Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Fringe concerns. Why all the focus on anti-Semitism in the Lab

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited March 6 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Fringe concerns. Why all the focus on anti-Semitism in the Labour party?

Imagine, if you will, that Labour sweep to power under Jeremy Corbyn. There is much that an avowedly socialist government would wish to do. No doubt it would look at nationalising key industries. It would open up the spigots of the Treasury, letting its funds gush into any number of spending channels. It would look to make irreversible redistributions of wealth.  

Read the full story here


«13456

Comments

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 73,185
    Super piece Alastair
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 40,825
    edited March 6
    I don't know that I completely buy the conclusion. I accept that I would not have expected any to actually defect, and they did, but how much more can the leadership do (or not do, for those who are unhappy) that has not already occurred? What fresh revelations of not following through with something substantive will be the final straw? What is true this week (or not) will be true (or not) next week too.

    So I struggle to accept these are necessarily calculated provocations, and if they are I don't know that it is working to the extend of leading to more defections so the PLP is more in the image the Corbyn project wants. While wanting more quiescent MPs can even Corbyn truly think losing many more MPs is a good idea?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 73,185
    E pluribus unum
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 20,005
    edited March 6
    Been out all afternoon.

    Seems Labour have sunk to a new low. Still there's way more sinking to be done before the end of all this.

    How on earth do moderate, non-jew hating MPs sleep at nights?
  • Since it is axiomatic that anti-semitism is prejudicial to the party's electoral prospects in some respects, then indeed it follows that by not removing it, Labour think they will gain a greater electoral advantage.

    As for "One way or another, they get the Labour party – an asset of great value in the long term and worth a lot of short term pain." - my response would be two words: Ratner / Marconi.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 11,136
    Number of police officers

    2010 -143000
    2018 -122000
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 40,825


    How on earth do moderate, non-jew hating MPs sleep at nights?

    They don't believe the furore, think it a price worth paying unfortunately for a Labour government, or think they can overcome it I presume?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 40,825

    Number of police officers

    2010 -143000
    2018 -122000

    I'm actually surprised its not a bigger drop.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 21,252
    edited March 6
    Very good piece Alastair. (Apart from the Turkey reference, on which we've disagreed before).
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 50,861

    Number of police officers

    2010 -143000
    2018 -122000

    Number of unemployed

    2010 7.9%
    2018 4.1%

    https://www.statista.com/statistics/279898/unemployment-rate-in-the-united-kingdom-uk/
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 24,709

    Number of police officers

    2010 -143000
    2018 -122000

    A few weeks ago there was a report from Hartlepool saying that local people had to take to the streets to police the town because there weren't any actual police available.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 50,861

    Number of police officers

    2010 -143000
    2018 -122000

    Crime rate England and Wales

    2010 10 000 000
    2017 8 000 000

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/bulletins/crimeinenglandandwales/yearendingseptember2017#overview-of-crime
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 12,671
    A good header. Thank you.

    There are two reasons why they are not shutting it down: (a) it is central to or otherwise arises out of their political world view. This was a point made by Siobhan McDonagh yesterday; (b) they are concerned that to do so would end up pointing the finger at Corbyn. How can a Labour Party criticise others for their reaction to anti-semitic murals without also criticising their own leader, etc.

    But, fundamentally, I think they don't care about the reaction of the Jewish community or those appalled by what's happened. They reckon that this is of no interest to the vast majority of voters, that those who are appalled are unlikely to be Labour voters anyway and that, even if they were, they will probably be outnumbered by those attracted to Labour because of its anti-Jewish stance.

    It is the same cynical - and utterly amoral - stance as that taken by those who used those posters in the Leave campaign. And in taking such a cynical stance, their calculation as to its electoral effect is probably correct. The moral compasses of political parties, of political campaigns have not featured highly in our public discourse. If we get amoral politicians cynically using hatred of minorities for political gain it is because the public don't care about this - or not enough.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 147
    I just don’t buy that Corbyn is intelligent enough to operate at that level of Machiavellianism
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 16,613
    Dear me, we're in deep shit:

    https://es.pn/2J3advc
  • AndyJS said:

    Number of police officers

    2010 -143000
    2018 -122000

    A few weeks ago there was a report from Hartlepool saying that local people had to take to the streets to police the town because there weren't any actual police available.
    The Emergency Services are on their arses. Government apologists can spout statistics as much as they want, it doesn't alter the fact that we are all stretched.
  • HYUFD said:

    Number of police officers

    2010 -143000
    2018 -122000

    Crime rate England and Wales

    2010 10 000 000
    2017 8 000 000

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/bulletins/crimeinenglandandwales/yearendingseptember2017#overview-of-crime
    It isn't just about crime.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 21,252
    Corporation Tax Receipts

    2010 31,630m @28%
    2018 54,604m @19%

    Arthur Laffer would be very proud :)
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 4,679
    All of these statistics point to it being very hard to correlate police numbers to changes in the crime rate - particularly if you try to break it down into individual categories of crime.

    We need to look at the influence of mobile phone apps, social media, the culture that has grown up around knives in various communities and the effect of the reduction in the use of Stop and Search powers. Research like that is where we will find the causes - and possibly the solutions to this perceived knife crime epidemic.

    Throwing around numbers and pointing fingers helps no-one.

    Stop and search changes are possibly one of the most significant factors in all this - but it is hard to prove.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 16,613
    DougSeal said:

    I just don’t buy that Corbyn is intelligent enough to operate at that level of Machiavellianism

    I think you have included eight extraneous words there.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 16,613
    Cyclefree said:

    A good header. Thank you.

    There are two reasons why they are not shutting it down: (a) it is central to or otherwise arises out of their political world view. This was a point made by Siobhan McDonagh yesterday; (b) they are concerned that to do so would end up pointing the finger at Corbyn. How can a Labour Party criticise others for their reaction to anti-semitic murals without also criticising their own leader, etc.

    But, fundamentally, I think they don't care about the reaction of the Jewish community or those appalled by what's happened. They reckon that this is of no interest to the vast majority of voters, that those who are appalled are unlikely to be Labour voters anyway and that, even if they were, they will probably be outnumbered by those attracted to Labour because of its anti-Jewish stance.

    It is the same cynical - and utterly amoral - stance as that taken by those who used those posters in the Leave campaign. And in taking such a cynical stance, their calculation as to its electoral effect is probably correct. The moral compasses of political parties, of political campaigns have not featured highly in our public discourse. If we get amoral politicians cynically using hatred of minorities for political gain it is because the public don't care about this - or not enough.

    It was a very good header. I wasn't actually sure for a while if Alastair had written it or you had. Then I came across a reference to Turkey...
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 632
    DougSeal said:

    I just don’t buy that Corbyn is intelligent enough to operate at that level of Machiavellianism

    I suspect neither does Mr Meeks. Hence his references to "the leadership", rather than "the leader".

    Excellent article, by the way.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 9,337
    Remind me how Corbyn's concern for Palestine raises aspiration and living standards on council estates across the UK.

    If the Palestinians were to form a pro-US government, Corbyn would probably denounce them at the first opportunity.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 2,745
    ydoethur said:

    Dear me, we're in deep shit:

    https://es.pn/2J3advc

    That is a mean way to get me to click on something about cricket...
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 16,613

    ydoethur said:

    Dear me, we're in deep shit:

    https://es.pn/2J3advc

    That is a mean way to get me to click on something about cricket...
    It wasn't actually deliberate. But it is rather a good video. I particularly liked Mark Butcher's acid comments on Nick Knight.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 22,863
    Excellent piece. Thanks Alastair.

    However I do wonder if this theory requires too much competence from Labour - it might all be a mess they do not desire.

    The current situation might just be a result of a lack of ability by the leadership to shut things down a couple of years ago. That failure has made it increasingly difficult to do the right thing now. They have descended the spiral of mistakes and are finding it harder and harder to do the right thing.

    Or perhaps, as some of us contend, he really is an anti-Semite, and finds it difficult to punish fellow travellers who share his views. This is possible: he has spent decades telling himself and others that he is anti-racist, and he may have actually lost track of what that means.

    Or might it just be that, after compromising on things like Trident and NATO membership, he cannot move any more without disheartening his true supporters. If true, this reflects very poorly on his true supporters: that they choose this topic as the thing they will not budge on.

    Whatever the reason (or reasons), it has led to the current situation and the battening down of the hatches, along with the denial and excusing of anti-Semitism that we see daily from the Corbynites on here.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 2,745
    edited March 6
    (a) it is central to or otherwise arises out of their political world view. This was a point made by Siobhan McDonagh yesterday;
    _____________________________________

    Sort of mentioned this in the other thread, Some Jewish people were not happy about them being linked to capitalism or that their left wing views are suddenly anti semitic.

    If she was a Corbyn supporting MP and made comments like that regarding Jews she would be suspended and hounded for it.

    Also goes against actual research into the area but hey who doesn't love a good conspiracy theory.

    https://cst.org.uk/public/data/file/7/4/JPR.2017.Antisemitism in contemporary Great Britain.pdf
    _______________________________________
    Levels of antisemitism among those on the left-wing of the political spectrum,
    including the far-left, are indistinguishable from those found in the general
    population. Yet, all parts of those on the left of the political spectrum – including
    the ‘slightly left-of-centre,’ the ‘fairly left-wing’ and the ‘very left-wing’ – exhibit
    higher levels of anti-Israelism than average. The most antisemitic group on the
    political spectrum consists of those who identify as very right-wing:
    _________________________________________
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 22,863

    AndyJS said:

    Number of police officers

    2010 -143000
    2018 -122000

    A few weeks ago there was a report from Hartlepool saying that local people had to take to the streets to police the town because there weren't any actual police available.
    The Emergency Services are on their arses. Government apologists can spout statistics as much as they want, it doesn't alter the fact that we are all stretched.
    I agree.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 25,763
    Cyclefree said:

    A good header. Thank you.

    There are two reasons why they are not shutting it down: (a) it is central to or otherwise arises out of their political world view. This was a point made by Siobhan McDonagh yesterday; (b) they are concerned that to do so would end up pointing the finger at Corbyn. How can a Labour Party criticise others for their reaction to anti-semitic murals without also criticising their own leader, etc.

    But, fundamentally, I think they don't care about the reaction of the Jewish community or those appalled by what's happened. They reckon that this is of no interest to the vast majority of voters, that those who are appalled are unlikely to be Labour voters anyway and that, even if they were, they will probably be outnumbered by those attracted to Labour because of its anti-Jewish stance.

    It is the same cynical - and utterly amoral - stance as that taken by those who used those posters in the Leave campaign. And in taking such a cynical stance, their calculation as to its electoral effect is probably correct. The moral compasses of political parties, of political campaigns have not featured highly in our public discourse. If we get amoral politicians cynically using hatred of minorities for political gain it is because the public don't care about this - or not enough.

    I don't think that anti-semitism is popular. I think it costs Labour three constituencies, and gains them none. And, I think it's hurting the party with a lot of swing voters. I don't see any electoral advantage from it.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 21,252

    All of these statistics point to it being very hard to correlate police numbers to changes in the crime rate - particularly if you try to break it down into individual categories of crime.

    We need to look at the influence of mobile phone apps, social media, the culture that has grown up around knives in various communities and the effect of the reduction in the use of Stop and Search powers. Research like that is where we will find the causes - and possibly the solutions to this perceived knife crime epidemic.

    Throwing around numbers and pointing fingers helps no-one.

    Stop and search changes are possibly one of the most significant factors in all this - but it is hard to prove.

    Well said. There's going to be a large number of reasons behind this. I suspect there's also a rise in drug consumption (especially cocaine) somewhere in the mix too.

    Whatever the many reasons, the government is on the back foot politically though. The Home Secretary needs to earn his salary by being seen to enable proposed solutions. Start with reintroducing stop and search and getting rid of the PC culture that stops criminals being chased on motorbikes.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 50,082
    HYUFD said:
    Good to see cross party cooperation on Brexit !
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 16,613
    HYUFD said:
    How about, 'vote for the fecking deal?'

    It's such an easy answer you would have thought even Boles, Letwin and Powell would have got it, perhaps at the second go.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 2,745
    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:
    Good to see cross party cooperation on Brexit !
    Yeah, not sure if it can get anywhere but I can live with a soft Brexit or a second referendum so I hope they can.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 16,983

    (a) it is central to or otherwise arises out of their political world view. This was a point made by Siobhan McDonagh yesterday;
    _____________________________________

    Sort of mentioned this in the other thread, Some Jewish people were not happy about them being linked to capitalism or that their left wing views are suddenly anti semitic.

    If she was a Corbyn supporting MP and made comments like that regarding Jews she would be suspended and hounded for it.

    Also goes against actual research into the area but hey who doesn't love a good conspiracy theory.

    https://cst.org.uk/public/data/file/7/4/JPR.2017.Antisemitism in contemporary Great Britain.pdf
    _______________________________________
    Levels of antisemitism among those on the left-wing of the political spectrum,
    including the far-left, are indistinguishable from those found in the general
    population. Yet, all parts of those on the left of the political spectrum – including
    the ‘slightly left-of-centre,’ the ‘fairly left-wing’ and the ‘very left-wing’ – exhibit
    higher levels of anti-Israelism than average. The most antisemitic group on the
    political spectrum consists of those who identify as very right-wing:
    _________________________________________

    How many members of the general population are leaders of the opposition
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 25,763
    Roy Mason or Merlin Rees would have said the same.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 7,191
    Labour is now under control of people who think like this

    “We are not interested in reforming … the police, armed services, judiciary and monarchy. We are about dismantling them and replacing them with our own machinery of class rule.”

    Diane Abbott said that FFS
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 26,014
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 7,484
    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:
    Good to see cross party cooperation on Brexit !
    I will never cease to be bemused by this. Parliament doesn't negotiate the deal with itself, Government negotiates the deal with the EU. I'm sure they're having a whale of a time being all soppy hopey-changey and co-operationy, but it's fan-fiction about the deal they'd like to have, not the real one IRL. Meanwhile Barnier is tearing us a new asshole. There are 23 days to Brexit... :(
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 6,346
    From the Guardian
    'A recall petition for Peterborough MP Fiona Onasanya will be launched on March 19, Peterborough city council has announced. As the Press Association reports, voters in the constituency will each be allocated to one of 10 signing stations where they can add their names to the petition. A byelection will be triggered if 10% of eligible voters - around 7,000 people - sign the petition before it closes at 5pm on 1 May.'
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 40,825
    viewcode said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:
    Good to see cross party cooperation on Brexit !
    I will never cease to be bemused by this. Parliament doesn't negotiate the deal with itself, Government negotiates the deal with the EU. I'm sure they're having a whale of a time being all soppy hopey-changey and co-operationy, but it's fan-fiction about the deal they'd like to have, not the real one IRL. Meanwhile Barnier is tearing us a new asshole. There are 23 days to Brexit... :(
    If parliament could agree on something besides a unicorn it would be a good start indeed. At least the ones supporting a softer deal have more chance of the EU agreeing even if not guaranteed.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 2,974
    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:
    Good to see cross party cooperation on Brexit !
    The normalisation of Corbyn continues.

    (In a rather ghastly way we are demonstrating the reason the 20th century was the way it was. In what way can the unacceptable become so acceptable so swiftly?)
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 21,252
    AndyJS said:
    That’s sad news. Only 61 too, far too young.

    So many people from ‘90s culture now passing away. RIP.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 20,005
    Omnium said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:
    Good to see cross party cooperation on Brexit !
    The normalisation of Corbyn continues.

    (In a rather ghastly way we are demonstrating the reason the 20th century was the way it was. In what way can the unacceptable become so acceptable so swiftly?)
    :+1:

    Expediency.

    Sickening. Nothing has been learnt from history it seems.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 40,825
    Omnium said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:
    Good to see cross party cooperation on Brexit !
    The normalisation of Corbyn continues.

    He's been leader, and therefore prospective PM, for a long time. Of course he's normalised. Even he has changed to some degree since he became leader. A bit harder, more obviously one of the same old same old in style.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 2,108
    Sean_F said:

    Cyclefree said:

    A good header. Thank you.

    There are two reasons why they are not shutting it down: (a) it is central to or otherwise arises out of their political world view. This was a point made by Siobhan McDonagh yesterday; (b) they are concerned that to do so would end up pointing the finger at Corbyn. How can a Labour Party criticise others for their reaction to anti-semitic murals without also criticising their own leader, etc.

    But, fundamentally, I think they don't care about the reaction of the Jewish community or those appalled by what's happened. They reckon that this is of no interest to the vast majority of voters, that those who are appalled are unlikely to be Labour voters anyway and that, even if they were, they will probably be outnumbered by those attracted to Labour because of its anti-Jewish stance.

    It is the same cynical - and utterly amoral - stance as that taken by those who used those posters in the Leave campaign. And in taking such a cynical stance, their calculation as to its electoral effect is probably correct. The moral compasses of political parties, of political campaigns have not featured highly in our public discourse. If we get amoral politicians cynically using hatred of minorities for political gain it is because the public don't care about this - or not enough.

    I don't think that anti-semitism is popular. I think it costs Labour three constituencies, and gains them none. And, I think it's hurting the party with a lot of swing voters. I don't see any electoral advantage from it.
    For the many not the few. There are 10 times as many Muslims as Jews.
    And although there are 10 times as many Christians as Muslims, most are CofE and don't feel strongly about it.



  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 22,442
    How many of their half million members are not paying their membership fees any longer
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 20,005
    Well, there's Falconer's vast army of lawyers and data analysts to fund I suppose.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 20,005
    edited March 6
    Floater said:

    Labour is now under control of people who think like this

    “We are not interested in reforming … the police, armed services, judiciary and monarchy. We are about dismantling them and replacing them with our own machinery of class rule.”

    Diane Abbott said that FFS

    Topped by Murray's line about needing to see the shadow of the guillotine.

  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 10,928
    Jezza and the gang went on a bender in Yarmouth. It was a hell of a weekend, but worth every penny.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 50,861
    edited March 6
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:
    How about, 'vote for the fecking deal?'

    It's such an easy answer you would have thought even Boles, Letwin and Powell would have got it, perhaps at the second go.
    Boles and Letwin did vote for the Deal and will do so again, however they are also willing to push Norway + and Customs Union BINO if it fails again
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 4,939
    Excellent piece, Alastair, as usual, although like one or two others I'm not wholly convinced by your conclusion.

    One problem is that it implies a depth and quality in its planning that one does not easily associate with the Party. There is however a simpler and I think more convincing explanation. The Leadership perceives Israel as a client-state of the USA which it regards as principally responsible for widespread oppression and injustice around the world. Support for the Palestinians and hostility to Israel signals the Leadership's posture to its supporters. It cannot reposition without disappointing its backers and appearing weak and inconsistent.

    The anti-Israel theme is thus part of a wider world view in which the Imperialist USA is the main villain, and by implication the former communist Republics are the good guys. Any spill-over into anti-semitism may be formally disavowed, but tolerated in practice, as long as it doesn't become too much of an embarrassment.

    Does that conclusion work for you, Alastair?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 21,252

    Well, there's Falconer's vast army of lawyers and data analysts to fund I suppose.
    If they have any sense they’ll ask to get paid weekly. In advance.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 16,613
    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:
    How about, 'vote for the fecking deal?'

    It's such an easy answer you would have thought even Boles, Letwin and Powell would have got it, perhaps at the second go.
    Boles and Letwin did vote for the Deal and will do so again, however they are also willing to push Norway + BINO and Customs Union if it fails again
    OK, I withdraw my slur re Letwin and Boles.

    Powell, however...
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 4,679
    justin124 said:

    From the Guardian
    'A recall petition for Peterborough MP Fiona Onasanya will be launched on March 19, Peterborough city council has announced. As the Press Association reports, voters in the constituency will each be allocated to one of 10 signing stations where they can add their names to the petition. A byelection will be triggered if 10% of eligible voters - around 7,000 people - sign the petition before it closes at 5pm on 1 May.'

    And all the time, she gets to claim her salary and all the privileges that come with being MP.

    This process is too slow.

    Prison time should equal kicked out of Parliament - simple as that. The one year limit is arbitrary and too generous to criminal MPs.

    I agree with recall petitions as a principle - but not for removing MPs under these circumstances. And certainly not with this extended time period (but ludicrously limited opening hours - 9 to 5, Monday to Friday excludes too many potential signatories.)

    Use them for other egregious behaviour - but any MP who serves prison time should be out. Immediately. End of.
  • Jezza has promised us a 10% payrise. He better get his arse in gear!
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 2,745
    geoffw said:

    Sean_F said:

    Cyclefree said:

    A good header. Thank you.

    There are two reasons why they are not shutting it down: (a) it is central to or otherwise arises out of their political world view. This was a point made by Siobhan McDonagh yesterday; (b) they are concerned that to do so would end up pointing the finger at Corbyn. How can a Labour Party criticise others for their reaction to anti-semitic murals without also criticising their own leader, etc.

    But, fundamentally, I think they don't care about the reaction of the Jewish community or those appalled by what's happened. They reckon that this is of no interest to the vast majority of voters, that those who are appalled are unlikely to be Labour voters anyway and that, even if they were, they will probably be outnumbered by those attracted to Labour because of its anti-Jewish stance.

    It is the same cynical - and utterly amoral - stance as that taken by those who used those posters in the Leave campaign. And in taking such a cynical stance, their calculation as to its electoral effect is probably correct. The moral compasses of political parties, of political campaigns have not featured highly in our public discourse. If we get amoral politicians cynically using hatred of minorities for political gain it is because the public don't care about this - or not enough.

    I don't think that anti-semitism is popular. I think it costs Labour three constituencies, and gains them none. And, I think it's hurting the party with a lot of swing voters. I don't see any electoral advantage from it.
    For the many not the few. There are 10 times as many Muslims as Jews.
    And although there are 10 times as many Christians as Muslims, most are CofE and don't feel strongly about it.



    Exactly, as the right winger points out, there are very few Jewish people but many of the monstrous Muslims. So Corbyn can appeal for votes from the bad people rather than the pure of heart*

    *All us non Muslims.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 2,974
    kle4 said:

    Omnium said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:
    Good to see cross party cooperation on Brexit !
    The normalisation of Corbyn continues.

    He's been leader, and therefore prospective PM, for a long time. Of course he's normalised. Even he has changed to some degree since he became leader. A bit harder, more obviously one of the same old same old in style.
    Look, I'll say something that's totally unfair. I'm not suggesting that this is good parallel. However I think it illustrates the dangers.
    Suppose you had written;

    "Adolf's been leader, and therefore prospective PM, for a long time. Of course he's normalised. Even he has changed to some degree since he became leader. A bit harder, more obviously one of the same old same old in style."

    Completely unfair - I'll reiterate. Nonetheless this is the normalisation process at work. It has long baffled me how the German people managed to get themselves into the pickle they did. Something of what's happening with Corbyn illuminates that.



  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 22,442

    Jezza has promised us a 10% payrise. He better get his arse in gear!
    And you believe it ??
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 7,191

    Jezza has promised us a 10% payrise. He better get his arse in gear!
    And you believe it ??
    But what are Labour employees getting? oh
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 13,570
    SLab was always kept afloat by UK Lab, by several accounts that tap now seems to be at a trickle.

    All Labour roads lead to Dundee this weekend as the party gathers for its spring conference. Beyond this latest gathering of the remaining faithful, however, the problem for Labour is it is going nowhere. The publication of its latest accounts confirmed as much.

    The party made a loss in 2018. More pertinently, it attracted just £35,555 in donations last year. A party that is losing membership and losing money is a party that has lost touch with its own voters, never mind its failure to engage with people who are not already members of the Labour tribe.'

    https://tinyurl.com/y6bwgypm
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 3,290
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 40,825
    Shows how silly and drawn out this process is - I assumed he'd already declared he was.
    Omnium said:

    kle4 said:

    Omnium said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:
    Good to see cross party cooperation on Brexit !
    The normalisation of Corbyn continues.

    He's been leader, and therefore prospective PM, for a long time. Of course he's normalised. Even he has changed to some degree since he became leader. A bit harder, more obviously one of the same old same old in style.
    Look, I'll say something that's totally unfair. I'm not suggesting that this is good parallel. However I think it illustrates the dangers.
    Suppose you had written;

    "Adolf's been leader, and therefore prospective PM, for a long time. Of course he's normalised. Even he has changed to some degree since he became leader. A bit harder, more obviously one of the same old same old in style."

    Completely unfair - I'll reiterate. Nonetheless this is the normalisation process at work. It has long baffled me how the German people managed to get themselves into the pickle they did. Something of what's happening with Corbyn illuminates that.

    I'm not saying that the normalisation of Corbyn is a good thing - I still don't like him, and the halo his members put on him is not convincing even if we accept the argument he gets more crap than he deserves - I'm just staying that it has already happened and was inevitable. I accept the point, though one certainly hopes we never find ourselves in this situation, that really really bad people and things can become accepted through a slow creep.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 7,191

    Floater said:

    Labour is now under control of people who think like this

    “We are not interested in reforming … the police, armed services, judiciary and monarchy. We are about dismantling them and replacing them with our own machinery of class rule.”

    Diane Abbott said that FFS

    Topped by Murray's line about needing to see the shadow of the guillotine.

    I can't find the original article - but I once saw a picture of a Labour current front bencher posing with a pamphlet from a far left group.

    Said pamphlet called for arming of a peoples militia to counteract the power available to the establishment.

    I think there is a term for that......

    Anyway - said person said they had endorsed it but not read it........

    of course - not like we have heard that before right?

    They aren't just stupid they are dangerous.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 40,825

    justin124 said:

    From the Guardian
    'A recall petition for Peterborough MP Fiona Onasanya will be launched on March 19, Peterborough city council has announced. As the Press Association reports, voters in the constituency will each be allocated to one of 10 signing stations where they can add their names to the petition. A byelection will be triggered if 10% of eligible voters - around 7,000 people - sign the petition before it closes at 5pm on 1 May.'

    And all the time, she gets to claim her salary and all the privileges that come with being MP.

    This process is too slow.

    Prison time should equal kicked out of Parliament - simple as that. The one year limit is arbitrary and too generous to criminal MPs.

    I agree with recall petitions as a principle - but not for removing MPs under these circumstances. And certainly not with this extended time period (but ludicrously limited opening hours - 9 to 5, Monday to Friday excludes too many potential signatories.)

    Use them for other egregious behaviour - but any MP who serves prison time should be out. Immediately. End of.
    If someone has posted an explanation as to why the Act that set the period of 12 months did so I do not recall it. I can understand the aspect about, for instance, recall procedures not kicking in until appeals are exhausted, but like you I would think any prison time makes it reasonable that someone loses their seat, and yet when the Act was first brought in a long time ago now they decided 11 months 30 days in prison was fine for a sitting MP. Why? And if there was a reason that was felt to be a good call, does it still apply?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 73,185
    I’m on United to qualify.

    #Aftertiming.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 50,861
    edited March 6
    Biden has a leads in current polls for the Democratic nomination if he does run and tends to do best against Trump too.

    The latest national Democratic nomination poll of likely Democratic primary/caucus voters has it Biden 31%, Sanders 27%, Harris 11%, Warren 7%, O'Rourke 6%, Booker 4%

    https://morningconsult.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Political-Intelligence-3.5.19.pdf

    The latest general election polling has Biden leading Trump 51% to 40%, Warren leads Trump 45% to 42%, Sanders leads Trump 50% to 41%, Harris leads Trump 45% to 43% and Booker leads Trump 46% to 43%
    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/20190301_US.pdf
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 40,825
    edited March 6
    After the huge influx of members over the last few years how can they possibly be in financial trouble even if some number, say even a large number, have not paid up for the last year? Seriously, that must have put millions into the coffers.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 4,679
    kle4 said:

    justin124 said:

    From the Guardian
    'A recall petition for Peterborough MP Fiona Onasanya will be launched on March 19, Peterborough city council has announced. As the Press Association reports, voters in the constituency will each be allocated to one of 10 signing stations where they can add their names to the petition. A byelection will be triggered if 10% of eligible voters - around 7,000 people - sign the petition before it closes at 5pm on 1 May.'

    And all the time, she gets to claim her salary and all the privileges that come with being MP.

    This process is too slow.

    Prison time should equal kicked out of Parliament - simple as that. The one year limit is arbitrary and too generous to criminal MPs.

    I agree with recall petitions as a principle - but not for removing MPs under these circumstances. And certainly not with this extended time period (but ludicrously limited opening hours - 9 to 5, Monday to Friday excludes too many potential signatories.)

    Use them for other egregious behaviour - but any MP who serves prison time should be out. Immediately. End of.
    If someone has posted an explanation as to why the Act that set the period of 12 months did so I do not recall it. I can understand the aspect about, for instance, recall procedures not kicking in until appeals are exhausted, but like you I would think any prison time makes it reasonable that someone loses their seat, and yet when the Act was first brought in a long time ago now they decided 11 months 30 days in prison was fine for a sitting MP. Why? And if there was a reason that was felt to be a good call, does it still apply?
    Appeal - fine - that should be part of the process. But there is no justification in my mind that means that prison time (served or suspended) should not mean removal from office.

    Personally I would extend that to a permanent ban on standing for elected office (at any level) - and I would also remove Peers from the Lords for prison terms.

    Law breakers don't get to stay as law makers.

    We will never full clean up politics - I accept that. But I find it intolerable that this convicted liar gets to vote in the Commons.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 40,825
    edited March 6

    kle4 said:

    justin124 said:

    From the Guardian
    'A recall petition for Peterborough MP Fiona Onasanya will be launched on March 19, Peterborough city council has announced. As the Press Association reports, voters in the constituency will each be allocated to one of 10 signing stations where they can add their names to the petition. A byelection will be triggered if 10% of eligible voters - around 7,000 people - sign the petition before it closes at 5pm on 1 May.'

    And all the time, she gets to claim her salary and all the privileges that come with being MP.

    This process is too slow.

    Prison time should equal kicked out of Parliament - simple as that. The one year limit is arbitrary and too generous to criminal MPs.

    I agree with recall petitions as a principle - but not for removing MPs under these circumstances. And certainly not with this extended time period (but ludicrously limited opening hours - 9 to 5, Monday to Friday excludes too many potential signatories.)

    Use them for other egregious behaviour - but any MP who serves prison time should be out. Immediately. End of.
    If someone has posted an explanation as to why the Act that set the period of 12 months did so I do not recall it. I can understand the aspect about, for instance, recall procedures not kicking in until appeals are exhausted, but like you I would think any prison time makes it reasonable that someone loses their seat, and yet when the Act was first brought in a long time ago now they decided 11 months 30 days in prison was fine for a sitting MP. Why? And if there was a reason that was felt to be a good call, does it still apply?
    Appeal - fine - that should be part of the process. But there is no justification in my mind that means that prison time (served or suspended) should not mean removal from office.

    Personally I would extend that to a permanent ban on standing for elected office (at any level) - and I would also remove Peers from the Lords for prison terms.

    Law breakers don't get to stay as law makers.

    We will never full clean up politics - I accept that. But I find it intolerable that this convicted liar gets to vote in the Commons.
    I agree (mostly - permanent ban seems very disproportionate, and I know of elected politicians who have had long time past convictions for things and are very good), I'm just hoping someone with a longer memory knows why that was not the rule from the start.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 2,974
    kle4 said:

    Shows how silly and drawn out this process is - I assumed he'd already declared he was.
    Omnium said:

    kle4 said:

    Omnium said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:
    Good to see cross party cooperation on Brexit !
    The normalisation of Corbyn continues.

    He's been leader, and therefore prospective PM, for a long time. Of course he's normalised. Even he has changed to some degree since he became leader. A bit harder, more obviously one of the same old same old in style.
    Look, I'll say something that's totally unfair. I'm not suggesting that this is good parallel. However I think it illustrates the dangers.
    Suppose you had written;

    "Adolf's been leader, and therefore prospective PM, for a long time. Of course he's normalised. Even he has changed to some degree since he became leader. A bit harder, more obviously one of the same old same old in style."

    Completely unfair - I'll reiterate. Nonetheless this is the normalisation process at work. It has long baffled me how the German people managed to get themselves into the pickle they did. Something of what's happening with Corbyn illuminates that.

    I'm not saying that the normalisation of Corbyn is a good thing - I still don't like him, and the halo his members put on him is not convincing even if we accept the argument he gets more crap than he deserves - I'm just staying that it has already happened and was inevitable. I accept the point, though one certainly hopes we never find ourselves in this situation, that really really bad people and things can become accepted through a slow creep.
    I hope Corbyn never gets the chance to prove me wrong, but if he does I hope he does so rather convincingly.

    Mind you in this instance it was really Lucy Powell that was of concern. Chummying up with (to my mind) anybody as suits her.
  • Jezza has promised us a 10% payrise. He better get his arse in gear!
    And you believe it ??
    Of course I don't believe it- he's a fecking politician!
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 50,082
    philiph said:
    George W Bush was a decent runner, the current incumbent... Doubtful.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 2,745
    kle4 said:

    After the huge influx of members over the last few years how can they possibly be in financial trouble even if some number, say even a large number, have not paid up for the last year? Seriously, that must have put millions into the coffers.
    The party has lost big donors though that would mostly have been made up by the growing membership. I'd be more sceptical if it wasn't Stephen Bush although he does refer to cost cutting. Maybe tightening the belt because the assumption is an election isn't coming soon (spend less when you aren't building up to an election) or just to save money for the election whenever it does come.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 50,082

    I’m on United to qualify.

    #Aftertiming.

    Looks a good game
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 4,679
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    justin124 said:

    From the Guardian
    'A recall petition for Peterborough MP Fiona Onasanya will be launched on March 19,

    And all the time, she gets to claim her salary and all the privileges that come with being MP.

    This process is too slow.

    Prison time should equal kicked out of Parliament - simple as that. The one year limit is arbitrary and too generous to criminal MPs.

    I agree with recall petitions as a principle - but not for removing MPs under these circumstances. And certainly not with this extended time period (but ludicrously limited opening hours - 9 to 5, Monday to Friday excludes too many potential signatories.)

    Use them for other egregious behaviour - but any MP who serves prison time should be out. Immediately. End of.
    If someone has posted an explanation as to why the Act that set the period of 12 months did so I do not recall it. I can understand the aspect about, for instance, recall procedures not kicking in until appeals are exhausted, but like you I would think any prison time makes it reasonable that someone loses their seat, and yet when the Act was first brought in a long time ago now they decided 11 months 30 days in prison was fine for a sitting MP. Why? And if there was a reason that was felt to be a good call, does it still apply?
    Appeal - fine - that should be part of the process. But there is no justification in my mind that means that prison time (served or suspended) should not mean removal from office.

    Personally I would extend that to a permanent ban on standing for elected office (at any level) - and I would also remove Peers from the Lords for prison terms.

    Law breakers don't get to stay as law makers.

    We will never full clean up politics - I accept that. But I find it intolerable that this convicted liar gets to vote in the Commons.
    I agree (mostly - permanent ban seems very disproportionate, and I know of elected politicians who have had long time past convictions for things and are very good), I'm just hoping someone with a longer memory knows why that was not the rule from the start.
    I am fine with someone who stands for election having had a criminal past. As long as that is fully declared on all their election literature. Voters can make an informed choice under those circumstances.

    My preferred ban is for anyone who commits a crime that leads to them getting prison time whilst in office. I appreciate that it could be seen as a harsh additional punishment - but it is necessary to draw a line as to a need to hold MPs and Peers to a higher standard.
  • There's an article in the Guardian basically saying:

    Left-wing antisemitism good. Right-win antisemitism bad.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/06/ilhan-omar-weaponisation-of-anti-semitism
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 632

    There's an article in the Guardian basically saying:

    Left-wing antisemitism good. Right-win antisemitism bad.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/06/ilhan-omar-weaponisation-of-anti-semitism

    Comment is free. And yet still, somehow, overpriced.
  • There's an article in the Guardian basically saying:

    Left-wing antisemitism good. Right-win antisemitism bad.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/06/ilhan-omar-weaponisation-of-anti-semitism

    They've closed the comments on it already, as someone's mentioned St. Jez.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 4,679

    There's an article in the Guardian basically saying:

    Left-wing antisemitism good. Right-win antisemitism bad.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/06/ilhan-omar-weaponisation-of-anti-semitism

    They've closed the comments on it already, as someone's mentioned St. Jez.
    Of course, free speech - but only for the few
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 40,825
    Scott_P said:
    Pulling votes, it solves all problems, right?
  • blueblueblueblue Posts: 326

    There's an article in the Guardian basically saying:

    Left-wing antisemitism good. Right-win antisemitism bad.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/06/ilhan-omar-weaponisation-of-anti-semitism

    They've closed the comments on it already, as someone's mentioned St. Jez.
    Of course, free speech - but only for the few
    The Guardian policy on closing comments is essentially an admission that "We're wrong, our readers know we're wrong, but we can't take the shame of them ripping us a new one on the topic and we still have to publish it to maintain our loopy-left reputation for being wrong, so ... yeah".
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 40,825
    Promising - while I'd like a resolution, there's no point in pretending to hold talks if they are so far apart, and calling it off would therefore be a step forward.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 3,290
    Perfect position for a last minute agreement.

    Or not.
  • How are we going to remain after all the bad faith on both sides? They don't like our politicians, we don't like their politicians.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 40,825

    How are we going to remain after all the bad faith on both sides?
    Unharmoniously.

    But if our MPs won't vote to leave, that's where we'll find ourselves so we'll need to suck it up.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 2,745
    kle4 said:

    Promising - while I'd like a resolution, there's no point in pretending to hold talks if they are so far apart, and calling it off would therefore be a step forward.
    It would be nice to get to a this is it moment, it feels like forever we've been waiting for it to finally be admitted the contradictions weren't going away. Even then May's deal finally being settled is only one aspect of us finding out where we are going but it has been by far the most painful part.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 16,613
    kle4 said:

    How are we going to remain after all the bad faith on both sides?
    Unharmoniously.

    But if our MPs won't vote to leave, that's where we'll find ourselves so we'll need to suck it up.
    How many times?

    They have already voted to leave. It will happen automatically without further votes.

    It's only if our MPs actively vote to Remain before the 29th March that that changes. And they are as unable to do that as to do anything else.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 591
    If May pulls the no deal and extension votes there will be all out war in the Tory party.

    After promising these votes to avoid the Cooper Letwin amendment going through to renege on that will likely cause a host of resignations and would cause a huge backlash .
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 40,825
    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    How are we going to remain after all the bad faith on both sides?
    Unharmoniously.

    But if our MPs won't vote to leave, that's where we'll find ourselves so we'll need to suck it up.
    How many times?

    They have already voted to leave. It will happen automatically without further votes.

    It's only if our MPs actively vote to Remain before the 29th March that that changes. And they are as unable to do that as to do anything else.
    I am assuming an extension will ultimately lead to remain, probably via a referendum. I am very confident an extension will happen simply because so many don't want no deal but so many also don't want deal, and yet there probably are not enough to referendum or revoke, meaning can kicking will occur. It's a question of how they justify it without a reason beyond faffing about and if the EU accepts that.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 10,719
    Sandpit said:

    Corporation Tax Receipts

    2010 31,630m @28%
    2018 54,604m @19%

    Arthur Laffer would be very proud :)

    That's nominal.

    In 1999-2000 Corp Tax Receipts were 33,054. Inflation adjusted that would be around 55,461m
This discussion has been closed.