Saturday 9th, Sunday 10th May 2015

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sat 09 May, 2015 5:52 pm

howsillyofme1 wrote:Oh yes and they will have to make the decision on airport expansion in the South East as well now!

And find the money for HS2

And deal with the abuse of minors by the establishment

The list goes on of the things that people will find in the long grass when they start mowing it.....

And it'll stay in the long grass too.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Sat 09 May, 2015 5:54 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:Steel yourselves before you read this account from a teller at a polling station (but not just any old teller ...)

David Hencke ‏@davidhencke 1h1 hour ago
Fear and loathing of Labour at the polling station; See Francis Beckett's blog http://francisbeckett.wordpress.com/201 ... t=standard …

There were an awful lot of lies flying around in this election - brazen isn't the half of it. But ends justify means in this game.

(I’ve met Quentin Letts and found him courteous and kind. I don’t know what it is about elections that brings out the playground bully in him.)

I disagree - he's like this all the time not just at elections. Horrid spiteful little man. Him and the DM are well matched.

Tizme1 · Post by **Tizme1** » Sat 09 May, 2015 5:57 pm

yahyah wrote:
Tizme1 wrote:
yahyah wrote:
Sturgeon knew she would have an influence as the left's flavour of the month.

So why did she tell people in England and Wales to vote Green or Plaid, not Labour ?

If she cared one little hoot for people's lives and our public services she would have said
'Vote SNP in Scotland because we want to destroy Scottish Labour and get independence, but vote
Labour where they can win in England or Plaid/Green where they can win'.

But she didn't, she used her influence to keep Labour out in both Scotland & England.
All to suit Rupert Murdoch avoid media controls, and to help get Cameron back in Downing St.

Very progressive. Self serving and aiding to a right wing media mogul and the Tories, all dressed up in nationalist faux left wing fervour.
I am not a member of the SNP yahyah. I can't answer for them. Or for Nicola Sturgeon. I'm not even prepared to get into how left or right wing she is. Because it is irrelevant. If Labour hadn't neglected Scotland for so many years, the SNP would not have been able to get the hold it has. So, it's not Sturgeon's fault - she did what she felt was right for her party. It's Labour own fault.

I've said before that sometimes we all see things through a prism based on what we are hoping or fearing. One such occasion on this forum was when a number of you referred to Nicola Sturgeon, Leanne Wood, and Natalie Bennett as witches. This was seemingly because they were meeting up before the leaders debate. Firstly, the meeting was actually between Leanne Wood and Nicola Sturgeon. Natalie wasn't part of it. Secondly, how could you know what they were meeting up for or what they would discuss? Could have been plans to put Ed down. Could have been plans to be supportive. Could have been to discuss what outfits they each planned to wear for all we know! Why assume anyone who isn't 100% for you, must therefore be 100% against you?

Before I go, quickly because lasagne sauces must be made, I refer to Bennett and her pals as the witches as in Macbeth...you know, cooking up schemes together, which they did, the main one being lying about Labour. Sorry if that so offends you, we all have various levels of sensitivity.

I've already had your green pal complaining about Bortolotti being called potty on this site, when you yourself call someone Dotty Mare.
But, frankly that's the type of hypocritical sniping I expect from some quarters.

Now, bechamel and tomato sauce beckons.

I'm not offended yahyah. I did get what you meant by it. Though as I say, Natalie wasn't even at that meeting, nor was it ever planned that she should be. I call Dorothy the Dotty Mare as a play on her name - Dotty being short for Dorothy and Mare as opposed to Mayor. That said, I did read your post about it from last night and it did give me pause for thought.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:03 pm

Question that I;m not sure I know the answer to...

Are we due a Budget in June?

We had one in 2010 only because of a change of government but since all they've done is kick out a small part of it there's no need for one I assume.

I know they were talking about a spending review over the summer so presume it's the Autumn Statement where we'll know where the cuts are due to fall.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:05 pm

Very interesting - if quite hard to take in places - Shaun Lawson piece published by Open Democracy. Read through to the end - I have wondered similar things about the Ashcroft polling myself over the past couple of weeks.

The polls (and all but one of) the forecasts WERE wrong. Ed Miliband was nowhere near becoming Prime Minister
https://opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/sh ... ere-near-b

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:05 pm

Tizme1 wrote:
AngryAsWell wrote:
Tizme1 wrote: *sigh*

Here we go again. It was not the fault of the Greens that Labour lost. I haven't finished looking at the stats yet but many of our votes came from the Lib dems. If anything, we helped Labour locally. Even if we hadn't, that doesn't mean it's our fault Labour lost. Why can't you understand that as Greens, we believe in a fundamentally different approach? I don't demand that you support my views - why do you demand that I should support yours? Is that what democracy means to you - the right for people who don't want to vote Tory to vote Labour?

Some of you have spoken of a kind of broad church of those on the left to work together to defeat the Tories. This is possible and imo desirable. But it won't happen if what you mean by that is we do what you tell us. At the count for the local results, there was already some hints of such a joining together where possible.

One of the new Labour councillors is a chap I know. Indeed I'm friendly with both him and his wife. They are good people. As I'm sure you all know, the election agents are told the result before each announcement is made. Shortly before the announcement for his ward was made, I saw his son leave the room in tears. I was a bit concerned and couldn't see where our election agent was so I looked over at the Labour group. They seemed to be smiling and looking pleased while next to them the Lib dems looked glum. I went over to him and asked "did you manage it"? He replied "yes". At which point I hugged him. Then I turned to his wife and we had a huge hug. "I'm so so proud of him" she said. And I replied "I'm so, so, proud of both of you". We were both in tears. I know what a long, hard struggle it has been.

So you see, it is possible for Greens and Labour to disagree on some things but to work together where it is 'for the common good' which after all is what us Greens believe in. But it isn't possible if you blame us when Labour fall short. Because for all the trying to work out what went wrong, the reason Labour lost is because they didn't persuade enough people they were the best option. And that is not the fault of the Greens, or SNP, or UKIP or any bloody one. Except Labour.
I don't demand anything from you or anyone, but I can and will express disgust at people who are - allegedly - more "left" than me deliberately sabotaging the chance for this country to have had a fair government by standing in seats they had not a hope in hell of taking.
I wont suffer, but the sick, disabled, unemployed and disadvantaged will.
If the "other left" had not lied then Labour might well have convinced enough people to vote for them. One of my best friends was convinced by the green lie that Labour would cut 30 million and would not be convinced otherwise because "Bennett had said so". Its the combination of standing in marginals and the lies that has made me so angry. Of course its your right to stand where you want and do what you want. Just as its my right to be upset when your actions affect people.
That's my opinion - I'm not asking you to change yours - don't ask me to change mine.
Actually Labour did sign up to cuts. Of course that doesn't necessarily mean they would have cut in the same way. And I fully accept they wouldn't have had to enforce cuts, or cuts at that level given no government can force such a thing on a future government. But Labour were stupid to put themselves in that position. They tried to play the middle ground and it worked against them. Again, their fault. Not anyone else's.

Labour are not whiter than white when it comes to telling the truth.

As a matter of fact, I will suffer. I probably would have suffered under a Labour government too but possibly not as much.

Actually Labour did sign up to cuts
They signed up to a balanced budget agreement that had no mention of cuts. That's the bill they signed. No mention of cuts in it. Just an agreement to balance the budget.
The IFS (or OBR) suggested that would mean 30 mil cuts and the tory's accepted that - Labour did not.
That's what I mean about lies.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:06 pm

howsillyofme1 wrote:I don't think I have seen anyone say that Labour went into the election with the wrong policies .....

Diane Abbott is, she's blaming the loss completely on the immigration mug.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:09 pm

LadyCentauria wrote:
citizenJA wrote:jesus christ almighty
my husband just gave me the breakdown of vote share here in Stoke-on-Trent
oh god
Sorry for more bad news but turnout ranged from 49.9% in S-o-T Central up to 56.9% in S-o-T South

I wish I'd seen more youngsters voting here. They'll be screaming blue murder in a couple of years.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:09 pm

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
howsillyofme1 wrote:I don't think I have seen anyone say that Labour went into the election with the wrong policies .....
Diane Abbott is, she's blaming the loss completely on the immigration mug.

That doesn't make any sense at all. Apart from in Bradford, of course . . . .

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:11 pm

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
howsillyofme1 wrote:I don't think I have seen anyone say that Labour went into the election with the wrong policies .....
Diane Abbott is, she's blaming the loss completely on the immigration mug.

change to

'anyone of consequence'

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:12 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:
PorFavor wrote:@SpinningHugo

Winning to what end, though?

Some politicians are career politicians. Some politicians have convictions which lead them to make their career in politics. There's a world of difference.
The first 'end' is keeping the Tories out.

Even if we had a government that did nothing at all for the next five years, just let things tick over as they are now, that would be far better to the Tories being in power.

How often do we have to relearn the same lessons?
I understand what you are saying Hugo, but Ed was not a raving lefty and still got slaughtered. So I see no need to try to appease a right wing press.
But even if there was such a need - we have no one on either side left or right, that is competent to stand. And therein lies the rub.

Creasy. She is young. Telegenic. Roots in the north, but grew up in the south. Clever. A woman. Not too metropolitan. Wonga gave profile. Untainted by the 2015 disaster. Acceptable to all wings of the party.

Our vote share was lower than in 1987.

Next time there will have been boundary changes in the Tories favour.

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:15 pm

Ok, this is for Hugo, but anybody else can chip in ( leadership but the posts are too long to copy in).

First off it is brilliant that Hugo is here, a tremendous addition to the forum and The Guardian can bite my shiny metal ass.

Now to substance.

Alan Johnson - Seriously. This guy was and is almost utterly useless (and yes I have met him).

His criticism today about Ed's failure to accept blame on economics is utter shit. He was the worst shadow chancellor in history. The disaster was Brown and Darling not staying on and defending their record.

Serious question - how, given his abject performance as shadow chancellor could anybody even consider AJ as any sort of leader (interim or otherwise?). I am going to credit him for not getting involved in the abortive Progress Coup.

Second point - David Miliband??? Now remember I voted for this muppet for leader. I did that because I viewed him as a safe choice. However even when I did that I worried about the fallout from Iraq. Turns out I was right, he has blood on his hands, and if he was Labour leader he would have been relentlessly hammered for it. Also he couldn't win an election where he was overwhelming favourite, one reason being he could not communicate. Every article he has written since in the G has been wonk speak bollocks to the point of incoherence. He was the candidate the Tories wanted. Seriously Hugo how can the Progress wing not see how useless he is?

Umunna - is another David Miliband. He has zero, I repeat zero, charisma. He is arrogant, self centred, and is a wet fish in a suit. Worse he says stupid things, his put down of Murphy was stupid, rude and unhelpful. The idea he could inspire the Labour Party and his voters is risible. What on earth does anybody see in him? How can you seriously think this Teflon wonk could be credible?

To the wider issue, Labour needs somebody who can win, but I would argue Ed's basic platform was sound. If the Progress wing want to get the much more left wing membership to vote for their candidate they need to think about that. In 2020 all of Ed's themes will be relevant but more so. Absolute red lines, a crackdown on ZHC, the abolition of Non Dom status, the total rejection of Murdoch, a resolve to tackle predatory capitalism, support for generation rent, fairer treatment for the disabled and sick, a rollback of the market in the NHS ( if it still exists), support for the Welfare state and opposition to Workfare. Progress need to get away from their stupidity of "reform" I.e. allow the market into public services. I can if you need provide a reference to why market forces are shit in healthcare.

My question to Hugo, when you see Danczuk and Owen Jones arguing do you not think Danczuk should not be in the Labour Party. Why are Progress so in thrall to business that they won't stand up for the millions business are screwing over? Sure we need good businesses but we don't need them in the public sector and we don't need the predators.

Now beyond the red lines things can change to expand the tent, but I would argue Ed got the policy mostly right and Labour will not wear a return to the politics of right wing twats like Danczuk. Whoever is leader should encourage the Scots to piss off, and set Scottish Labour free to do what it wants. While I accept Independence will be a disaster for Scotland, Labour will not win in rUK while the SNP can be held up as the bogeyman.

So if I was Jarvis I would quit Progress and move to the left. Basically absorb a chunk of Miliband ideology and look at putting a layer of tough but fair lines around welfare.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:16 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
AngryAsWell wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote: The first 'end' is keeping the Tories out.

Even if we had a government that did nothing at all for the next five years, just let things tick over as they are now, that would be far better to the Tories being in power.

How often do we have to relearn the same lessons?
I understand what you are saying Hugo, but Ed was not a raving lefty and still got slaughtered. So I see no need to try to appease a right wing press.
But even if there was such a need - we have no one on either side left or right, that is competent to stand. And therein lies the rub.
Creasy. She is young. Telegenic. Roots in the north, but grew up in the south. Clever. A woman. Not too metropolitan. Wonga gave profile. Untainted by the 2015 disaster. Acceptable to all wings of the party.

Our vote share was lower than in 1987.

Next time there will have been boundary changes in the Tories favour.

See what I said about her way up there /|\
Agree the boundary changes are going to make this next one very hard to win with anyone

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:17 pm

Tizme1 wrote:
citizenJA wrote:
AngryAsWell wrote: To be truthful the "other left" did too much hateful damage to a very good, honerable man for me to ever forgive them. They helped lose us one of the best PM we could ever have had. They lied and lied and lied. "They signed up to 30 million of cuts" said time and again, even after they knew without doubt that was not true, Bennett even used it in the debates. Those 1000 here an there votes lost us some good people and they knew that when standing in marginals that they knew they had no chance of winning, they also knew they would take enough votes from us to lose us the seat. And they did.
One at least did realise (too late - day before election) what he was about to do, but left it so late his name was still on the ballot paper.
No time for them. None at all they are just Tory enablers who have helped put this country down. There will be no way back after 10 years of tory's.
Agreed. Thank you.
*sigh*

Here we go again. It was not the fault of the Greens that Labour lost. I haven't finished looking at the stats yet but many of our votes came from the Lib dems. If anything, we helped Labour locally. Even if we hadn't, that doesn't mean it's our fault Labour lost. Why can't you understand that as Greens, we believe in a fundamentally different approach? I don't demand that you support my views - why do you demand that I should support yours? Is that what democracy means to you - the right for people who don't want to vote Tory to vote Labour?

Some of you have spoken of a kind of broad church of those on the left to work together to defeat the Tories. This is possible and imo desirable. But it won't happen if what you mean by that is we do what you tell us. At the count for the local results, there was already some hints of such a joining together where possible.

One of the new Labour councillors is a chap I know. Indeed I'm friendly with both him and his wife. They are good people. As I'm sure you all know, the election agents are told the result before each announcement is made. Shortly before the announcement for his ward was made, I saw his son leave the room in tears. I was a bit concerned and couldn't see where our election agent was so I looked over at the Labour group. They seemed to be smiling and looking pleased while next to them the Lib dems looked glum. I went over to him and asked "did you manage it"? He replied "yes". At which point I hugged him. Then I turned to his wife and we had a huge hug. "I'm so so proud of him" she said. And I replied "I'm so, so, proud of both of you". We were both in tears. I know what a long, hard struggle it has been.

So you see, it is possible for Greens and Labour to disagree on some things but to work together where it is 'for the common good' which after all is what us Greens believe in. But it isn't possible if you blame us when Labour fall short. Because for all the trying to work out what went wrong, the reason Labour lost is because they didn't persuade enough people they were the best option. And that is not the fault of the Greens, or SNP, or UKIP or any bloody one. Except Labour.

Tiz,
I read and understood exactly what you're saying, I'm one of those who has been advocating for a long time a closer link between Greens and Labour. Which would of course mean a lot of soul searching and rethinking of all sorts of things that both sides hold dear. That's something for the broad membership to start doing, if they think it of value, in both parties.

I do think though that there's a huge difference between what the two parties are and what their members believe in, and the public jockeying into position at the top, which quite frankly horrified me. It's this polarised and oppositional stuff that has caused so much damage. I know your thoughts on this are probably very different to mine, but to me the showboating nature of the SNP 'offer' and Greens apparent support for it during the debates was very hard to stomach. The two nationalist parties have very different overall aims to Greens, and I had a lot of difficulty with the leaders of three parties claiming the moral high ground on social issues and human rights etc, while demolishing a proponent of exactly those values.

This is of course not the fault of the many thousands of green supporters and activists, but nevertheless it happened very publicly and the overall effect has been to discredit all progressive ideas from all four parties. I can see exactly how this has been engineered in terms of the media and believe all need to really think about the whole nature of public office, power, and the reasons for being in politics. And if it is to improve things for the majority, who we know inhabit the large base of the pyramid, and whose circumstances, or inertia, or disengagement, or inability to participate affects the future of our nation and our planet, then come together to do something about it, in the way the Labour movement affected social change globally. I'm not in favour of single issue politics as a solution, only as a means of awareness, and feel if the differences aren't set aside we miss a great opportunity. And we have to start somewhere. But that place is not and never could be a shouty demand on live TV. The issues deserve a lot better than that.

Your descriptions of the events and your own engagement in activism are so far away from the public stuff as to be of a different nature altogether. But the politicking affects us all, and not always in beneficial ways. It's a very boggy area, and there are plenty to coopt such events for their own purposes. I think we all have to be reflective about these issues that are so close to our hearts. We are up against some quite ruthless forces, whose strength is to appear weak and often stupid. But that is a hallmark of who they are. We need to be playing their game with our rules.

Keep posting, I love to hear your view, and please don't take this as criticism, it applies equally to mistakes in all the parties aligned against the right.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:17 pm

Evening all.

pk1 - sad to hear your family's hurting.
howsillyofme - happy birthday.

I am about to pen what someone here (yahyah? pk1?) calls one of my essays - bear with me.

The Tories have started already. One day in, and they're off.
Cut to the Access to Work funding; no more life-time council tenancies; snoopers' charter; and more.
Fancy title for the towel re-folder; Cameron's arrogance once more on show as he appoints his successor without consulting anyone.

This is going to be brutal.
Those of us here who are reliant on social security, be it sickness benefits, pensions, housing support - we are going to suffer more.
People ARE going to be socially cleansed and washed away who knows where; People ARE going to be homeless and hungry.
the 3.5 Million children in poverty WILL continue to rise; the safety net for them and their parents WILL disappear.

Somebody above mentioned Sue Marsh. Does anyone here really think she can make any difference now?
Even if she jacks in her job as a corporate shill for Maximus, her credibility is shot.
DWP won't give a flying fuck for "improving the customer journey".

I posted a very long list yesterday of what I think will happen; I'll spare you the repeat.

Ed Miliband is a decent man. That's why Labour lost - along with the lies and propaganda emanating from the mainstream media.
He has passion - but not many people could see it. He has integrity - but not many people care.
He was too good for the appalling atmosphere that pervades our politics today in the UK.

What is needed now is a groundswell of serious activism. Charlotte Church and Michael Sheen have set a sterling example.
Whether that's building our communities by sharing land to grow food, teaching our children how to share, being the support that our frail, elderly, sick and disabled will need very soon, whatever - we have to get that Blitz spirit going again.
It may seem silly, but I actually believe that will help - it might help those of us who do it to appreciate how isolated we have become in many ways; having engaged with local support groups myself I know that happened to me.

I am very likely to have a harder time under this government. The things I rely on - and need, until I qualify for my already-delayed pension - are going to be harder to access and ever more difficult to obtain. Me and millions of others.
I intend to fight. I intend to keep an eye on my neighbours, support them when I can, see if we can get some allotments going, and campaign for whatever needs fighting for. I will NOT lie down and take all this crap without a fight.

Dan Jarvis would make a good leader, because he would take the fight to the Tories.
Failing him, we need a heavyweight political bruiser with the gravitas of Brown.
We also need someone as a counterpoint - different style, but every bit as sharp - Creagh or Creasey.
Khan and Thornberry where they are - they are both excellent.
Burnham at health - he's good; he can sort out this Mid-Staffs nonsense and he needs to do it soon.
Cooper is good at the FO and is too Blairite for my liking to put near anything else.
Reeves at the Treasury - she has a good brain for this.
DWP will need someone very tough and good in an argument. Angela Eagle - tough, uncompromising, and always on top of her brief; she will make mincemeat of IDS or whoever gets his job.

I hope a place is found for Ed that he can apply his intellect to. I hope he is treated with the respect he deserves.

I'm tired and depressed. I fear for the people of this country - if they truly cannot see what they have done, then Thatcher was right. The sheeple will vote in their own personal interests every time, and bugger the country and all the other people in it.

The next few days are crucial - I hope Labour takes its' time to reflect and understand what it has lost. If it doesn't, if the Blairites take over again, I don't think we will see a truly left-wing government again in my lifetime.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:18 pm

Big OccupyDemocracy demo in London. Violent by the look of it. Naturally not on the BBC.

Here's me being cynical again...I wonder how many of them voted?

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:27 pm

howsillyofme1 wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
howsillyofme1 wrote:I don't think I have seen anyone say that Labour went into the election with the wrong policies .....
Diane Abbott is, she's blaming the loss completely on the immigration mug.
change to

'anyone of consequence'

Re. your comment about the "no tax cuts being enshrined in law", do you really think he'll carry through on that? Or on the extra cash for the NHS, all those roads Osborne promised, the nice toys they promised "the Northern Powerhouse"? They didn't honour their promises last time, so why should they bother now they are entirely off the leash?

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:27 pm

@ seeingclearly
Lovely post in response to Tizme. Wish I could use a thanks button several times over for that. I really hate the way any detail and nuance to an argument gets completely stripped away to make a headline weapon for use in debates and the media. Hate it.

@ ephemerid
Another spot on post. And I was the one who mentioned Sue Marsh in a very wry way hoping I'd get across that it was clear she was absolutely pissing in the wind ...

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:28 pm

TechnicalEphemera

-I don't agree on Progress, no.

-Danczuk is not a useful MP, no.

-Jones is an amusing polemicist, but not someone with any judgement whatsoever. He panders to our prejudices. He should not be taken seriously.

If you are asking me to choose between Danczuk and Jones, I choose neither.

I expressed my strong dissent from the policy mix we put forward before the election, and (unsurprisingly) still think the same. It suffered from 'free pony' syndrome. We promised free ponies (fixing energy and rail prices, second generation rent controls) that were populist but, frankly, daft. Taken individually they may be popular. As a package, they give off the fatal smell of incompetence.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:30 pm

ohsocynical wrote:Big OccupyDemocracy demo in London. Violent by the look of it. Naturally not on the BBC.

Here's me being cynical again...I wonder how many of them voted?

Also a pretty big anti EDL protest going on in Walthamstow. Stella Creasy is there and tweeting about it. The EDL were organising a march and the police / authorities refused to ban it - so the locals have come out to counter protest.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:32 pm

HuffPost UK ‏@HuffPostUK 23m23 minutes ago
The EDL's rubbish attempt at a march in Walthamstow and the public's awesome response: http://huff.to/1JWAgx0

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:34 pm

Pretty bad rioting from the looks of it...I reckon Boris will be begging to use the water cannons. And I reckon May will say yes....

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:34 pm

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
howsillyofme1 wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote: Diane Abbott is, she's blaming the loss completely on the immigration mug.
change to

'anyone of consequence'

Re. your comment about the "no tax cuts being enshrined in law", do you really think he'll carry through on that? Or on the extra cash for the NHS, all those roads Osborne promised, the nice toys they promised "the Northern Powerhouse"? They didn't honour their promises last time, so why should they bother now they are entirely off the leash?

I said, yesterday, that the Liam Byrne note will be whipped out of a pocket and the words "there is no money" will be intoned when the time comes to cough up.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:35 pm

Arif Ansari ‏@ArifBBC 11m11 minutes ago
Labour has taken control of Cheshire West and Chester council from the Tories.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:45 pm

In my ring round to some fellow activists yesterday I got some feedback about the dynamics and events at our count. I am pleased to be able to tell you that the platter of cheese sandwiches made by a Labour bod were taken over to the Green group to be shared alongside some gentle chat in a gesture of friendship. They all went pretty quickly apparently.

However - the Conservatives had double the amount of people that were supposed to be allowed for each party and behaved as though they owned the place. Ukip were similarly bullish and took it upon themselves to come over and say some pretty sneery stuff to both Labour and Green ...

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:46 pm

Rabih Chaaban ‏@ChaabanRabih 26 mins ago Newcastle Upon Tyne, England

UK Polling Council setting up an investigation to look into Conservative's Bizarre majority!

https://www.politicshome.com/home-affai ... o89wZ.dpuf…

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:47 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Arif Ansari ‏@ArifBBC 11m11 minutes ago
Labour has taken control of Cheshire West and Chester council from the Tories.

That'll cause George Osborne some problems, if he cuts the funding to that council he is harming his own constituents.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:50 pm

I'd be more interested if the Electoral Commission were setting up an inquiry into the Conservative's bizarre majority! I can dream, can't I? (As the song has it.)

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:54 pm

James Chapman (Mail) ‏@jameschappers 1m1 minute ago
#GE2015 on new boundaries would have been CON 322 LAB 204 SNP 50 LIB 4. CON maj of 44 in Commons of 600 (via @anthonyjwells)

Be afraid people.

Not much room for any of the smaller voices in that set up.

Editing to add: No Plaid, Green or Ukip would have come through.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:54 pm

PorFavor wrote:I'd be more interested if the Electoral Commission were setting up an inquiry into the Conservative's bizarre majority! I can dream, can't I? (As the song has it.)

More and more are asking that very question PF, and there is a petition around calling for full verification enquiry. From their own ground work they don't believe the results.
Sadly too late for Ed even if anything had been dodgy and provable.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:56 pm

Some council results on Twitter.

Bracknell is back to one solitary Labour councilor
Wokingham has gone completely Tory.

The Greens have lost control of Brighton Council and been pushed into third place.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 09 May, 2015 6:57 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:
PorFavor wrote:I'd be more interested if the Electoral Commission were setting up an inquiry into the Conservative's bizarre majority! I can dream, can't I? (As the song has it.)
More and more are asking that very question PF, and there is a petition around calling for full verification enquiry. From their own ground work they don't believe the results.
Sadly too late for Ed even if anything had been dodgy and provable.

Surely he could come back the conquering hero if anything were proved to be dodgy?

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sat 09 May, 2015 7:01 pm

PorFavor wrote:
AngryAsWell wrote:
PorFavor wrote:I'd be more interested if the Electoral Commission were setting up an inquiry into the Conservative's bizarre majority! I can dream, can't I? (As the song has it.)
More and more are asking that very question PF, and there is a petition around calling for full verification enquiry. From their own ground work they don't believe the results.
Sadly too late for Ed even if anything had been dodgy and provable.
Surely he could come back the conquering hero if anything were proved to be dodgy?

He resigned, would have to stand again, not sure he would

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Sat 09 May, 2015 7:02 pm

Yvetteforleader? Website registered by key aide suggests Cooper leadership bid
http://labourlist.org/2015/05/yvettefor ... rship-bid/

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sat 09 May, 2015 7:02 pm

Protest in Wales too.

Charlotte Church 'mad as hell' as she joins Cardiff protest following Conservative majority http://bit.ly/1dTREoS

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Sat 09 May, 2015 7:03 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
James Chapman (Mail) ‏@jameschappers 1m1 minute ago
#GE2015 on new boundaries would have been CON 322 LAB 204 SNP 50 LIB 4. CON maj of 44 in Commons of 600 (via @anthonyjwells)
Be afraid people.

Not much room for any of the smaller voices in that set up.

Editing to add: No Plaid, Green or Ukip would have come through.

I seem to recall there were quote a few dissenting Tories who (i) disliked the boundaries they way they were set as they weren't making sense with local landmarks and LA borders and (ii) disliked the idea of 600 as some would lose their seat.

Wouldn't take much to vote this down - the perils of a small majority...esp. if it was seen to be purely for electoral gain and not fairness.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Sat 09 May, 2015 7:05 pm

Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 2m2 minutes ago
Proof that the strong Tory performance in #GE2015 had deep roots: they did rather well in local elections too http://www.lgiu.org.uk/2015/05/09/local ... e-results/ …

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Sat 09 May, 2015 7:06 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:TechnicalEphemera

-I don't agree on Progress, no.

-Danczuk is not a useful MP, no.

-Jones is an amusing polemicist, but not someone with any judgement whatsoever. He panders to our prejudices. He should not be taken seriously.

If you are asking me to choose between Danczuk and Jones, I choose neither.

I expressed my strong dissent from the policy mix we put forward before the election, and (unsurprisingly) still think the same. It suffered from 'free pony' syndrome. We promised free ponies (fixing energy and rail prices, second generation rent controls) that were populist but, frankly, daft. Taken individually they may be popular. As a package, they give off the fatal smell of incompetence.

I don't get what Progress are for anymore, other than picking daft fights with the Unions ( although to be fair Len is almost as hopeless as Diane Abbott). I think Owen Jones is bang on, his views should advise strategy, but you wouldn't want to campaign on them unfiltered.

However I am more intrigued as to how somebody who obviously has a clue can rate AJ,DM or CU.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sat 09 May, 2015 7:06 pm

ohsocynical wrote:Protest in Wales too.

Charlotte Church 'mad as hell' as she joins Cardiff protest following Conservative majority http://bit.ly/1dTREoS

Suggested we should co-op her as leader and posted a picture of her earlier Ohso

(was quite pleased with myself as getting pictures posted is not my "thing")

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Sat 09 May, 2015 7:07 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:
James Chapman (Mail) ‏@jameschappers 1m1 minute ago
#GE2015 on new boundaries would have been CON 322 LAB 204 SNP 50 LIB 4. CON maj of 44 in Commons of 600 (via @anthonyjwells)
Be afraid people.

Not much room for any of the smaller voices in that set up.

Editing to add: No Plaid, Green or Ukip would have come through.
I seem to recall there were quote a few dissenting Tories who (i) disliked the boundaries they way they were set as they weren't making sense with local landmarks and LA borders and (ii) disliked the idea of 600 as some would lose their seat.

Wouldn't take much to vote this down - the perils of a small majority...esp. if it was seen to be purely for electoral gain and not fairness.

I'm sure I saw yesterday tweets to the effect that the Tories are saying they don't need a vote ... it's already approved and will go ahead asap. This is why voter registration numbers for this election were so critical ... and why they weren't too bothered about getting people to register.

And of course - if they've effectively got rid of most of the Lib Dems there are far fewer, if any, of their own MPs who are up for the chop ... they've got an inbuilt advantage of + 44 on those figures above ... should shut up their dissenters.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 09 May, 2015 7:08 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:
AngryAsWell wrote:
Tizme1 wrote:Actually Labour did sign up to cuts. Of course that doesn't necessarily mean they would have cut in the same way. And I fully accept they wouldn't have had to enforce cuts, or cuts at that level given no government can force such a thing on a future government. But Labour were stupid to put themselves in that position. They tried to play the middle ground and it worked against them. Again, their fault. Not anyone else's.

Labour are not whiter than white when it comes to telling the truth.

As a matter of fact, I will suffer. I probably would have suffered under a Labour government too but possibly not as much.
Actually Labour did sign up to cuts
They signed up to a balanced budget agreement that had no mention of cuts. That's the bill they signed. No mention of cuts in it. Just an agreement to balance the budget.
The IFS (or OBR) suggested that would mean 30 mil cuts and the tory's accepted that - Labour did not.
That's what I mean about lies.
And this was the genius of Osborne's trap. If Labour had not voted for the fiscal responsibility motion it would have been as bad as 'the note'. And actually Labour managed to get it changed to refer to the current budget, not including capital. But in signing up for it, everyone who disliked austerity could attack them for 'signing up to cuts'. Quite frankly, everyone who did that fell for Osborne's plan hook, line and sinker.

Looks like the left will always be split. Ah well, it won't have the same consequences it did in the Spanish Civil War. It will be pretty bloody bad but at least Guernica won't get firebombed again. No actual massacres. More Tory state-shrinking and demonisation of everyone without a CBE, of course.

Unless those on the left can swallow their pride and bloody talk to each other civilly. Is that too much to ask?

Let me tell you something else. I said we should ignore Rusty and I will never mention his name after this ever again. But if he is reading this today, he will be pissing himself laughing.

Yes. I thought about that, too. I even checked to see if he was signed in. Who knows who's lurking? Still, can't be helped. I think it will do people good to lance any boils (if they can) as soon as possible. Then perhaps something productive will emerge. It's hardly as though we can carry on as if nothing's happened.

Edited

Tidy up

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Sat 09 May, 2015 7:11 pm

Lasagne nearly cooked, just back for a peek.

Brighton now back to Labour. Big loss of Green seats.
Odd that people trusted Lucas but not their councillors.

Apologies to Tizme if my post was curt. I probably upset more people at breakfast time when coming round and just before supper than at any other time of the day.

& Rob. I really understand how you feel.
But people need to be able to discuss their feelings at the moment surely ?
Feelings of betrayal go deep, can't just be glossed over.
Your explanation of how the anti-austerity parties played the tune the Tories wanted, to hurt Labour, is excellent, thank you.
That's what I mean though, that's why feelings run strong.
The so called progressives attacked Labour on it, and manipulated the truth to suit their agenda.
Or lie as some may call it.

I'm fortunate.
Could probably out match Rusty on champagne purchasing, have no mortgage, no debt, generous savings, solid regular income and a small but homely house.

I won't suffer, apart from emotionally under the Tories.
But I care about those who will suffer. Suffer they will and it will be challenging to anyone with compassion.

Any closing of distance with the anti-austerity parties would have to include an apology for damaging Ed & Labour with those lies. They bang on about Iraq & Labour being baby murderers, when they acknowledge they may have helped harm people here...then I'll feel a little more accepting.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 09 May, 2015 7:14 pm

yahyah wrote:Lasagne nearly cooked, just back for a peek.

Brighton now back to Labour. Big loss of Green seats.
Odd that people trusted Lucas but not their councillors.

Apologies to Tizme if my post was curt. I probably upset more people at breakfast time when coming round and just before supper than at any other time of the day.

& Rob. I really understand how you feel.
But people need to be able to discuss their feelings at the moment surely ?
Feelings of betrayal go deep, can't just be glossed over.

Yes. That's more or less what I said. It needs to happen at this stage, doesn't it? Then hopefully we can move on and maybe audition for a Coca Cola advert!

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Sat 09 May, 2015 7:16 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote: I'm sure I saw yesterday tweets to the effect that the Tories are saying they don't need a vote ... it's already approved and will go ahead asap. This is why voter registration numbers for this election were so critical ... and why they weren't too bothered about getting people to register.

And of course - if they've effectively got rid of most of the Lib Dems there are far fewer, if any, of their own MPs who are up for the chop ... they've got an inbuilt advantage of + 44 on those figures above ... should shut up their dissenters.

It was voted down according to this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21235169

Plans to redraw constituency boundaries before 2015, backed by the Tories, have been defeated in the House of Commons.
MPs voted by 334 to 292 to accept changes made by peers, meaning the planned constituency shake-up will be postponed until 2018 at the earliest.

edit - and a lot of things could have happened before then...

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Sat 09 May, 2015 7:16 pm

Bugger I can't find it. Faffing around trying to save the picture but no good

An going to Google to have a look, but there seems to be a protest gathering strength because they say the election was rigged
and that 25,000 ballot papers went missing in Sussex.
Wonder if they were the ones in the van that got pinched? I didn't think much could be done with them. At least that's what one of the Conservative tellers said the other night.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Sat 09 May, 2015 7:17 pm

George Eaton @georgeeaton · 40m 40 minutes ago
The Tories would have won a majority of 44 under new boundaries, estimates @anthonyjwells. Big obstacle to Labour victory in 2020.

George Eaton @georgeeaton · 39m 39 minutes ago
Here's the link to @anthonyjwells's boundaries analysis: http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/9413 …

From a quick scan of that analysis ... looks as though you may be right Roger - sounds as if there is to be another review and proposal this parliament - presume that means a vote is required.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sat 09 May, 2015 7:18 pm

Is this democracy? @SweetsWayN20s

Kettled in London

http://bambuser.com/v/5500035

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sat 09 May, 2015 7:19 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote: I'm sure I saw yesterday tweets to the effect that the Tories are saying they don't need a vote ... it's already approved and will go ahead asap. This is why voter registration numbers for this election were so critical ... and why they weren't too bothered about getting people to register.

And of course - if they've effectively got rid of most of the Lib Dems there are far fewer, if any, of their own MPs who are up for the chop ... they've got an inbuilt advantage of + 44 on those figures above ... should shut up their dissenters.
It was voted down according to this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21235169

Plans to redraw constituency boundaries before 2015, backed by the Tories, have been defeated in the House of Commons.
MPs voted by 334 to 292 to accept changes made by peers, meaning the planned constituency shake-up will be postponed until 2018 at the earliest.
edit - and a lot of things could have happened before then...

Shapps has said they don't need a vote only yesterday ?

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Sat 09 May, 2015 7:21 pm

On a completely separate note, I was followed to the loo when going for a piss and although exhibiting natural curiosity one of the cats gave me the right and proper privacy that I were due. In the corner next to the bowl sits a litter tray and I pondered on the advances made by human culture and whether or not they be afforded by all, they damn well ought to be.

'And then I thought of Thomas Crapper with a rue smile on my face. I believe it were he that invented the ball and cock valve, maybe the flushing cistern but not the toilet itself. Of course I may be completely wrong but isn't Google great if I could be bothered to check? Of course we must sometimes exercise greater attention span than a flick here and a flick there.

I once broke down in an adolescent snigger whilst addressing the school reading out an award some first or second year girl had deservedly earned. "Susan Crapper has ...". I completely lost it in infectious manner. Half the school joined in, including the line of teachers framing the stage who could not contain themselves. I saw a young girl staring back at me from the second or third row. Poor thing was as red as a beetroot.

Did I tell you I was stoned?

Edit: inserted valve after ball and cock, could have used ballcock. Apparently invented by José Antonio de Alzate y Ramírez, a Mexican priest and scientist, who described the device in 1790 in the Gaceta de Literatura Méxicana, Crapper it appears developed the idea. Just popped back having decided to diarise my posts for the yime being.

Oh well, yime shall do.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sat 09 May, 2015 7:21 pm

Sara Firth @Sara__Firth
· 1h 1 hour ago
It's getting a bit chaotic here in #London at the protest

https://twitter.com/Sara__Firth