Wouldn’t it be lovely if we had a proper national anthem – one that celebrated the country and its people rather than the creepy dirge that got Jeremy Corbyn into trouble at the Battle of Britain memorial service. There’s a case for boycotting God Save the Queen on aesthetic grounds.
Comments
Oh and first
O/T
Bullying Germany
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/11873936/Eastern-European-countries-may-be-forced-accept-quotas-for-migrants.html
Still, I take Don's point about dumping negatives. The two negatives which Labour most needs to dump are John McDonnell and Jeremy Corbyn.
She argues that he [sic] Tory economic record doesn’t match Cameron and Osborne’s boasts."
HAHAHHAHAHHAH Let's see New Very Old Labour beat the Tories on economic credibility. I await with baited breath.
And he has apologised for saying he wished he could go back in time and murder the PM of our country. That's nice too.
But it doesn't make him a nice man. Not at all.
Of course spending money helps win elections - both advertising and funding the ground game is important.
HYUFD's invocation of Romney misses the point. Political money spending is subject to the laws of diminishing returns and, indeed, there comes a point where additional money probably has no or even negative impact.
The political funding laws and environments are very different between the US and UK. Over $2 billion was spent on the last US Presidential campaign. If I had lived in Ohio, I doubt I could have brought myself to watch TV.
But with the limited spending on UK elections, I doubt any party actually reaches the point where additional money is not helpful if wisely spent.
I'm convinced its a weird, ego driven vanity project, where they are walking round with two fingers up at everybody. I know a 15 year old who is heading for very poor GCSE results. She says:
But you don't get it, I just don't care.
Underneath the bravado I'm sure she realises she's behaving irresponsibly but she seems set on self destruction, I can't help think Corbyn's lot are the same. Peculiar.
Another point- we've got record numbers in work, especially in the private sector. With wages rising at about 3% in this sector, why would anyone feel that the current 'plan' isn't working?
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/i-loathe-socialism-but-have-to-admit-jeremy-corbyn-has-economic-policies-that-could-win-him-an-election-10507354.html
The other point about dumping former statements is that the way it was done just looks crass. McDonnell has had a decade to repudiate his former statements and instead waits until he gets appointed to senior office? It looks like a case of being forced to apologise so as to avoid awkward questions. If he really did not mean them why did he not apologise beforehand.
Finally "McDonnell and Corbyn will have enjoyed reading Nobel prize-winning economist Paul Krugman view of his victory.". True no doubt and cuddly and warm, but he would be much wiser reading the criticisms of those who stand against him for that is where the battles ahead will be fought.
Very good post.
Plus of course if Ozzie is running surpluses by 2020, he'll have plenty of room for juicy tax cuts for low and middle income workers.
By GE2020 it'll be resolved as a public spending issue, unless something really drastic happens.
It's all so Last War.
..
Best piece on wishful thinking I have read since Labourlist..
Her article makes 2 very good points. Firstly, politicians only really focus on the economy when things go seriously wrong. By far the best chance of Labour doing well in 2020 would be if the economy took a serious dip taking the gloss off Osborne in particular. There has to be at least a 40% chance of this happening given the length of the current cycle.
Secondly, she observes politicians are really not good at focussing on long term improvement to the economy. Whether it is infrastructure, housing or education it is very difficult not to agree with that even if people differ on the solutions.
She makes a less good point that Osborne's record is not as good as it is trumpeted and plays about with some regional statistics in a way which somewhat undermines the seriousness of her message. But one to watch I think.
1) We've only had growth because Osborne eased off on austerity and has only done a moderate amount of austerity
2) Balancing the books over the longer term is important and we'll do it with moderate austerity
The focus should definitely be on national insurance. The employer contribution is a simple jobs tax, and we should focus on cutting that rather than corporation tax. The employee contribution is just an unfair additional income tax on the middle earners, hitting right at the point on the income scale where people are thinking about working more.
Right up to the point where he opens his mouth and starts talking about the economy.
And I don't buy that double-apology on QT. Trying to lighten the moment by saying the "assassinate Thatcher" er "joke" was the end of his career in stand-up. Ugh. The man is politically penitent, nothing else.
I don't believe he has emotionally moved one millimeter from his opinions held for the last 30 years.
But I don't believe there will be surpluses by 2020. The proportion of the deficit that was structural just goes up and up. It may even have exceeded the deficit itself. This has made it so much harder to cut. Growth has not produced the revenues expected and I expect it to continue to disappoint. The hole we were in was vast.
If we have a slow down in 2018 which results in the deficit rising again the next election will look very different from the walk in the park it looks at the moment.
http://www.newser.com/story/213009/man-arrested-at-17-in-saudi-arabia-to-be-crucified.html
1. Deal with the personal negatives attributed to them (we can debate if they were deserved) to the extent that instinctive Labour-leaning voters feel that they aren't a barrier to voting Labour. It doesn't matter about impressing flightpath or JEO, but Southam and others of siilar mind need to be addressed.
2. Develop an economic narrative that most people accept is a viable alternative to the current policy. If they think it's great, so much the better, but the key thing is that it's not seen to be riskier than drifting on with the status quo.
3. Discredit the current Government and offer a better alternative.
Point 1 is what we're seeing at the moment, and to my mind we're making some progress. The initial attack on Corbyn as a dangerous nutter has largely failed - most people accept that he's a nice man, if somewhat in the manner of an absent-minded academic. McConnell is widely acknowledged through gritted teeth to have handled his apologies well and is anything but absent-minded. Both of them are well-mannered and reasonable, and the crucial issue is going to be more whether they're seen to be competent.
Point 2 is difficult after years of neglected drift in alternative thinking, but easier if the snags about the current alternative become more evident, as I suspect they will over the next few years. It's that which will largely decide the next election, because:
Point 3 will be relatively easy if points 1 and 2 have been addressed. Floating voters don't think the Government is wonderful, they think it's rather crap but maybe the best available. They've given it a tiny majority over an opposition that they didn't really trust, and by 2020 we'll have had years of squabbles over Europe and a potentially divisive Tory leadership election. People will in principle be up for a change. But phase 3 only works once phases 1 and 2 are done, because otherwise people won't listen.
NI, income tax, property tax, fuel tax, drink tax.
in that order of priority.
The apology forced on McDonnell on QT was seen quickly, to be the insincere lie that it was; except for the true believers, of course.
And Mr Brind, The 6th verse of GSTQ is lovely. Rebellious Scotts should be crushed, as is fitting. Th song is only a dirge if you make it so.
The initial attack on Corbyn as a dangerous nutter has largely failed - most people accept that he's a nice man, if somewhat in the manner of an absent-minded academic.
I'm sorry Nick but that simply isn't right. I thought Ed decent but out of his depth, Corbyn appears far more sinister.
Always hard to know exactly where the blah blah ends and outright disingenuousness starts with Nick Palmer, isn't it?
yeh, at last Mr Brind and I agree on something...
Nick seems to be constructing a fantasy to self-justify his own decision in voting for Corbyn.
It is disappointing, but only human.
But Corbyn seems to want to keep on piling on hostages to fortune like wanting to pay for things by printing money, which may actually have been a good idea around 2008 to 2012, but is highly unlikely to be a good idea in 2020. So what's he going to do around 2018, turn around and say, "Actually forget everything I've been saying for the last few years, it turns out we need austerity after all"?
Pigeonhole someone as incompetent and it is far easier to interpret future actions and words as evidence of that. Try to do the same as him being dangerous, and the right words could seem to support that.
Incidentally, the attacks on Ed M were generally about him being useless, except for a brief period when they tried to say he dangerous. Perhaps withCorbyn the opposite will happen.
John McDonnell holds the key to the success of Project Corbyn. Because it will be a symbolic turning point when Corbyn fires him.
I thought that was very perceptive - he's having to face reality whether he likes it or not. Dealing with conventions, making compromises, thinking about the views of others on his team, not surrounded by adoring acolytes et al.
As @Richard_Nabavi noted - he may be happier attending pointless protests about Nicaraguan sex workers, than paying respects to Battle of Britain heroes. But that's no longer on offer.
Wallpaper phrases - there to cover the cracks in an argument, whenever you see one you can be sure the speaker is trying it on.
These last few threads - I'm 100% with you.
http://www.wsj.com/article_email/the-undercard-and-the-mane-event-1442530625-lMyQjAxMTA1ODEyODExMzgxWj
But as far as I can tell, Jeremy Corbyn is no Alexis Tsipras.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-34287655
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOAtz8xWM0w
But as SeanT eloquently put it last night, he used exactly the same technique for explaining away his IRA comments and his desire to kill Margaret Thatcher, as he did to explain why Corbyn didnt sing the anthem.
It's precisely like watching a magician do a great trick when he makes the third ball disappear . Thinking Wow, thats pretty good. He does it again, and again you are impressed. Then a third time he does the same thing, but this time his sleight of hand isnt as good and you see how the trick is performed. You realise that there was no third ball all along and that in hindsight it wasnt a particularly good trick to begin with.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hyCc1DzRAgQ
It certainly will not work. First impressions are terribly important.. The people at the top of Labour are ghastly in terms of what they want to do to the the country.
There is all sorts of infighting going on, possible defections and to try and gloss over it is plainly ludicrous
The die is cast..
Even Chanel No 5 won't make any difference./
What happened and is it a fuss about nothing by a washed up media bod?
This time it took me until half way through the second sentence before I thought "Who wrote this shit?"
That would be nice but when the library is full to overflowing with 'negatives' for both McDonnell & Corbyn there's no chance of that happening.
The TL;DR version is - UKIP are going to do well in the Welsh Assembly.
Labour will win between 28 and 32 seats (26 - 28 constituency seats PLUS 2 - 4 list seats)
The Conservatives will win between 10 and 12 seats (5 - 6 constituency seats PLUS 5 - 6 list seats)
Plaid Cymru will win between 9 and 11 seats (6 - 7 constituency seats PLUS 3 - 4 list seats)
The Lib Dems will win 1 or 2 constituency seats
UKIP will win 6 or 7 list seats
http://elxn-data.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/ukip-labour-and-welsh-assembly.html
If it's long it's either Don Brind or @antifrank.
At least with @antifrank there's usually tables, statistics and interesting analysis to break up the prose
As you say, this is outstanding from Election Data.
35 MILLION migrants heading to Europe, says Hungary as it builds second fence http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/606211/35-MILLION-migrants-Europe-Hungary-builds-second-fence …
'The wallpaper phrases, "Most people" and "widely acknowledged" used without a scintilla of evidence rather give the game away. '
Just like his fantasy canvass returns.
Ann Coulter ✔ @AnnCoulter
How many f---ing Jews do these people think there are in the United States?
Ann Coulter ✔ @AnnCoulter
I like the Jews, I like fetuses, I like Reagan. Didn't need to hear applause lines about them all night.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/09/17/gop-debate-ann-coulter-tweets-about-f-ing-jews/
Merkel Greeted As a Traitor With Massive Booing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UNZO5fokeE …
The poem was set to the tune of a popular British song written by John Stafford Smith for the Anacreontic Society, a men's social club in London. "To Anacreon in Heaven" (or "The Anacreontic Song"), with various lyrics, was already popular in the United States. Set to Key's poem and renamed "The Star-Spangled Banner", it would soon become a well-known American patriotic song. With a range of one octave and one fifth (a semitone more than an octave and a half), it is known for being difficult to sing. Although the poem has four stanzas, only the first is commonly sung today.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Star-Spangled_Banner
'The initial attack on Corbyn as a dangerous nutter has largely failed'
You missed out 'according to Corbyn supporters'.