elections. Then we have the real outrage, when the current NEC fails to vote through all of His "democracy" reforms and the PLP votes through the IHRA definition of antisemitism. Most of the Kali Ma have been told (by "journalism" published by Shitebox) that the democracy review needed to protect Jeremy from the enemy (the Labour Party) needs the new NEC to carry them through.

    But the new NEC doesn't meet until AFTER conference - the existing one is in charge in September. You can see where this one is going.

    The Leader and Deputy Leader at each other's throats
    A legitimate NEC making decisions that will be denounced as illegitimate
    The NEC and PLP clashing
    Everyone who isn't making the new pledge for Jeremy "I follow #JC and know antisemitism is just a Blairite plot despite Jeremy sending all members an email saying the opposite" will be seen as the enemy by the Kali Ma and demands for purges will grow

    Meanwhile I and thousands of other Labour candidates will be campaigning for council elections next May where both Labour and Tory parties seem fixated on a "lets make ourselves hated" programme.

  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 4,636

    Fishing said:

    rkrkrk said:

    MPs should ignore twitter. Much of it is complete disinformation anyway. And many of the people who actually are people are bonkers and certainly not representative of anything.

    ... or boycott it. It is made for loud-mouthed, bonkers obsessives and lazy journalists. The sewer of the Internet.

    It'd be interesting to know if any of them get anything useful out of it, for instance knowing about constituent's needs. I somehow doubt it as the signal to noise ratio is poor.

    But it could be that MPs get, as well as negatives, a comfortable echo chamber.

    I doubt that's helpful either.
    MPs won't be getting an echo chamber on twitter unless they are very, very liberal with the number of people they block.

    Instead of a boycott, I think we are going the other way.

    Increasingly you see articles online which are based almost entirely on what someone on twitter said. Now I'm okay with that if it's someone like Trump, because he's actually a big deal. But when it's Tim from Ruislip, and you don't even know if Tim really exists...
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 21,491
    daodao said:

    I pretty much despise Watson for his behaviour towards others, and especially his paedo-sniffing general activities.

    It's therefore slightly odd to feel that he's on the right side of this issue, tinged with a certain amount of schadenfreude that he is now victim of the sort of campaigning he has used against others.

    Spot on.
    Watson is a scheming b.s.r.d and wrong on this issue too. Corbyn by contrast is principled and it is because of his anti-racist principles that he does not support the inclusion of some of the examples in the IHRA definition of anti-semitism, however unpopular that makes him to some people. I am not stating that I agree with Corbyn's view, but I do support his right to take this view, and it is not an existential threat to the Labour party, as Watson has claimed.

    I am fed up with continued discussion of this minor issue, and the way that many in the media are using it to hound the Labour party and Corbyn in particular. There are much more important matters to focus on, such as the disgraceful behaviour of the Home Office, put in place by a certain T.May, towards those (particularly those with children) whose residency/immigration papers are not quite in order.
    " ... it is because of his anti-racist principles"

    I fail to see any 'anti-racist' principles in him. He *thinks* he is anti-racist and has spent decades telling himself he is anti-racist; his words and deeds on this issue point in a very different direction.

    If, that is, you count anti-Semitism as racism.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 5,747
    edited August 6
    daodao said:

    I pretty much despise Watson for his behaviour towards others, and especially his paedo-sniffing general activities.

    It's therefore slightly odd to feel that he's on the right side of this issue, tinged with a certain amount of schadenfreude that he is now victim of the sort of campaigning he has used against others.

    Spot on.
    Watson is a scheming b.s.r.d and wrong on this issue too. Corbyn by contrast is principled and it is because of his anti-racist principles that he does not support the inclusion of some of the examples in the IHRA definition of anti-semitism, however unpopular that makes him to some people. I am not stating that I agree with Corbyn's view, but I do support his right to take this view, and it is not an existential threat to the Labour party, as Watson has claimed.

    I am fed up with continued discussion of this minor issue, and the way that many in the media are using it to hound the Labour party and Corbyn in particular. There are much more important matters to focus on, such as the disgraceful behaviour of the Home Office, put in place by a certain T.May, towards those (particularly those with children) whose residency/immigration papers are not quite in order.
    Its NOT a minor issue , its a MAJOR issue. IF Corbyn takes the stance he does, he is going to be rightly pilloried for it. No amount of mealy mouthed non-apologies is going to change that.
  • felixfelix Posts: 8,005
    daodao said:

    I pretty much despise Watson for his behaviour towards others, and especially his paedo-sniffing general activities.

    It's therefore slightly odd to feel that he's on the right side of this issue, tinged with a certain amount of schadenfreude that he is now victim of the sort of campaigning he has used against others.

    Spot on.
    Watson is a scheming b.s.a.d and wrong on this issue too. Corbyn by contrast is principled and it is because of his anti-racist principles that he does not support the inclusion of some of the examples in the IHRA definition of anti-semitism, however unpopular that makes him to some people. I am not stating that I agree with Corbyn's view, but I do support his right to take this view, and it is not an existential threat to the Labour party, as Watson has claimed.

    I am fed up with continued discussion of this minor issue, and the way that many in the media are using it to hound the Labour party and Corbyn in particular. There are much more important matters to focus on, such as the disgraceful behaviour of the Home Office, put in place by a certain T.May, towards those (particularly those with children) whose residency/immigration papers are perceived to be not quite in order. At least Trump is honest about his approach.
    I grieve for your sadness that the newspapers are reporting news which you do not like. Clearly such stories should be banned forthwith.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 45,509
    Good morning, everyone.

    Whilst it's true Watson cannot be easily removed (and if the MP revolt necessary for a leadership challenge is required for the deputy then it's immensely unlikely), he's also not in the position of power, now is he able, unlike Corbyn, to try and stuff the NEC or rewrite the rule book so there's a far left successor.

    Staying power alone is insufficient to rid Labour of its far left problem.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 21,491

    Fishing said:

    It’s an open question which is greater: the crazed hysteria of the Corbynites or the crazed hysteria of the Leavers.

    You don't think that Remainers show any signs of hysteria at all? The Emergency Budget that wasn't? The idea that our leaving would somehow trigger World War 3?
    Ah, another example of a Leaver who believes their own lies. The idea that Leaving would triggger Word War 3 was entirely a Leave newspaper invention.
    To be fair, it was David Cameron who warned of a third world war. It is hard to read his speech any other way.
    Really? Care to expand?
    Expand on what? You can google the speech. You could try searching for David Cameron or Number 10 denying that was intended. Alas, I must depart for the Post Office to pick up a parcel that could not be delivered.
    I have read the speech in the past, and fail to see the conclusion you make from it.
  • MyBurningEarsMyBurningEars Posts: 2,831

    A poll that will not be breathlessly retweeted by the usual suspects:

    Idiots talk up the Swedish far-right because it was convenient for their narrative. Just like idiots who confidently opined that le Pen would win the first round in France. Or how AfD would be the second-largest party in Germany.

    Nevertheless I retain the right to be horrified that in a relatively stable country as Sweden, about a quarter of votes are going to parties I would classify as "extreme" on one side or the other. And that in a country so important as France, le Pen would reach the final round. Or that in Germany, the AfD would become the official opposition.

    Elections in Italy, Greece, Hungary, Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands, Poland, Bulgaria, Cyprus have all produced results which are worth worrying about. I could have listed more.

    UKIP won the 2014 Euros in the UK. They were second in 2009 (when the BNP also picked up 2 seats). If Brexit reduces them to a mere polling blip, then despite whatever dissatisfaction I have with the three main parties, I'd find it a blessed relief.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 22,402
    The Labour Party Constitution is a mess but despite having the title of deputy leader I am not sure what Watson can actually do other than make embarrassing comments. The only role I can identify in the Constitution is becoming temporary leader in the event that the leader resigns until a new leader is elected.

    This means that the deputy leader can be completely sidelined and there is some evidence that this has happened to Watson under Corbyn's leadership. Watson was also Labour Party Chair for a time but replaced by Lavery last year. He is the shadow minister for CMS, a relatively unimportant role. He is clearly not on the Corbyn express. He may not be sackable but he can be ignored.

    What I think Watson is reflecting is the pretty deep disgust of a significant chunk of the PLP. But they are increasingly ignored too.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 348
    edited August 6

    It’s an open question which is greater: the crazed hysteria of the Corbynites or the crazed hysteria of the Leavers.

    Whilst Remainers are models of sober mature reflection......
    Remainers have not so far hopped from hate figure to hate figure or sought to undermine every aspect of the civic infrastructure that they have come into contact with.
    Yes, they have. See the hatred directed at Nigel Farage, then Boris Johnson, then Jacob Rees-Mogg, (usually dragging in Donald Trump somewhere for good measure) for having the effrontery to differ from them on Britain's membership of the EU. And as for the hatred directed at Kate Hoey, Frank Field and Gisela Stuart, it has broken all records. If that isn't hopping from hate figure to hate figure, I don't know what is.

    As for seeking to undermine eery aspect of the civic infrastructure, I don't know how else you'd describe David Cameron's calling of a referendum without any contingency plans with what he'd do if he lost it.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 4,679
    edited August 6

    It’s an open question which is greater: the crazed hysteria of the Corbynites or the crazed hysteria of the Leavers.

    Whilst Remainers are models of sober mature reflection......
    Remainers have not so far hopped from hate figure to hate figure or sought to undermine every aspect of the civic infrastructure that they have come into contact with.
    Just democracy and the outcome of a plebiscite....
    The outcome was only democratic if the leave side had kept within the spending rules and It didn't. Remember is only required a swing of 1.89% for this to have produced a different outcome. Leave cheated = result should be voided
  • FishingFishing Posts: 348



    He warned of the risk of further military conflict in Europe. It was an entirely fair point that Leavers first traduced and then took their traduction as history.

    It was totally wrong, and didn't stand up to a second's scrutiny. See this article in, of all places, the Guardian.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/09/is-david-cameron-right-leaving-eu-brexit-increase-risk-war

    He's not the only person who's made that totally spurious argument either. Some of my German friends make it, as does my father. There are good economic, social and environmental arguments for us to remain in the EU, but none at all on security or peace grounds.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 12,683

    It’s an open question which is greater: the crazed hysteria of the Corbynites or the crazed hysteria of the Leavers.

    Whilst Remainers are models of sober mature reflection......
    Remainers have not so far hopped from hate figure to hate figure or sought to undermine every aspect of the civic infrastructure that they have come into contact with.
    Just democracy and the outcome of a plebiscite....
    The outcome was only democratic if the leave side had kept within the spending rules and It didn't. Remember is only required a swing of 1.89% for this to have produced a different outcome. Leave cheated = result should be voided
    That's a dangerous argument:

    https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/conservative-party/david-cameron/news/91572/official-eu-remain-campaign
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 4,715
    DavidL said:

    The Labour Party Constitution is a mess but despite having the title of deputy leader I am not sure what Watson can actually do other than make embarrassing comments. The only role I can identify in the Constitution is becoming temporary leader in the event that the leader resigns until a new leader is elected.

    This means that the deputy leader can be completely sidelined and there is some evidence that this has happened to Watson under Corbyn's leadership. Watson was also Labour Party Chair for a time but replaced by Lavery last year. He is the shadow minister for CMS, a relatively unimportant role. He is clearly not on the Corbyn express. He may not be sackable but he can be ignored.

    What I think Watson is reflecting is the pretty deep disgust of a significant chunk of the PLP. But they are increasingly ignored too.

    Being unsackable Deputy does mean that in the event of Jezza stepping down for whatever reason, Watson becomes acting leader. This gives him a headstart on becoming leader himself. I think he is an underpriced contender, and that there is an element of playing to the gallery with recent remaks.

    Not that I think he would be a good leader, but perhaps the Noncefinder General might adapt well to other witch hunts.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 21,379
    edited August 6
    Fishing said:

    It’s an open question which is greater: the crazed hysteria of the Corbynites or the crazed hysteria of the Leavers.

    Whilst Remainers are models of sober mature reflection......
    Remainers have not so far hopped from hate figure to hate figure or sought to undermine every aspect of the civic infrastructure that they have come into contact with.
    Yes, they have. See the hatred directed at Nigel Farage, then Boris Johnson, then Jacob Rees-Mogg (usually dragging in Donald Trump somewhere for good measure) for having the effrontery to differ from them on Britain's membership of the EU. If that isn't hopping from hate figure to hate figure, I don't know what is.

    As for seeking to undermine eery aspect of the civic infrastructure, I don't know how else you'd describe David Cameron's calling of a referendum without any contingency plans with what he'd do if the UK lost it.
    Well the first paragraph is a spectacular false equivalence. The contempt expressed for individual Leavers cannot be compared with the systematic attempt by Leavers to deiegitimise every institution that gets in their way, from the BBC for reporting the news to the judiciary for hearing cases to the Chancellor of the Exchequer for having regard to fiscal considerations to the governor of the Bank of England for remarking on the implications of Brexit for his remit to the Electoral. Commission for having the temerity to find that Vote Leave had broken electoral law. This hysteria is directly comparable to the Corbynite hysteria when others challenge their orthodoxy.

    And the second paragraph is a spectacular example of blaming other people for your own failings. If Leave didn’t have a clue what they were doing or wanted (and they didn’t), you can’t expect others to fill the gaps.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 21,379
    Fishing said:



    He warned of the risk of further military conflict in Europe. It was an entirely fair point that Leavers first traduced and then took their traduction as history.

    It was totally wrong, and didn't stand up to a second's scrutiny. See this article in, of all places, the Guardian.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/09/is-david-cameron-right-leaving-eu-brexit-increase-risk-war

    He's not the only person who's made that totally spurious argument either. Some of my German friends make it, as does my father. There are good economic, social and environmental arguments for us to remain in the EU, but none at all on security or peace grounds.
    It is no coincidence that Europe has become more unstable since the Brexit vote. That’s what happens when a major country chooses to leave its deepest alliance in the area. David Cameron has been proved right.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 12,683
    edited August 6
    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    The Labour Party Constitution is a mess but despite having the title of deputy leader I am not sure what Watson can actually do other than make embarrassing comments. The only role I can identify in the Constitution is becoming temporary leader in the event that the leader resigns until a new leader is elected.

    This means that the deputy leader can be completely sidelined and there is some evidence that this has happened to Watson under Corbyn's leadership. Watson was also Labour Party Chair for a time but replaced by Lavery last year. He is the shadow minister for CMS, a relatively unimportant role. He is clearly not on the Corbyn express. He may not be sackable but he can be ignored.

    What I think Watson is reflecting is the pretty deep disgust of a significant chunk of the PLP. But they are increasingly ignored too.

    Being unsackable Deputy does mean that in the event of Jezza stepping down for whatever reason, Watson becomes acting leader. This gives him a headstart on becoming leader himself. I think he is an underpriced contender, and that there is an element of playing to the gallery with recent remaks.

    Not that I think he would be a good leader, but perhaps the Noncefinder General might adapt well to other witch hunts.
    For those who are knowledgeable about such things:

    Is the procedure for ousting a deputy leader the same as a leader? i.e. 20% nominations from the PLP and EPLP to trigger a contest?

    And if so might Watson be vulnerable to that?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 4,715
    edited August 6

    Fishing said:



    He warned of the risk of further military conflict in Europe. It was an entirely fair point that Leavers first traduced and then took their traduction as history.

    It was totally wrong, and didn't stand up to a second's scrutiny. See this article in, of all places, the Guardian.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/09/is-david-cameron-right-leaving-eu-brexit-increase-risk-war

    He's not the only person who's made that totally spurious argument either. Some of my German friends make it, as does my father. There are good economic, social and environmental arguments for us to remain in the EU, but none at all on security or peace grounds.
    It is no coincidence that Europe has become more unstable since the Brexit vote. That’s what happens when a major country chooses to leave its deepest alliance in the area. David Cameron has been proved right.
    Indeed Brexiteers throwing their toys out of the pram sometimes cheerlead a Russian invasion of the Baltics as righteous punishment of the EU for the temerity of not delivering on Cakeism.
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    The Labour Party Constitution is a mess but despite having the title of deputy leader I am not sure what Watson can actually do other than make embarrassing comments. The only role I can identify in the Constitution is becoming temporary leader in the event that the leader resigns until a new leader is elected.

    This means that the deputy leader can be completely sidelined and there is some evidence that this has happened to Watson under Corbyn's leadership. Watson was also Labour Party Chair for a time but replaced by Lavery last year. He is the shadow minister for CMS, a relatively unimportant role. He is clearly not on the Corbyn express. He may not be sackable but he can be ignored.

    What I think Watson is reflecting is the pretty deep disgust of a significant chunk of the PLP. But they are increasingly ignored too.

    Being unsackable Deputy does mean that in the event of Jezza stepping down for whatever reason, Watson becomes acting leader. This gives him a headstart on becoming leader himself. I think he is an underpriced contender, and that there is an element of playing to the gallery with recent remaks.

    Not that I think he would be a good leader, but perhaps the Noncefinder General might adapt well to other witch hunts.
    Tom Watson does not have the personality to be a Leader. In the party that used to be, he was a conspirator. The irony is he is now a PB Tory darling!

    Also, in the old days when the voice of members wasn't there, he had great connections with the Unions. Today that power is greatly diminished.

    Personally, I think he should just be ignored as the media should also be ignored. What will they do ? The general public are not interested. There has not been a collapse in the polls for Labour.
  • JWisemannJWisemann Posts: 1,079
    edited August 6
    It is 100% obvious that the Labour traitors have licked their wounds since their rout by last June's election results, and have now decided that this frankly disgusting (and dangerous) cynical misuse of an important issue (though tiny in the grand scheme of things, in terms of prevalence - especially in the Labour Party - as we know tory voters are far more likely to hold anti-semitic views) is one of their last chances to damage the party before they lose power for good.

    Tom Watson, to his eternal discredit, has shown which side of the line he stands on - the vile 'labour' traitors for whom anything but two main parties devoted to endless war abroad and endless privatisation and wealth accumulation by a tiny unaccountable elite at home is an anathema.

    He deserves everything he gets. And is showing exactly why mandatory reselection is vital, when such a prominent part of teh party are actively sabotaging it when they should be trying to damage this desperately destructive Tory-led non-government.

  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    DavidL said:

    The Labour Party Constitution is a mess but despite having the title of deputy leader I am not sure what Watson can actually do other than make embarrassing comments. The only role I can identify in the Constitution is becoming temporary leader in the event that the leader resigns until a new leader is elected.

    This means that the deputy leader can be completely sidelined and there is some evidence that this has happened to Watson under Corbyn's leadership. Watson was also Labour Party Chair for a time but replaced by Lavery last year. He is the shadow minister for CMS, a relatively unimportant role. He is clearly not on the Corbyn express. He may not be sackable but he can be ignored.

    What I think Watson is reflecting is the pretty deep disgust of a significant chunk of the PLP. But they are increasingly ignored too.

    What does the Vice President of the US do ? In fact, every deputy is in the same situation. In depends on what they make of it.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 21,491
    JWisemann said:

    It is 100% obvious that the Labour traitors have licked their wounds since their rout by last June's election results, and have now decided that this frankly disgusting (and dangerous) cynical misuse of an important issue (though tiny in the grand scheme of things, in terms of prevalence - especially in the Labour Party - as we know tory voters are far more likely to hold anti-semitic views) is one of their last chances to damage the party before they lose power for good.

    Tom Watson, to his eternal discredit, has shown which side of the line he stands on - the vile 'labour' traitors for whom anything but two main parties devoted to endless war abroad and endless privatisation and wealth accumulation by a tiny unaccountable elite at home is an anathema.

    He deserves everything he gets. And is showing exactly why mandatory reselection is vital, when such a prominent part of teh party are actively sabotaging it when they should be trying to damage this desperately destructive Tory-led non-government.

    If Labour voters are less likely to hold anti-Semitic views, then it's clear that much of the Labour leadership and hierarchy are out-of-step with their voters ... ;)
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 12,683
    surby said:

    DavidL said:

    The Labour Party Constitution is a mess but despite having the title of deputy leader I am not sure what Watson can actually do other than make embarrassing comments. The only role I can identify in the Constitution is becoming temporary leader in the event that the leader resigns until a new leader is elected.

    This means that the deputy leader can be completely sidelined and there is some evidence that this has happened to Watson under Corbyn's leadership. Watson was also Labour Party Chair for a time but replaced by Lavery last year. He is the shadow minister for CMS, a relatively unimportant role. He is clearly not on the Corbyn express. He may not be sackable but he can be ignored.

    What I think Watson is reflecting is the pretty deep disgust of a significant chunk of the PLP. But they are increasingly ignored too.

    What does the Vice President of the US do ? In fact, every deputy is in the same situation. In depends on what they make of it.
    In theory at least the Vice President is Chairman of the Senate (not that they ever do chair the senate except for State of the Union addresses).
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 4,715
    surby said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    The Labour Party Constitution is a mess but despite having the title of deputy leader I am not sure what Watson can actually do other than make embarrassing comments. The only role I can identify in the Constitution is becoming temporary leader in the event that the leader resigns until a new leader is elected.

    This means that the deputy leader can be completely sidelined and there is some evidence that this has happened to Watson under Corbyn's leadership. Watson was also Labour Party Chair for a time but replaced by Lavery last year. He is the shadow minister for CMS, a relatively unimportant role. He is clearly not on the Corbyn express. He may not be sackable but he can be ignored.

    What I think Watson is reflecting is the pretty deep disgust of a significant chunk of the PLP. But they are increasingly ignored too.

    Being unsackable Deputy does mean that in the event of Jezza stepping down for whatever reason, Watson becomes acting leader. This gives him a headstart on becoming leader himself. I think he is an underpriced contender, and that there is an element of playing to the gallery with recent remaks.

    Not that I think he would be a good leader, but perhaps the Noncefinder General might adapt well to other witch hunts.
    Tom Watson does not have the personality to be a Leader. In the party that used to be, he was a conspirator. The irony is he is now a PB Tory darling!

    Also, in the old days when the voice of members wasn't there, he had great connections with the Unions. Today that power is greatly diminished.

    Personally, I think he should just be ignored as the media should also be ignored. What will they do ? The general public are not interested. There has not been a collapse in the polls for Labour.
    I don't think people thought Jezza had the personality to be leader either.

    Neither is there anything new to be said over the antisemitism issue. I cannot see Jezza caving in on this rather arcane dispute over an illustrative example of the code.
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227

    A poll that will not be breathlessly retweeted by the usual suspects:

    Idiots talk up the Swedish far-right because it was convenient for their narrative. Just like idiots who confidently opined that le Pen would win the first round in France. Or how AfD would be the second-largest party in Germany.

    Nevertheless I retain the right to be horrified that in a relatively stable country as Sweden, about a quarter of votes are going to parties I would classify as "extreme" on one side or the other. And that in a country so important as France, le Pen would reach the final round. Or that in Germany, the AfD would become the official opposition.

    Elections in Italy, Greece, Hungary, Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands, Poland, Bulgaria, Cyprus have all produced results which are worth worrying about. I could have listed more.

    UKIP won the 2014 Euros in the UK. They were second in 2009 (when the BNP also picked up 2 seats). If Brexit reduces them to a mere polling blip, then despite whatever dissatisfaction I have with the three main parties, I'd find it a blessed relief.
    Please do not disappoint a regular poster who is still waiting to find out if Le Pen won - the first round!
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 1,554
    edited August 6
    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    The Labour Party Constitution is a mess but despite having the title of deputy leader I am not sure what Watson can actually do other than make embarrassing comments. The only role I can identify in the Constitution is becoming temporary leader in the event that the leader resigns until a new leader is elected.

    This means that the deputy leader can be completely sidelined and there is some evidence that this has happened to Watson under Corbyn's leadership. Watson was also Labour Party Chair for a time but replaced by Lavery last year. He is the shadow minister for CMS, a relatively unimportant role. He is clearly not on the Corbyn express. He may not be sackable but he can be ignored.

    What I think Watson is reflecting is the pretty deep disgust of a significant chunk of the PLP. But they are increasingly ignored too.

    Being unsackable Deputy does mean that in the event of Jezza stepping down for whatever reason, Watson becomes acting leader. This gives him a headstart on becoming leader himself. I think he is an underpriced contender, and that there is an element of playing to the gallery with recent remaks.

    Not that I think he would be a good leader, but perhaps the Noncefinder General might adapt well to other witch hunts.
    For those who are knowledgeable about such things:

    Is the procedure for ousting a deputy leader the same as a leader? i.e. 20% nominations from the PLP and EPLP to trigger a contest?

    And if so might Watson be vulnerable to that?
    My guess would be no if it is the same system, I can't see Corbyn and his allies being up for no confidence vote in him as things stand, would probably take Watson really going for the leadership. Someone like Chris Williamson might be up for it!

    There doesn't seem much need to force the deputy leadership issue (if that is what this is about) as DavidL noted there isn't much to it. It is another little piece but you wouldn't want to waste goodwill, time or effort on it if you had better uses for it which I would assume they do.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 31,005

    It’s an open question which is greater: the crazed hysteria of the Corbynites or the crazed hysteria of the Leavers.

    Whilst Remainers are models of sober mature reflection......
    Remainers have not so far hopped from hate figure to hate figure or sought to undermine every aspect of the civic infrastructure that they have come into contact with.
    Just democracy and the outcome of a plebiscite....
    The outcome was only democratic if the leave side had kept within the spending rules and It didn't. Remember is only required a swing of 1.89% for this to have produced a different outcome. Leave cheated = result should be voided
    And yet, Remain outspent Leave by a significant margin, not even taking into account the government’s contribution. Yet that leaves Remainers curiously unconcerned.....
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    ydoethur said:

    surby said:

    DavidL said:

    The Labour Party Constitution is a mess but despite having the title of deputy leader I am not sure what Watson can actually do other than make embarrassing comments. The only role I can identify in the Constitution is becoming temporary leader in the event that the leader resigns until a new leader is elected.

    This means that the deputy leader can be completely sidelined and there is some evidence that this has happened to Watson under Corbyn's leadership. Watson was also Labour Party Chair for a time but replaced by Lavery last year. He is the shadow minister for CMS, a relatively unimportant role. He is clearly not on the Corbyn express. He may not be sackable but he can be ignored.

    What I think Watson is reflecting is the pretty deep disgust of a significant chunk of the PLP. But they are increasingly ignored too.

    What does the Vice President of the US do ? In fact, every deputy is in the same situation. In depends on what they make of it.
    In theory at least the Vice President is Chairman of the Senate (not that they ever do chair the senate except for State of the Union addresses).
    The Deputy Leader goes to many gatherings and draws the winning number out of a hat!
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227

    It’s an open question which is greater: the crazed hysteria of the Corbynites or the crazed hysteria of the Leavers.

    Whilst Remainers are models of sober mature reflection......
    Remainers have not so far hopped from hate figure to hate figure or sought to undermine every aspect of the civic infrastructure that they have come into contact with.
    Just democracy and the outcome of a plebiscite....
    The outcome was only democratic if the leave side had kept within the spending rules and It didn't. Remember is only required a swing of 1.89% for this to have produced a different outcome. Leave cheated = result should be voided
    And yet, Remain outspent Leave by a significant margin, not even taking into account the government’s contribution. Yet that leaves Remainers curiously unconcerned.....
    Totally legally !
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,250
    I see the thugs of the remain side have attacked JRM family car.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 45,509
    F1: Red Bull second driver watch:

    Big moves on the market. Gasly stays 1.5, Sainz out to 4.33, Alonso down to 6 (he had been 51 or so on the day Ricciardo's move to Renault was announced). Mr. B's [believe it was him] tip on the elder Spaniard certainly seems value, although it remains to be seen whether it'll come off (do hope so as I put down a small sum myself).

    Hartley is out from 15ish to 26, Raikkonen steady at 29. Meanwhile, Kubica's gone from about 17 to 34, and Wehrlein is now longer odds than the Finn (also 34). Kvyat's gone from middling-long odds to 101.
  • eekeek Posts: 2,112

    F1: Red Bull second driver watch:

    Big moves on the market. Gasly stays 1.5, Sainz out to 4.33, Alonso down to 6 (he had been 51 or so on the day Ricciardo's move to Renault was announced). Mr. B's [believe it was him] tip on the elder Spaniard certainly seems value, although it remains to be seen whether it'll come off (do hope so as I put down a small sum myself).

    Hartley is out from 15ish to 26, Raikkonen steady at 29. Meanwhile, Kubica's gone from about 17 to 34, and Wehrlein is now longer odds than the Finn (also 34). Kvyat's gone from middling-long odds to 101.

    I can't see Honda wanting Alonso anywhere near their engine again especially as they would be the company paying his wages..
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 22,402
    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    The Labour Party Constitution is a mess but despite having the title of deputy leader I am not sure what Watson can actually do other than make embarrassing comments. The only role I can identify in the Constitution is becoming temporary leader in the event that the leader resigns until a new leader is elected.

    This means that the deputy leader can be completely sidelined and there is some evidence that this has happened to Watson under Corbyn's leadership. Watson was also Labour Party Chair for a time but replaced by Lavery last year. He is the shadow minister for CMS, a relatively unimportant role. He is clearly not on the Corbyn express. He may not be sackable but he can be ignored.

    What I think Watson is reflecting is the pretty deep disgust of a significant chunk of the PLP. But they are increasingly ignored too.

    Being unsackable Deputy does mean that in the event of Jezza stepping down for whatever reason, Watson becomes acting leader. This gives him a headstart on becoming leader himself. I think he is an underpriced contender, and that there is an element of playing to the gallery with recent remaks.

    Not that I think he would be a good leader, but perhaps the Noncefinder General might adapt well to other witch hunts.
    I just don't see any way he becomes leader of the current Labour Party with its current membership, even before this imbroglio. I also don't think he is up to the job, although Corbyn has proven that is not a hurdle in itself.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 21,491
    surby said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    The Labour Party Constitution is a mess but despite having the title of deputy leader I am not sure what Watson can actually do other than make embarrassing comments. The only role I can identify in the Constitution is becoming temporary leader in the event that the leader resigns until a new leader is elected.

    This means that the deputy leader can be completely sidelined and there is some evidence that this has happened to Watson under Corbyn's leadership. Watson was also Labour Party Chair for a time but replaced by Lavery last year. He is the shadow minister for CMS, a relatively unimportant role. He is clearly not on the Corbyn express. He may not be sackable but he can be ignored.

    What I think Watson is reflecting is the pretty deep disgust of a significant chunk of the PLP. But they are increasingly ignored too.

    Being unsackable Deputy does mean that in the event of Jezza stepping down for whatever reason, Watson becomes acting leader. This gives him a headstart on becoming leader himself. I think he is an underpriced contender, and that there is an element of playing to the gallery with recent remaks.

    Not that I think he would be a good leader, but perhaps the Noncefinder General might adapt well to other witch hunts.
    Tom Watson does not have the personality to be a Leader. In the party that used to be, he was a conspirator. The irony is he is now a PB Tory darling!

    Also, in the old days when the voice of members wasn't there, he had great connections with the Unions. Today that power is greatly diminished.

    Personally, I think he should just be ignored as the media should also be ignored. What will they do ? The general public are not interested. There has not been a collapse in the polls for Labour.
    Care to point to comments showing he is a 'PB Tory darling' ?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 12,683


    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    The Labour Party Constitution is a mess but despite having the title of deputy leader I am not sure what Watson can actually do other than make embarrassing comments. The only role I can identify in the Constitution is becoming temporary leader in the event that the leader resigns until a new leader is elected.

    This means that the deputy leader can be completely sidelined and there is some evidence that this has happened to Watson under Corbyn's leadership. Watson was also Labour Party Chair for a time but replaced by Lavery last year. He is the shadow minister for CMS, a relatively unimportant role. He is clearly not on the Corbyn express. He may not be sackable but he can be ignored.

    What I think Watson is reflecting is the pretty deep disgust of a significant chunk of the PLP. But they are increasingly ignored too.

    Being unsackable Deputy does mean that in the event of Jezza stepping down for whatever reason, Watson becomes acting leader. This gives him a headstart on becoming leader himself. I think he is an underpriced contender, and that there is an element of playing to the gallery with recent remaks.

    Not that I think he would be a good leader, but perhaps the Noncefinder General might adapt well to other witch hunts.
    For those who are knowledgeable about such things:

    Is the procedure for ousting a deputy leader the same as a leader? i.e. 20% nominations from the PLP and EPLP to trigger a contest?

    And if so might Watson be vulnerable to that?
    My guess would be no if it is the same system, I can't see Corbyn and his allies being up for no confidence vote in him as things stand, would probably take Watson really going for the leadership. Someone like Chris Williamson might be up for it!

    There doesn't seem much need to force the deputy leadership issue (if that is what this is about) as DavidL noted there isn't much to it. It is another little piece but you wouldn't want to waste goodwill, time or effort on it if you had better uses for it which I would assume they do.
    Thanks.

    The other question of course would be, 'do Corbyn's allies actually constitute 20% of the PLP?'
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 1,554
    I can't help but feel saying leave cheated is like saying Maradona punched the ball into the net, it might have been cheating but the result stands. It does perhaps lend a small amount of extra legitimacy to claims for a second referendum though.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 45,509
    Mr. eek, maybe, but the same was said about him returning to McLaren.

    Also, Alonso to Red Bull could suit McLaren for getting Key quickly from Toro Rosso.
  • eekeek Posts: 2,112

    A poll that will not be breathlessly retweeted by the usual suspects:

    Idiots talk up the Swedish far-right because it was convenient for their narrative. Just like idiots who confidently opined that le Pen would win the first round in France. Or how AfD would be the second-largest party in Germany.

    Nevertheless I retain the right to be horrified that in a relatively stable country as Sweden, about a quarter of votes are going to parties I would classify as "extreme" on one side or the other. And that in a country so important as France, le Pen would reach the final round. Or that in Germany, the AfD would become the official opposition.

    Elections in Italy, Greece, Hungary, Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands, Poland, Bulgaria, Cyprus have all produced results which are worth worrying about. I could have listed more.

    UKIP won the 2014 Euros in the UK. They were second in 2009 (when the BNP also picked up 2 seats). If Brexit reduces them to a mere polling blip, then despite whatever dissatisfaction I have with the three main parties, I'd find it a blessed relief.
    This is the result of the future not looking better than the past resulting in everyone voting for the none of the current lot option whatever it is.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 22,402
    surby said:

    DavidL said:

    The Labour Party Constitution is a mess but despite having the title of deputy leader I am not sure what Watson can actually do other than make embarrassing comments. The only role I can identify in the Constitution is becoming temporary leader in the event that the leader resigns until a new leader is elected.

    This means that the deputy leader can be completely sidelined and there is some evidence that this has happened to Watson under Corbyn's leadership. Watson was also Labour Party Chair for a time but replaced by Lavery last year. He is the shadow minister for CMS, a relatively unimportant role. He is clearly not on the Corbyn express. He may not be sackable but he can be ignored.

    What I think Watson is reflecting is the pretty deep disgust of a significant chunk of the PLP. But they are increasingly ignored too.

    What does the Vice President of the US do ? In fact, every deputy is in the same situation. In depends on what they make of it.
    I agree and a Deputy can be powerful if they are the voice of the Leader working closely as a team in a common enterprise. Watson has not chosen that path. He isn't nearly as important as a Vice President who becomes the President on the demise of the elected President, like Ford or LBJ. Watson merely gets to hold the ring. This is definitely zephyrs and tea cups territory.
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 1,710
    ydoethur said:

    It’s an open question which is greater: the crazed hysteria of the Corbynites or the crazed hysteria of the Leavers.

    Whilst Remainers are models of sober mature reflection......
    Remainers have not so far hopped from hate figure to hate figure or sought to undermine every aspect of the civic infrastructure that they have come into contact with.
    Just democracy and the outcome of a plebiscite....
    The outcome was only democratic if the leave side had kept within the spending rules and It didn't. Remember is only required a swing of 1.89% for this to have produced a different outcome. Leave cheated = result should be voided
    That's a dangerous argument:
    https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/conservative-party/david-cameron/news/91572/official-eu-remain-campaign
    It isn`t the argument that is dangerous. It is the reality, or at least the perception.

    In the good old days, so they tell me, when a criminal was apprehended, his first comment was always "It`s a fair cop!" (as reported in the magistrates`court).

    If we have elections, it is essential that the losing side should feel that the process has been fair, and the outcome legitimate. I do not feel this about the Referendum, nor about the last two general elections. I therefore see Mrs May and her government as totally illegitimate. I don`t think OGH goes quite this far.

    This is the cue for Mr Mark to appear and to insert some kind of distracting comment.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,250


    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    The Labour Party Constitution is a mess but despite having the title of deputy leader I am not sure what Watson can actually do other than make embarrassing comments. The only role I can identify in the Constitution is becoming temporary leader in the event that the leader resigns until a new leader is elected.

    This means that the deputy leader can be completely sidelined and there is some evidence that this has happened to Watson under Corbyn's leadership. Watson was also Labour Party Chair for a time but replaced by Lavery last year. He is the shadow minister for CMS, a relatively unimportant role. He is clearly not on the Corbyn express. He may not be sackable but he can be ignored.

    What I think Watson is reflecting is the pretty deep disgust of a significant chunk of the PLP. But they are increasingly ignored too.

    Being unsackable Deputy does mean that in the event of Jezza stepping down for whatever reason, Watson becomes acting leader. This gives him a headstart on becoming leader himself. I think he is an underpriced contender, and that there is an element of playing to the gallery with recent remaks.

    Not that I think he would be a good leader, but perhaps the Noncefinder General might adapt well to other witch hunts.
    For those who are knowledgeable about such things:

    Is the procedure for ousting a deputy leader the same as a leader? i.e. 20% nominations from the PLP and EPLP to trigger a contest?

    And if so might Watson be vulnerable to that?
    My guess would be no if it is the same system, I can't see Corbyn and his allies being up for no confidence vote in him as things stand, would probably take Watson really going for the leadership. Someone like Chris Williamson might be up for it!

    There doesn't seem much need to force the deputy leadership issue (if that is what this is about) as DavidL noted there isn't much to it. It is another little piece but you wouldn't want to waste goodwill, time or effort on it if you had better uses for it which I would assume they do.
    May I thank you for your kind words last week when I and my family were going through hell on someone close with mental health issues.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 19,763
    DavidL said:

    The Labour Party Constitution is a mess but despite having the title of deputy leader I am not sure what Watson can actually do other than make embarrassing comments. The only role I can identify in the Constitution is becoming temporary leader in the event that the leader resigns until a new leader is elected.

    ....and Watson now being such a hate-figure for the Left (welcome to the party guys - better late than never) pretty much ensures that Corbyn ain't EVER resigning to be replaced by him, no matter how fleeting that tenure at the top.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 7,652

    F1: Red Bull second driver watch:

    Big moves on the market. Gasly stays 1.5, Sainz out to 4.33, Alonso down to 6 (he had been 51 or so on the day Ricciardo's move to Renault was announced). Mr. B's [believe it was him] tip on the elder Spaniard certainly seems value, although it remains to be seen whether it'll come off (do hope so as I put down a small sum myself).

    Hartley is out from 15ish to 26, Raikkonen steady at 29. Meanwhile, Kubica's gone from about 17 to 34, and Wehrlein is now longer odds than the Finn (also 34). Kvyat's gone from middling-long odds to 101.

    Who on earth backed Hartley at 15 ?
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 6,353

    I see the thugs of the remain side have attacked JRM family car.

    His home as well:
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6030379/Vandals-attack-Jacob-Rees-Moggs-home-spray-paint-sex-toy.html

    All part of the kinder gentler politics I see.

    There is a real nasty element being formulated in politics. On both sides. Someone needs to step in and shut this down asap, or we'll have another Jo Cox incident.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 12,683
    PClipp said:

    ydoethur said:

    It’s an open question which is greater: the crazed hysteria of the Corbynites or the crazed hysteria of the Leavers.

    Whilst Remainers are models of sober mature reflection......
    Remainers have not so far hopped from hate figure to hate figure or sought to undermine every aspect of the civic infrastructure that they have come into contact with.
    Just democracy and the outcome of a plebiscite....
    The outcome was only democratic if the leave side had kept within the spending rules and It didn't. Remember is only required a swing of 1.89% for this to have produced a different outcome. Leave cheated = result should be voided
    That's a dangerous argument:
    https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/conservative-party/david-cameron/news/91572/official-eu-remain-campaign
    It isn`t the argument that is dangerous. It is the reality, or at least the perception.

    In the good old days, so they tell me, when a criminal was apprehended, his first comment was always "It`s a fair cop!" (as reported in the magistrates`court).

    If we have elections, it is essential that the losing side should feel that the process has been fair, and the outcome legitimate. I do not feel this about the Referendum, nor about the last two general elections. I therefore see Mrs May and her government as totally illegitimate. I don`t think OGH goes quite this far.

    This is the cue for Mr Mark to appear and to insert some kind of distracting comment.
    My point being that if both sides have been fined for illegally overspending, it's difficult to argue that it made a material difference to the result.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 4,713
    edited August 6
    There are still some Remainers who take the result of the referendum as a personal insult to them. .

    How dare the population go against their views. Don't they know that some people have superior intellect, display better judgement and know everything. By voting wrongly, they are showing how stupid they are, and therefore the vote should be invalid.

    It's a common human trait, but chill out; perhaps consider you may not always be the font of all human wisdom. It is possible, you know. Of course, if I get any response, it will be along the lines of "Its the Leavers that are doing this, we are being calm and dignified against intolerable bigotry."

    Still these threads would be far less interesting if we were all saints.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 31,005
    surby said:

    It’s an open question which is greater: the crazed hysteria of the Corbynites or the crazed hysteria of the Leavers.

    Whilst Remainers are models of sober mature reflection......
    Remainers have not so far hopped from hate figure to hate figure or sought to undermine every aspect of the civic infrastructure that they have come into contact with.
    Just democracy and the outcome of a plebiscite....
    The outcome was only democratic if the leave side had kept within the spending rules and It didn't. Remember is only required a swing of 1.89% for this to have produced a different outcome. Leave cheated = result should be voided
    And yet, Remain outspent Leave by a significant margin, not even taking into account the government’s contribution. Yet that leaves Remainers curiously unconcerned.....
    Totally legally !
    So outspending your opponents by more than 50% is absolutely fine.....funnily enough, I doubt you’d advance that argument if LEAVE had done it.

    Are you seriously arguing that the relatively minor overspend by a side that was significantly outspent invalidates the result?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 22,402

    I see the thugs of the remain side have attacked JRM family car.

    His home as well:
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6030379/Vandals-attack-Jacob-Rees-Moggs-home-spray-paint-sex-toy.html

    All part of the kinder gentler politics I see.

    There is a real nasty element being formulated in politics. On both sides. Someone needs to step in and shut this down asap, or we'll have another Jo Cox incident.
    Yet another example of why sane people don't choose politics as a career.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 31,005
    ydoethur said:

    PClipp said:

    ydoethur said:

    It’s an open question which is greater: the crazed hysteria of the Corbynites or the crazed hysteria of the Leavers.

    Whilst Remainers are models of sober mature reflection......
    Remainers have not so far hopped from hate figure to hate figure or sought to undermine every aspect of the civic infrastructure that they have come into contact with.
    Just democracy and the outcome of a plebiscite....
    The outcome was only democratic if the leave side had kept within the spending rules and It didn't. Remember is only required a swing of 1.89% for this to have produced a different outcome. Leave cheated = result should be voided
    That's a dangerous argument:
    https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/conservative-party/david-cameron/news/91572/official-eu-remain-campaign
    It isn`t the argument that is dangerous. It is the reality, or at least the perception.

    In the good old days, so they tell me, when a criminal was apprehended, his first comment was always "It`s a fair cop!" (as reported in the magistrates`court).

    If we have elections, it is essential that the losing side should feel that the process has been fair, and the outcome legitimate. I do not feel this about the Referendum, nor about the last two general elections. I therefore see Mrs May and her government as totally illegitimate. I don`t think OGH goes quite this far.

    This is the cue for Mr Mark to appear and to insert some kind of distracting comment.
    My point being that if both sides have been fined for illegally overspending, it's difficult to argue that it made a material difference to the result.
    Imagine the arguments if LEAVE had outspent REMAIN by a significant margin, not the other way round?
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 1,554
    ydoethur said:


    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    Being unsackable Deputy does mean that in the event of Jezza stepping down for whatever reason, Watson becomes acting leader. This gives him a headstart on becoming leader himself. I think he is an underpriced contender, and that there is an element of playing to the gallery with recent remaks.

    Not that I think he would be a good leader, but perhaps the Noncefinder General might adapt well to other witch hunts.
    For those who are knowledgeable about such things:

    Is the procedure for ousting a deputy leader the same as a leader? i.e. 20% nominations from the PLP and EPLP to trigger a contest?

    And if so might Watson be vulnerable to that?
    My guess would be no if it is the same system, I can't see Corbyn and his allies being up for no confidence vote in him as things stand, would probably take Watson really going for the leadership. Someone like Chris Williamson might be up for it!

    There doesn't seem much need to force the deputy leadership issue (if that is what this is about) as DavidL noted there isn't much to it. It is another little piece but you wouldn't want to waste goodwill, time or effort on it if you had better uses for it which I would assume they do.
    Thanks.

    The other question of course would be, 'do Corbyn's allies actually constitute 20% of the PLP?'
    Difficult question, depends on what you mean by ally. With things currently going relatively well and Corbyn popular (to a large section of Labour) I feel relatively confident he could swing 20% of the party for something like that with some at least plausible good reasons for doing so (more than currently). His closest allies who would go in to bat for him if things weren't so sunny probably constitute a smaller number.

    The style from Corbyn so far hasn't really required people to back him so much as not oppose him, rather than attack it has been more of a defence so rather than require his MPs to attack for him it is his internal opponents who have got to raise people to attack. Generally not attacking is easier to justify on both fronts so by staying somewhat defensive Corbyn doesn't need a huge base in the PLP just as long as his opponents don't have one. Which a mix of the leadership election and general election killed.

  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 2,186

    I see the thugs of the remain side have attacked JRM family car.

    His home as well:
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6030379/Vandals-attack-Jacob-Rees-Moggs-home-spray-paint-sex-toy.html

    All part of the kinder gentler politics I see.

    There is a real nasty element being formulated in politics. On both sides. Someone needs to step in and shut this down asap, or we'll have another Jo Cox incident.
    The dildo was a good finishing touch. Very post modern.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 4,715

    I see the thugs of the remain side have attacked JRM family car.

    His home as well:
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6030379/Vandals-attack-Jacob-Rees-Moggs-home-spray-paint-sex-toy.html

    All part of the kinder gentler politics I see.

    There is a real nasty element being formulated in politics. On both sides. Someone needs to step in and shut this down asap, or we'll have another Jo Cox incident.
    Fascists attacked the TUC bookshop last week:

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 45,509
    Mr. B, don't know. It seems inexplicable to me, but there we are.
  • On topic, what a world we live in where Tom Watson is accused of being a Blairite and a Murdoch lickspittle.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 46,151
    Watson is a figure on what used to be the Brownite centre of Labour ie in between the Blairites and the hard Left. However it is a measure of how far left the Labour Party has moved under Corbyn, at least in terms of the membership even if not the parliamentary party, that he now funds himself increasingly on the fringe with his concerns over anti Semitism being just one element of that
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 1,554


    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    The Labour Party Constitution is a mess but despite having the title of deputy leader I am not sure what Watson can actually do other than make embarrassing comments. The only role I can identify in the Constitution is becoming temporary leader in the event that the leader resigns until a new leader is elected.

    This means that the deputy leader can be completely sidelined and there is some evidence that this has happened to Watson under Corbyn's leadership. Watson was also Labour Party Chair for a time but replaced by Lavery last year. He is the shadow minister for CMS, a relatively unimportant role. He is clearly not on the Corbyn express. He may not be sackable but he can be ignored.

    What I think Watson is reflecting is the pretty deep disgust of a significant chunk of the PLP. But they are increasingly ignored too.

    Being unsackable Deputy does mean that in the event of Jezza stepping down for whatever reason, Watson becomes acting leader. This gives him a headstart on becoming leader himself. I think he is an underpriced contender, and that there is an element of playing to the gallery with recent remaks.

    Not that I think he would be a good leader, but perhaps the Noncefinder General might adapt well to other witch hunts.
    For those who are knowledgeable about such things:

    Is the procedure for ousting a deputy leader the same as a leader? i.e. 20% nominations from the PLP and EPLP to trigger a contest?

    And if so might Watson be vulnerable to that?
    My guess would be no if it is the same system, I can't see Corbyn and his allies being up for no confidence vote in him as things stand, would probably take Watson really going for the leadership. Someone like Chris Williamson might be up for it!

    There doesn't seem much need to force the deputy leadership issue (if that is what this is about) as DavidL noted there isn't much to it. It is another little piece but you wouldn't want to waste goodwill, time or effort on it if you had better uses for it which I would assume they do.
    May I thank you for your kind words last week when I and my family were going through hell on someone close with mental health issues.
    No problem. Serious mental health issues are nasty stuff, a person is their personality and their mind that is so impotant. I hope things are better/improving now.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 7,652

    I see the thugs of the remain side have attacked JRM family car.

    Are you personally acquainted with them ?

    Mogg himself appears less well informed about their identity:
    "“It appears to be someone who can’t hold their drink — and probably not Catholic...."

    Are those exclusively 'remain' traits ?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 21,491

    I see the thugs of the remain side have attacked JRM family car.

    Any evidence that it was 'remain' thugs who did it, as opposed to common-or-garden left-wing thugs?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 45,509
    Mr. Eagles, worth pointing out that Fox is a political animal and the Governor of the Bank of England ought not be.

    Also, people take Carney more seriously...

    Dr. Foxy, alarming to see the damage done to Mogg's property, and a bookshop under attack.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 19,763

    surby said:

    It’s an open question which is greater: the crazed hysteria of the Corbynites or the crazed hysteria of the Leavers.

    Whilst Remainers are models of sober mature reflection......
    Remainers have not so far hopped from hate figure to hate figure or sought to undermine every aspect of the civic infrastructure that they have come into contact with.
    Just democracy and the outcome of a plebiscite....
    The outcome was only democratic if the leave side had kept within the spending rules and It didn't. Remember is only required a swing of 1.89% for this to have produced a different outcome. Leave cheated = result should be voided
    And yet, Remain outspent Leave by a significant margin, not even taking into account the government’s contribution. Yet that leaves Remainers curiously unconcerned.....
    Totally legally !
    So outspending your opponents by more than 50% is absolutely fine.....funnily enough, I doubt you’d advance that argument if LEAVE had done it.

    Are you seriously arguing that the relatively minor overspend by a side that was significantly outspent invalidates the result?
    The same people who argue loudly that the result was invalid because Leave broke expenditure rules in the Referendum are

    1. quite happy for there to be no similar level of scrutiny undertaken of the Remain spend and

    2. think it a wizard wheeze that the Govt. spent £9m of taxpayers money on Remain propaganda sent to every home just moments before the tight spending limits kicked in.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 21,491
    Sad to see so many left-wing posters descending into the gutter by downplaying Labour's massive issues with anti-Semitism.

    I guess in their eyes the ends justify the means ...
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 1,554
    edited August 6

    I see the thugs of the remain side have attacked JRM family car.

    Any evidence that it was 'remain' thugs who did it, as opposed to common-or-garden left-wing thugs?
    It's always a fun game when something bad happens and your faction gets blamed for it without any evidence...

    As a remain voter I'd complain but I figure most people will be switching the blame to my other political faction of Labour.

    Well I'm blaming angry Cameronites!

    Edit: Also of course no politicians should face harassment at their homes or damage to their property, even the actual despicable ones (eg BNP) which JRM is far from. Outside of normal peaceful protest they should be left alone.
  • Mr. Eagles, worth pointing out that Fox is a political animal and the Governor of the Bank of England ought not be.

    Also, people take Carney more seriously...

    Dr. Foxy, alarming to see the damage done to Mogg's property, and a bookshop under attack.

    I pointed out the other day The Governor of the Bank of England has a statutory obligation to ensure financial stability and warn when that is at risk.

    He was doing his job.

    Just like when his predecessor warned about the dangers of too much government borrowing during the last Labour government.

    https://www.newstatesman.com/economy/2009/07/crisis-king-bank-governor

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8469373.stm
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 46,151
    edited August 6

    A poll that will not be breathlessly retweeted by the usual suspects:

    Idiots talk up the Swedish far-right because it was convenient for their narrative. Just like idiots who confidently opined that le Pen would win the first round in France. Or how AfD would be the second-largest party in Germany.

    Nevertheless I retain the right to be horrified that in a relatively stable country as Sweden, about a quarter of votes are going to parties I would classify as "extreme" on one side or the other. And that in a country so important as France, le Pen would reach the final round. Or that in Germany, the AfD would become the official opposition.

    Elections in Italy, Greece, Hungary, Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands, Poland, Bulgaria, Cyprus have all produced results which are worth worrying about. I could have listed more.

    UKIP won the 2014 Euros in the UK. They were second in 2009 (when the BNP also picked up 2 seats). If Brexit reduces them to a mere polling blip, then despite whatever dissatisfaction I have with the three main parties, I'd find it a blessed relief.
    Just 6% behind the main centre left party and 1% behind the main centre right party is hardly out of the game even on that poll, Le Pen did win most departements and regions in France in the first round and beat the established centre right and centre left candidates in the popular vote even if she trailed Macron and the AfD are now polling third in Germany as the main opposition to the CDU and SPD coalition. In Italy there is now a populist right left government as you say and in Austria the far right are in government with the centre right.

    If UKIP go to a polling blip it will be because we get full Brexit, however the Chequers Deal has already revived them somewhat in the polls and there is talk of Farage standing in a Peterborough by election, though he has denied it.

    Sweden is quite similar in position to the UK in that like us it is outside the Eurozone and like us was one of the few EU nations not to impose transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries in 2004 which adding to concerns about migrants from North Africa and Syria etc has surely boosted the Swedish Democrats as it boosted UKIP
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 2,481

    surby said:

    It’s an open question which is greater: the crazed hysteria of the Corbynites or the crazed hysteria of the Leavers.

    Whilst Remainers are models of sober mature reflection......
    Remainers have not so far hopped from hate figure to hate figure or sought to undermine every aspect of the civic infrastructure that they have come into contact with.
    Just democracy and the outcome of a plebiscite....
    The outcome was only democratic if the leave side had kept within the spending rules and It didn't. Remember is only required a swing of 1.89% for this to have produced a different outcome. Leave cheated = result should be voided
    And yet, Remain outspent Leave by a significant margin, not even taking into account the government’s contribution. Yet that leaves Remainers curiously unconcerned.....
    Totally legally !
    So outspending your opponents by more than 50% is absolutely fine.....funnily enough, I doubt you’d advance that argument if LEAVE had done it.

    Are you seriously arguing that the relatively minor overspend by a side that was significantly outspent invalidates the result?
    The same people who argue loudly that the result was invalid because Leave broke expenditure rules in the Referendum are

    1. quite happy for there to be no similar level of scrutiny undertaken of the Remain spend and

    2. think it a wizard wheeze that the Govt. spent £9m of taxpayers money on Remain propaganda sent to every home just moments before the tight spending limits kicked in.
    OTOH, the Leave campaign demanded a purdah period during the refeare dum and then used this to unleash their myths on EU immigration, knowing that the civil service would not be allowed to issue rebuttals.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 38,717
    Dura_Ace said:

    The dildo was a good finishing touch. Very post modern.

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 19,763

    I see the thugs of the remain side have attacked JRM family car.

    His home as well:
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6030379/Vandals-attack-Jacob-Rees-Moggs-home-spray-paint-sex-toy.html

    All part of the kinder gentler politics I see.

    There is a real nasty element being formulated in politics. On both sides. Someone needs to step in and shut this down asap, or we'll have another Jo Cox incident.
    Although, if you want to tell everyone you aren't going to be there to stop them trashing your house, post online those lovely images of yourself and your family at the top of the Empire State Building....

    Muppet!

    (It also amused me that the Mail says the damage was discovered by the "maid". We really need to know though whether it was the scullery maid or the kitchen maid....)
This discussion has been closed.