Tuesday 12th July 2016

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 8:47 pm

refitman wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:Well, critics can't have it both ways. Was it a longterm dastardly conspiracy, or an ill co-ordinated spontaneous uprising?

How could they have had him gone? What else are you suggesting they did/do?

FWIIW I too think it was largely spontaneous as a result of the EU referendum. Most Labour MPs rblamed Corbyn for his part in the result. Justifiably in my view. And wanted a pro-EU leader.
The evidence is that they have been planning this since he was elected, only to find he kept being successful (Oldham for example). They didn't exactly hide their intention to try to get rid of him, when they tried to set up a "let's get Corbyn" group BEFORE HE WAS EVEN ELECTED!

It has been an almighty clusterfuck that has, to my mind, proved that the likes of Benn and the other should never, ever, be in charge of the Labour party.

When did they get behind him? When did they publicly support him? Fucking Benn, getting an ovation from the Tories for his Syria speech. Dick of the highest order.

From what I've read, they were plotting against Ed weeks before the election, and he resigned immediately after so it looks as if they never really stopped, and from that, we have to conclude they won't stop now.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 8:47 pm

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/scien ... 33316.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Racist, xenophobic and anti-intellectual:

Queue massive braindrain.

Up to now, with 0.8 percent of the world population Britain contributed 5.5 % of its research output (despite how much the sector has been shat on since Thatcher and Joseph took it on).

Don't think that's going to last.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 8:49 pm

ohsocynical wrote:
refitman wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:Well, critics can't have it both ways. Was it a longterm dastardly conspiracy, or an ill co-ordinated spontaneous uprising?

How could they have had him gone? What else are you suggesting they did/do?

FWIIW I too think it was largely spontaneous as a result of the EU referendum. Most Labour MPs rblamed Corbyn for his part in the result. Justifiably in my view. And wanted a pro-EU leader.
The evidence is that they have been planning this since he was elected, only to find he kept being successful (Oldham for example). They didn't exactly hide their intention to try to get rid of him, when they tried to set up a "let's get Corbyn" group BEFORE HE WAS EVEN ELECTED!

It has been an almighty clusterfuck that has, to my mind, proved that the likes of Benn and the other should never, ever, be in charge of the Labour party.

When did they get behind him? When did they publicly support him? Fucking Benn, getting an ovation from the Tories for his Syria speech. Dick of the highest order.
From what I've read, they were plotting against Ed weeks before the election, and he resigned immediately after so it looks as if they never really stopped, and from that, we have to conclude they won't stop now.

Read where?

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 8:50 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
Temulkar wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:
See this board. See every Labour board i frequent. Go to your local CLP (I don't attend mine anymore).

Corbyn is going to win easily.

Not least because this year we only have stalking horse candidates. The PLP is playing a long game.

I know most here now hate her, but I agree with Toynbee in the last paragraph of this

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... membership" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Takes guts.
PLP are not playinig any game whatsoever, they have bungled this right from the start and were flying from the seat of their pants from the monday after brexit, and hhave been running around like headless chickkens ever since. They don't know what they are doing they have no plan, they have tried every trick in the book to avoid the contest, but not in any coherent way, if they had managed just an iota of intelligence corbyn could have been gone by now, instead they misjudged a man who has been a street fighter in politics all his lifem and went down to the street to take him on. No subtlety, no clever idea, no challenger.

Well, critics can't have it both ways. Was it a longterm dastardly conspiracy, or an ill co-ordinated spontaneous uprising?

How could they have had him gone? What else are you suggesting they did/do?

FWIIW I too think it was largely spontaneous as a result of the EU referendum. Most Labour MPs rblamed Corbyn for his part in the result. Justifiably in my view. And wanted a pro-EU leader.

That's not what I am saying at all, it was clearly co-ordinated and clearly planned - they were so lacking in intellect that they managed to leak the plan on no less than four different occassions over the last ten months.

That meant JC knew what was coming and even when it was likely to come, and just how to resist it. They played to a timetable that had chilcot and the NEC elections in red lines and never once did it enter their minds that corbyn wouldnt do what they wanted. That is gross negligence on the part of the plotters, they had no alternative they played for a leadership election without JC nad have lost. Had they gone for a straight fight, they may very well have beaten him.

The problem they have is that they ignored the number one rule - know your enemy - and it's not as if enough people didnt warn them about his nature. A truly terrifying level of political incompetence, and they claim Corbyn is ineffectual, he has jst taken on the PLP and beaten them, and he will do it for a third time by september.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 8:52 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
ohsocynical wrote:
refitman wrote: The evidence is that they have been planning this since he was elected, only to find he kept being successful (Oldham for example). They didn't exactly hide their intention to try to get rid of him, when they tried to set up a "let's get Corbyn" group BEFORE HE WAS EVEN ELECTED!

It has been an almighty clusterfuck that has, to my mind, proved that the likes of Benn and the other should never, ever, be in charge of the Labour party.

When did they get behind him? When did they publicly support him? Fucking Benn, getting an ovation from the Tories for his Syria speech. Dick of the highest order.
From what I've read, they were plotting against Ed weeks before the election, and he resigned immediately after so it looks as if they never really stopped, and from that, we have to conclude they won't stop now.
Read where?

Link posted earlier. Guardian.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 8:54 pm

SpinningHugo wrote: if interested in legality

Out of interest are you actually a qualified lawyer?

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 8:54 pm

Bring it on. There is momentum here (lower case); we need to keep our collective eye on the ball and go for PR. There is enough energy - can't let the Tories settle down and put us all back to sleep.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 8:55 pm

People like us leaving Labour is exactly what the Blairites (inc. Hugo?) want. Please stay.

Post by **refitman** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 8:56 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
refitman wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:Well, critics can't have it both ways. Was it a longterm dastardly conspiracy, or an ill co-ordinated spontaneous uprising?

How could they have had him gone? What else are you suggesting they did/do?

FWIIW I too think it was largely spontaneous as a result of the EU referendum. Most Labour MPs rblamed Corbyn for his part in the result. Justifiably in my view. And wanted a pro-EU leader.
The evidence is that they have been planning this since he was elected, only to find he kept being successful (Oldham for example). They didn't exactly hide their intention to try to get rid of him, when they tried to set up a "let's get Corbyn" group BEFORE HE WAS EVEN ELECTED!

It has been an almighty clusterfuck that has, to my mind, proved that the likes of Benn and the other should never, ever, be in charge of the Labour party.

When did they get behind him? When did they publicly support him? Fucking Benn, getting an ovation from the Tories for his Syria speech. Dick of the highest order.
Who is the 'they'? Watson? Eagle? Smith?

What is the evidence for this longterm conspiracy by the 172 members of the PLP?

As for Benn, that really depends on your view of intervening in Syria, which is another big and difficult question. I didn't approve of the Iraq War (because it was unlawful) but did approve of intervening in Syria (where it was lawful).

if interested in legality

https://spinninghugo.wordpress.com/2015 ... -in-syria/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chuka Umunna and Tristram Hunt to name two:

Shadow Cabinet MPs form ‘the Resistance’ group in anticipation of Corbyn win

A moderate Labour pressure group dubbed “the Resistance” is being formed by two top shadow cabinet members as Jeremy Corbyn pulls ahead in the leadership race, the Evening Standard can reveal.

Chuka Umunna and Tristram Hunt have written privately to Labour MPs calling on them to meet four days before the leadership result is announced. It is being seen by MPs as a rival to Mr Corbyn’s Left-wing platform and the start of guerrilla warfare for Labour’s soul.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics ... 33476.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 8:57 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote: if interested in legality

Out of interest are you actually a qualified lawyer?

I'm not.

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 8:59 pm

To be fair the £25 supporters fee is quuite the money spinning wheeze if as many people sign up as expected, of course the make up of the members in Feb was overwhelmingly corbynite so it does the PLP no favours. I would bet the corbynites shell out 25 for a vote if they have it.

Post by **refitman** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 8:59 pm

ohsocynical wrote:Link posted earlier. Guardian.

Hugo seems disinterested in reading things that conflict with his beliefs. My quote/link above was posted in response to a conversation the other day.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:00 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote: if interested in legality

Out of interest are you actually a qualified lawyer?

Read my blog and form a view.

[Completely off topic, and you may hate this coming from me, but many congratulations on submitting.]

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:01 pm

ohsocynical wrote:
Read where?

Link posted earlier. Guardian.[/quote]

i must have missed it. Anyone help me out?

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:02 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote: if interested in legality

Out of interest are you actually a qualified lawyer?

Out of interest, Roger, do you actually expect an answer?

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:03 pm

Temulkar wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:
Temulkar wrote: PLP are not playinig any game whatsoever, they have bungled this right from the start and were flying from the seat of their pants from the monday after brexit, and hhave been running around like headless chickkens ever since. They don't know what they are doing they have no plan, they have tried every trick in the book to avoid the contest, but not in any coherent way, if they had managed just an iota of intelligence corbyn could have been gone by now, instead they misjudged a man who has been a street fighter in politics all his lifem and went down to the street to take him on. No subtlety, no clever idea, no challenger.

Well, critics can't have it both ways. Was it a longterm dastardly conspiracy, or an ill co-ordinated spontaneous uprising?

How could they have had him gone? What else are you suggesting they did/do?

FWIIW I too think it was largely spontaneous as a result of the EU referendum. Most Labour MPs rblamed Corbyn for his part in the result. Justifiably in my view. And wanted a pro-EU leader.
That's not what I am saying at all, it was clearly co-ordinated and clearly planned - they were so lacking in intellect that they managed to leak the plan on no less than four different occassions over the last ten months.

That meant JC knew what was coming and even when it was likely to come, and just how to resist it. They played to a timetable that had chilcot and the NEC elections in red lines and never once did it enter their minds that corbyn wouldnt do what they wanted. That is gross negligence on the part of the plotters, they had no alternative they played for a leadership election without JC nad have lost. Had they gone for a straight fight, they may very well have beaten him.

The problem they have is that they ignored the number one rule - know your enemy - and it's not as if enough people didnt warn them about his nature. A truly terrifying level of political incompetence, and they claim Corbyn is ineffectual, he has jst taken on the PLP and beaten them, and he will do it for a third time by september.

There have been little hints in the media, such as a few weeks ago when a Shadow cabinet source said Margaret Hodges was going to sign a vote of no confidence. Nothing more was said about it, but I noticed she didn't deny it. I questioned what was happening on our local Lab Party page, and was poo-pooed probably as a dotty old lady.
I suppose once upon a time our press would have kept digging away at it. Weird to think that there was a time when you could pick up a paper and be pretty sure if there was anything untoward happening they'd be reporting it.

I tell you what our papers remind me of now. An old fashioned gossip column, where hints and tit-bits of gossip were tossed around, but the reader was expected to fill in the gaps.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:03 pm

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 33271.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Scottish Tory leader admits Brexit vote will 'test binds of the Union' – and refuses to rule out second EU vote

Perfect storm on the horizon. Maybe we should look to take advantage of this and use the politics-wide instability to get something positive out of it. PR.

Rebecca · Post by **Rebecca** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:03 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote: if interested in legality

Out of interest are you actually a qualified lawyer?
Read my blog and form a view.

[Completely off topic, and you may hate this coming from me, but many congratulations on submitting.]

Hugo,get a grip man and stop pimping your blog.You're really starting to sound needy.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:06 pm

Temulkar wrote:- they were so lacking in intellect that they managed to leak the plan on no less than four different occassions over the last ten months.

That meant JC knew what was coming and even when it was likely to come, and just how to resist it. They played to a timetable that had chilcot and the NEC elections in red lines and never once did it enter their minds that corbyn wouldnt do what they wanted. That is gross negligence on the part of the plotters, they had no alternative they played for a leadership election without JC nad have lost. Had they gone for a straight fight, they may very well have beaten him.

The problem they have is that they ignored the number one rule - know your enemy - and it's not as if enough people didnt warn them about his nature. A truly terrifying level of political incompetence, and they claim Corbyn is ineffectual, he has jst taken on the PLP and beaten them, and he will do it for a third time by september.

1. Did they? When? Where?

2. What did he need to do to 'resist' it? Other than refuse to resign?

3. Again, what do you think they could have done/could do, to get rid of him? Nobody I have seen has suggested anything. If he won't resign, they're stuffed.

4. Everyone knows what the Campaign Group are like. They have been around for decades. Their behaviour has been no surprise to me, and so I am completely sure no surprise to the PLP.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:06 pm

Robert Peston ‏@Peston 47m47 minutes ago

What is particularly impressive about the vast majority of MPs who want @jeremycorbyn out is they couldn't even read mood of their own NEC

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:06 pm

Temulkar wrote:The problem they have is that they ignored the number one rule - know your enemy - and it's not as if enough people didnt warn them about his nature. A truly terrifying level of political incompetence, and they claim Corbyn is ineffectual, he has jst taken on the PLP and beaten them, and he will do it for a third time by september.

I do keep saying this. If Corbyn is as inept and useless as certain elements of the PLP profess, why is it he keeps on winning against them? What does this say about their own competence beyond their being even more inept and useless than is Corbyn? The evidence certainly doesn't suggest that they're better than him, does it.

I'll also add, has it ever once occurred to them that it may just be their complete uselessness that is holding the Labour Party back at elections, not Corbyn?

The past few weeks have made me seriously doubt whether or not I actually want any of these muppets anywhere near the reigns of power because, actually, what they did with them could well be disastrous.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:07 pm

I'd like to teach the world to sing
In perfect harmony

But even to an incorrigible optimist it seems unlikely I can pull it off.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:07 pm

Rebecca wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote: Out of interest are you actually a qualified lawyer?
Read my blog and form a view.

[Completely off topic, and you may hate this coming from me, but many congratulations on submitting.]
Hugo,get a grip man and stop pimping your blog.You're really starting to sound needy.

Well, it is that or explain my claims in longhand.

but, as you say, nobody reads it anyway....

Post by **refitman** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:09 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
ohsocynical wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote: Read where?
Link posted earlier. Guardian.
i must have missed it. Anyone help me out?

Ephie's post: viewtopic.php?p=118953#p118953" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:09 pm

Temulkar wrote:To be fair the £25 supporters fee is quuite the money spinning wheeze if as many people sign up as expected, of course the make up of the members in Feb was overwhelmingly corbynite so it does the PLP no favours. I would bet the corbynites shell out 25 for a vote if they have it.

I'll also add that it doesn't exactly reek of confidence that the anti-Corbyn element in the Party are going to be very successful in attracting people to [sic] #SaveLabour.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:10 pm

refitman wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:
ohsocynical wrote:
Read where?
Link posted earlier. Guardian.
i must have missed it. Anyone help me out?

Ephie's post: viewtopic.php?p=118953#p118953" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;[/quote]

Ah, I don't read those.

Rather odd to rely on an article from 2014 that proved factually wrong.

"It has reached critical mass now.” Another said: “There isn’t a letter [demanding Miliband’s resignation] but there could be one very quickly.”"
-Just didn't, did it.

I wish they had got rid of him. I think Labour would be in power if they had, we would not have voted for Brexit, austerity would have ended, and the Labour party would still be a viable political party.

Still, never mind, eh?

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:12 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote: if interested in legality

Out of interest are you actually a qualified lawyer?
Read my blog and form a view.

[Completely off topic, and you may hate this coming from me, but many congratulations on submitting.]

No, I'd prefer a straight answer - are you a qualified lawyer yes or no?

Not a difficult question to answer...unless you're not of course and don't care to admit it.

And thanks for the other bit.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:15 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote: Out of interest are you actually a qualified lawyer?
Read my blog and form a view.

[Completely off topic, and you may hate this coming from me, but many congratulations on submitting.]
No, I'd prefer a straight answer - are you a qualified lawyer yes or no?

Not a difficult question to answer...unless you're not of course and don't care to admit it.

And thanks for the other bit.

We have been through this before. I post anonymously and won't be doing 20 questions on my identity. Work it out for yourself.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:15 pm

NEC members were locked in a debate lasting nearly six hours - amid threats of court action - after warring factions disputed the rules.

Their decision leaves the entire say on who will lead Labour to around 400,000 party members.

But another 100,000 who joined since the EU referendum - many of them thought to be Corbyn backers - are not currently eligible to vote.

The NEC agreed members must have been in the party for six months dating from today to take part.

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:19 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:We have been through this before. I post anonymously and won't be doing 20 questions on my identity. Work it out for yourself.

You're Grant Shapps aren't you:

1. Penchant for multiple identities
2. Pretends to have expertise he doesn't have
3. Tries to increase the SEO of his own website via dubious means
4. Gives guided tours of the House of Commons.

(I may be stretching this a bit...)

Post by **refitman** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:19 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote: Read my blog and form a view.

[Completely off topic, and you may hate this coming from me, but many congratulations on submitting.]
No, I'd prefer a straight answer - are you a qualified lawyer yes or no?

Not a difficult question to answer...unless you're not of course and don't care to admit it.

And thanks for the other bit.
We have been through this before. I post anonymously and won't be doing 20 questions on my identity. Work it out for yourself.

I think it's a fair question. You keep posting stuff on the legalities of things, but we have no idea if you are speaking from a position of authority, or just blowing smoke up our arses.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:20 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
We have been through this before. I post anonymously and won't be doing 20 questions on my identity. Work it out for yourself.

How on earth could anyone identify you simply from you saying whether you're a qualified lawyer or not?

I kinda assume from that that you're not.

Rebecca · Post by **Rebecca** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:20 pm

ohsocynical wrote:NEC members were locked in a debate lasting nearly six hours - amid threats of court action - after warring factions disputed the rules.

Their decision leaves the entire say on who will lead Labour to around 400,000 party members.

But another 100,000 who joined since the EU referendum - many of them thought to be Corbyn backers - are not currently eligible to vote.

The NEC agreed members must have been in the party for six months dating from today to take part.

Can that be right though?
Some MPs have been touting for membership in the national press in the past few days with the promise that they can get rid of Corbyn.
What are they going to say now,oh,thanks for the money but you can piss off now seeing as you can't vote?
Piss up in brewery.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:21 pm

ohsocynical wrote:NEC members were locked in a debate lasting nearly six hours - amid threats of court action - after warring factions disputed the rules.

Their decision leaves the entire say on who will lead Labour to around 400,000 party members.

But another 100,000 who joined since the EU referendum - many of them thought to be Corbyn backers - are not currently eligible to vote.

The NEC agreed members must have been in the party for six months dating from today to take part.

So Jess Philips and Angela Eagle asking people to join up and vote for Angela, are going to be disappointed.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:22 pm

Rebecca wrote:
ohsocynical wrote:NEC members were locked in a debate lasting nearly six hours - amid threats of court action - after warring factions disputed the rules.

Their decision leaves the entire say on who will lead Labour to around 400,000 party members.

But another 100,000 who joined since the EU referendum - many of them thought to be Corbyn backers - are not currently eligible to vote.

The NEC agreed members must have been in the party for six months dating from today to take part.
Can that be right though?
Some MPs have been touting for membership in the national press in the past few days with the promise that they can get rid of Corbyn.
What are they going to say now,oh,thanks for the money but you can piss off now seeing as you can't vote?
Piss up in brewery.

@Rebecca. Snap. Great minds think alike....

Rebecca · Post by **Rebecca** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:22 pm

ohsocynical wrote:
ohsocynical wrote:NEC members were locked in a debate lasting nearly six hours - amid threats of court action - after warring factions disputed the rules.

Their decision leaves the entire say on who will lead Labour to around 400,000 party members.

But another 100,000 who joined since the EU referendum - many of them thought to be Corbyn backers - are not currently eligible to vote.

The NEC agreed members must have been in the party for six months dating from today to take part.
So Jess Philips and Angela Eagle asking people to join up and vote for Angela, are going to be disappointed.

It isn't good though,is it.
Labour Party scared of the membership.

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:22 pm

ohsocynical wrote:So Jess Philips and Angela Eagle asking people to join up and vote for Angela, are going to be disappointed.

#SaveLabour

Oh... damn.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:25 pm

refitman wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote: No, I'd prefer a straight answer - are you a qualified lawyer yes or no?

Not a difficult question to answer...unless you're not of course and don't care to admit it.

And thanks for the other bit.
We have been through this before. I post anonymously and won't be doing 20 questions on my identity. Work it out for yourself.
I think it's a fair question. You keep posting stuff on the legalities of things, but we have no idea if you are speaking from a position of authority, or ust blowing smoke up our arses.

Well, don't read it then. One of the things I like about the blog is that it only has so much force as the arguments possess. You shouldn't defer to authority. Make your own mind up.

take this

https://spinninghugo.wordpress.com/2016 ... on-brexit/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

here I say a senior QC (and three senior academic public lawyers) are all wrong and try to explain why in simple terms. I am pretty sure I am right, but would the arguments be better if you knew my name was Hugo Spin QC, or Spin LJ? I try to be as accessible and short as possible, but if you don't find it helpful, look elsewhere.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:25 pm

Hoist on their own petard...

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:26 pm

So, unless these rules have been misrepresented, people who are not Labour Members but manage to register as a supporter between 18-20 July, are going to get a vote in this leadership election whereas fully paid up Members who happen not to have been so for 6 months backdated from today, will not.

Is there a head in hands emoticon?

Edit: plus, arguably, Jess Philips et al have been illegally inducing people to part with money for membership on the false premise that it would let them vote to #SaveLabour. IANAL, but...

[egads, me Inglish has gone to pot tonite]

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:28 pm

ohsocynical wrote:
ohsocynical wrote:NEC members were locked in a debate lasting nearly six hours - amid threats of court action - after warring factions disputed the rules.

Their decision leaves the entire say on who will lead Labour to around 400,000 party members.

But another 100,000 who joined since the EU referendum - many of them thought to be Corbyn backers - are not currently eligible to vote.

The NEC agreed members must have been in the party for six months dating from today to take part.
So Jess Philips and Angela Eagle asking people to join up and vote for Angela, are going to be disappointed.

Anything that causes the overly noisy Ms.Phillips to be disappointed will not cause me to worry.

It's a problem, though - there will be a lot of very angry people out there if they want to vote (for either side).

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:30 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:Can we just imagine for a moment what would have happened if the PLP had done something similar in 2014? And installed, say, Alan Johnson.

Does anyone seriously think that would have led to a Labour government? After what we've seen over the last couple of weeks?

Delusional.

I do, yes.

i am sure Labour would not have won a majority, Scotland would have been lost anyway, but it would have been enough to have a minority Labour government.

Unprovable, of course, but leadership and the economy were Labour's biggest negatives in polling.

thatchersorphan · Post by **thatchersorphan** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:31 pm

http://bambuser.com/v/6363996" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Ken Loach now speaking in london about Corbyn

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:32 pm

Jesus wept. I come here for intelligent something and occasional light relief. In these troubled times can all parties, give it a rest.

(Ta)

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:33 pm

PS: Labour is over. Long live Labour.

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:34 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:Unprovable, of course, but leadership and the economy were Labour's biggest negatives in polling.

Alan 'I'm too thick me to be shadow chancellor' Johnson would, of course, have done so much better on the economy. Not an easy target to smash into pulp by a merciless right wing media on that one at all...

Tizme1 · Post by **Tizme1** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:35 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:
Tizme1 wrote:I'd like to invite all disillusioned Labour party members to join the Greens. Before I do though, can I just check - Hugo, you don't live in Watford do you?
I'm keeping all options open, Tiz

You'd be welcome.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:37 pm

Less of the italics.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:37 pm

JonnyT1234 wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:Unprovable, of course, but leadership and the economy were Labour's biggest negatives in polling.
Alan 'I'm too thick me to be shadow chancellor' Johnson would, of course, have done so much better on the economy. Not an easy target to smash into pulp by a merciless right wing media on that one at all...

He was daft to accept the shadow Chancellor brief. He should never have been asked.

This is also backwards looking, unprovable and implausible. He didn't want to be leader, then or ever.

Tizme1 · Post by **Tizme1** » Tue 12 Jul, 2016 9:39 pm

ephemerid wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote: if interested in legality

Out of interest are you actually a qualified lawyer?

Out of interest, Roger, do you actually expect an answer?

Out of interest everyone, don't we all have a pretty good idea of the answer to both questions.