Wednesday 12th August 2015

Post by **refitman** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 7:12 am

Morning all.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 7:57 am

Morning.

Sarah Vine has penned a piece about Corbyn's popularity with women, be they Labour members or on MumsNet.

She thinks it's because of his passion and sincerity.
About Michael Gove she admits ''I’m not totally immune to these feelings myself, albeit on the other side of the political fence.
The fact that he’s a man of conviction is what first attracted me to my own husband, Justice Secretary Michael Gove. Whether it’s his passion for political reform or his loathing of houseplants (one for another column), I love his determination to stick to what he believes in, even if it makes him wildly unpopular.'' That made me chortle.

She ends the piece with her usual anti-Miliband vitriol.

''There’s something else, too.
A burning passion at the podium speaks of passion elsewhere.

There’s something very alluring about a man who knows exactly what he wants — as the millions of women who bought E.L. James’s Fifty Shades Of Grey will tell you.

Of course, we’re not supposed to say this; but it’s true. Sexy leaders win elections.
It’s why William Hague never quite made the grade, and why people never took John Major seriously.
It’s why many people are still very confused indeed about Margaret Thatcher.
It’s why Bill Clinton gets away with being a card-carrying scumbag.

Put crudely, Corbyn may be a 50 shades of beige pensioner; but when you see him up on that stage, alive with revolutionary zeal, you just know he’d be ten times better in bed than poor old Miliband.''

Is she right when she says earlier in the piece that most women go more for a politician they think looks trustworthy ?
She thinks we don't examine the minutiae of policy, go more with our hearts.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 8:23 am

& if Mike's reading please can you link Liz Kendall's article for the Morning Star ?

I can find the MS's editorial on her, but not the article.
Thanks if you can.

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-4c ... crz5XFVikp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 8:23 am

Pitt The Younger never appealed to the 'grey vote' About as much sex appeal as a used dish cloth, had that whipper snapper.

[youtube]T3jIE3b-bhY[/youtube]

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 8:26 am

Morning yahyah and all.

Male sex appeal advice from Mrs Gove ... nah, just nah. Not even had my first cup of tea yet.

Perhaps she'd secretly like Govey to wear a white vest ... a bit of a Streetcar Named Desire fantasy on her part.

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 8:27 am

Is Cameron sexy ?

: cameronHols_2651356b.jpg (65.79 KiB) Viewed 10296 times

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 8:27 am

Oh, that is funny Toby.

edited to add....the Blackadder's funny, Cameron is breakfast heaving.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 8:33 am

Found the Morning Star link:

''The Need For A Labour Government Is Greater Than Ever Before’
LIZ KENDALL explains how she would seek to shape Britain, should she be elected Labour leader''

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-03 ... cr2lnFVikp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 8:37 am

Just heard a government spokesperson saying their superfast broadband deal with BT is going really really well - it's fabulous apparently - right after a string of complaints from various communities who say they are being completely left out or let down by it.

Later today we are going to try and reinstate our phone line internet connection which has been down for weeks and weeks - with yet another new router. We are not in as bad a place as our neighbour though. We have the wireless service - beamed from a mast and bounced off a neighbouring farm to a receiver on our house - as our main system. We keep the phone line service as a back up. Our neighbour just opted for BT's 'superfast broadband' service and have had nothing but trouble and virtually nil service. They have speeds of less than 1mbp - and when they switch on the TV (internet) they can't use the computer at all - and vice versa. After the last 'fix' they lost the ability to get any service via the TV - no channels at all. So they've basically not got TV or internet now - superfast nothing. Quite an achievement.

They've been sold a pup - BT won't, yet, admit that they are too far from the cabinet for it to ever be a good enough service. They are sending yet another engineer out.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 8:59 am

Chris Bryant MP ‏@RhonddaBryant 14m14 minutes ago
Yes @BBCRadio4 @edvaizey was utterly complacent about broadband rollout. Always has been.

Ah that's who it was - Ed Vaizey. And complacent is exactly the right word.

Jenny Chapman ‏@JennyChapman 4m4 minutes ago
Didn't get much joy out of BT this week, trying to get decent broadband for local businesses. Have written to CEO.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 8:59 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:Just heard a government spokesperson saying their superfast broadband deal with BT is going really really well - it's fabulous apparently - right after a string of complaints from various communities who say they are being completely left out or let down by it.

Later today we are going to try and reinstate our phone line internet connection which has been down for weeks and weeks - with yet another new router. We are not in as bad a place as our neighbour though. We have the wireless service - beamed from a mast and bounced off a neighbouring farm to a receiver on our house - as our main system. We keep the phone line service as a back up. Our neighbour just opted for BT's 'superfast broadband' service and have had nothing but trouble and virtually nil service. They have speeds of less than 1mbp - and when they switch on the TV (internet) they can't use the computer at all - and vice versa. After the last 'fix' they lost the ability to get any service via the TV - no channels at all. So they've basically not got TV or internet now - superfast nothing. Quite an achievement.

They've been sold a pup - BT won't, yet, admit that they are too far from the cabinet for it to ever be a good enough service. They are sending yet another engineer out.

That's what happens when the main objective is to make profit/competition rather provision of a good service.

I've a good news story about a British company.
We bought a kitchen butcher block trolley eight years ago when we moved here.
Over-weighting the drawer has led to the drawer mechanism getting knackered and getting stuck.
My husband phoned them and they are sending us new drawer runners and wheels, free of charge and free of postage. We would have happily paid as we've had eight years of use which is fair.

There are companies out there that put customer service first, but they are hard to find.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 9:09 am

refitman wrote:Morning all.

Good morning, Refitman.

I want to say thank you to you for keeping this place going. I know the other administrators aren't around at the moment, so it's you who is doing whatever it takes to keep FTN open for us to have our haven - so thank you, sincerely.

As we lost two valued contributors yesterday (and if I am at fault for their departure, I apologise) please could we all have a little think before we post? I'm going to try to be a bit less combative - and I've already decided not to respond to one poster, as I cannot do so without being very annoyed and the temptation to be insulting is just too much on occasion....

People here have been saying for a very long time that we need differing points of view if we don't want to turn into an echo chamber. Maybe we should try a bit harder to prove it. Me included, obviously.
So if I have offended, I'm sorry.

Thanks.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 9:16 am

Morning Ephie.

Hope you got some sleep and Show enjoyed his birthday cake.

I think the problem sometimes comes because we are not face to face.
One tries to keep things brief so as not to post lengthily, and takes shortcuts but it can come out terse or wrongly.
My own mangled syntax and 'Eats Shoots & Leaves' punctuation doesn't help either.

What concerns me is the extremism on both sides...those who call Kendall, Cooper & Burnham obscene names because they disagree, and the right of the party who are calling gloom and destruction yet will do their very best to rip the party apart if Corbyn dare win.

Post by **refitman** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 9:19 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:Just heard a government spokesperson saying their superfast broadband deal with BT is going really really well - it's fabulous apparently - right after a string of complaints from various communities who say they are being completely left out or let down by it.

Later today we are going to try and reinstate our phone line internet connection which has been down for weeks and weeks - with yet another new router. We are not in as bad a place as our neighbour though. We have the wireless service - beamed from a mast and bounced off a neighbouring farm to a receiver on our house - as our main system. We keep the phone line service as a back up. Our neighbour just opted for BT's 'superfast broadband' service and have had nothing but trouble and virtually nil service. They have speeds of less than 1mbp - and when they switch on the TV (internet) they can't use the computer at all - and vice versa. After the last 'fix' they lost the ability to get any service via the TV - no channels at all. So they've basically not got TV or internet now - superfast nothing. Quite an achievement.

They've been sold a pup - BT won't, yet, admit that they are too far from the cabinet for it to ever be a good enough service. They are sending yet another engineer out.

I have a BT exchange literally at the top of my street (I can see it from by spare room). Can't get infinity though! (I do get BT Sport for free though because of it, can't really complain about that)

mikems · Post by **mikems** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 9:20 am

The impossible seems to be happening in the USA :

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251512442" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sanders could win the Democratic nomination.

mikems · Post by **mikems** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 9:30 am

What concerns me is the extremism on both sides...those who call Kendall, Cooper & Burnham obscene names because they disagree, and the right of the party who are calling gloom and destruction yet will do their very best to rip the party apart if Corbyn dare win.

That's politics!

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 9:32 am

mikems wrote:
What concerns me is the extremism on both sides...those who call Kendall, Cooper & Burnham obscene names because they disagree, and the right of the party who are calling gloom and destruction yet will do their very best to rip the party apart if Corbyn dare win.
That's politics!

That's true

Maybe I should take up knitting.

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 9:34 am

It doesn't help that those in Westminster who ought to know better keep playing devils advocate

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33873722

: ScreenShot00618.jpg (161.08 KiB) Viewed 10224 times

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 10:03 am

Martin Rowson on twitter

Well, I'm not registering to vote in Labour's election, tho I hope Corbyn wins. No business of satirists to support anyone even vaguely...

...interested in political power, unless they promised to abolish all political & every other form of power, their own included...

Meanwhile, I eagerly look forward to the new Realist Electable Party (Hodgesite-Rentoulian) winning every single seat in Commons in 2020...

..and bringing in their heroic programme of smug whining from the cradle to the grave (about 10 mins before we die of boredom)

mikems · Post by **mikems** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 10:23 am

I see that Ken Loach has been refused a vote in the leadership election. Not a surprise, I suppose, since he formed Left Unity two years ago. But I remember my very first meeting as a delegate to the local party GMC, where I was far too scared to say a word, and I was impressed by this meek looking chap behind me who kept getting up and making interesting points. It was Ken, of course, and I had no idea who he was until some time later, when I was told he directed Cathy Come Home, which I was too young to remember, but also Kes, one of my favourite films!

It seems absurd to me that someone like Ken Loach is deemed to not be part of the labour movement and doesn't share its values!

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 10:25 am

yahyah wrote:Found the Morning Star link:

''The Need For A Labour Government Is Greater Than Ever Before’
LIZ KENDALL explains how she would seek to shape Britain, should she be elected Labour leader''

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-03 ... cr2lnFVikp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks for posting this. It reads well, but I still don't feel she has enough experience to be Leader.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 10:31 am

mikems wrote:I see that Ken Loach has been refused a vote in the leadership election. Not a surprise, I suppose, since he formed Left Unity two years ago. But I remember my very first meeting as a delegate to the local party GMC, where I was far too scared to say a word, and I was impressed by this meek looking chap behind me who kept getting up and making interesting points. It was Ken, of course, and I had no idea who he was until some time later, when I was told he directed Cathy Come Home, which I was too young to remember, but also Kes, one of my favourite films!

It seems absurd to me that someone like Ken Loach is deemed to not be part of the labour movement and doesn't share its values!

In a way yes, but take a look at LU web page and the bold statement at the top

"Left Unity is active in movements and campaigns across the left, working to create an alternative to the main political parties."

I'm not sure that someone who is "working to create an alternative to the main political parties" should have a say in who the Labour leader will be, any more that the "Greens4Corbyn" people should.

http://leftunity.org/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

mikems · Post by **mikems** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 10:32 am

The thing that struck me in Kendall's article is that she shrinks from the measures that would bring about what she says she wants. She says she wants workers to enjoy greater power and rights, but does not commit to repealing the anti-union laws that shackle workers. She says she wants greater local devolution of power away from the state, but sees the problems in terms of a bloated central bureaucracy, rather than corporate influence over government both national and local, particularly with rules around tendering for services and hive-offs to private companies. You can devolve whatever power is left as much as you like, but it won't make much practical difference with commercial involvement being prioritised.

mikems · Post by **mikems** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 10:35 am

Point taken AAW, but I'm sure they means 'as currently constituted' as do so many others on the left. I don't share the values of this labour party particularly, the party of welfare caps, austerity and cuts, which is why I am voting to change it.

mikems · Post by **mikems** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 10:40 am

Do try and catch up Robert. It's Wednesday.

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 10:40 am

Sorry folks just logged in for a general moan about our so-called jobs factory and wage growth that Tory representatives speak of. I don't want to go too closely into specifics as it pertains to the earnings of my sons and my eldest's partner but was shocked to see how little they earn.

Before doing so I noticed someone commenting on the increased unemployment figures but pointing out the reduced claimant count as a success. In my mind it merely confirms the likelihood of people in need not making the claims they're entitled to, somewhat reminiscent of Professor David Stuckler's study of those disappearing after a sanction, deservedly so according to IDS and the late Esther (not in an existential case). http://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2015-01-21-san ... k-report-0,

I was speaking to my daughter-out-law yesterday who was having difficulty with their tax credits because a redundancy payment she'd received (yep another having lost work recently) had been misreported as wages, which troubled me regarding the forthcoming UC, if it ever does get rolled out. Anyway I saw the top line figure for their earnings last tax year and queried whether that was for both of them. It was; she needed accountancy qualifications for her p/t work and my son was in a management role. (I'd better skip my feelings toward Hartley Brewer or whatever her name is).

I've also mentioned Boots where my youngest works, very nearly a year now albeit for an agency and not directly employed by Boots even though he is now a trainer and also drives a variety of fork-lift trucks (don't ask me the technicalities of the different types but note they only give in-house certification nothing that applies nationally). He's supposedly being taken on by Boots themselves but that's been the case for months, longer than I care to think. Anyway he had another of his own apprenticeship days yesterday immediately followed by a full shift's work. At least he gets his nominal pay rather than apprenticeship rates but I still wonder at the terminology and what may be being claimed from government.

Anyway I'd just received a call from my eldest, who is now in recruitment, with an opportunity, via one of their mates as it happens, asking if I knew what he earned. Coincidentally he had mentioned how much his thirteen hours was going to earn him.

I'm sorry I'm appalled... and my youngest is thirty.

Edit: would you believe a typo?

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 10:40 am

TobyLatimer wrote:It doesn't help that those in Westminster who ought to know better keep playing devils advocate

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33873722

ScreenShot00618.jpg

He is a self-publicist and serial plonker. In my deeply considered opinion. A Devil's Advocate is someone who expresses a deliberately opposite view to provoke debate, thus testing the strength of the opposing argument. He is nothing of the kind. He doesn't want to have a debate, he wants it stopped.

He was trashing Ed Miliband during the election, and now he's started on Corbyn. He's not doing this because he sincerely believes the contest is being rigged in some unspecified way, but because he wants his chops on the telly.

John Mann is another one. They're good at taking the credit for work other people do on the causes they espouse - and whilst I'll happily agree that some of those causes are very worthy and their involvement may well have helped the campaigns along, the pair of them are not actually very nice people.

The way they have attacked Corbyn is disgraceful. I don't hear them attacking the others for their history or their background, and there's ammunition aplenty on expenses etc. for anyone who cares to look.

onebuttonmonkey · Post by **onebuttonmonkey** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 10:43 am

RobertSnozers wrote:
TobyLatimer wrote:It doesn't help that those in Westminster who ought to know better keep playing devils advocate

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33873722

ScreenShot00618.jpg
What, Simon Daczuk acting like a massive arsehole to the general detriment of his party?

It must be Tuesday.

Funny, Danczuk getting so exercised about potential voting irregularities. From Wikipedia:

Danczuk was selected in early 2007 to be Rochdale Labour Party's Prospective Parliamentary Candidate. The acrimonious selection process was delayed due to problems with postal voting and the local party passing a motion of no confidence in the selection process. Local members were concerned that the short-listing process was deliberately manipulated in order to exclude Afzal Khan, a Manchester councillor, who had received the highest number of nominations.

In August 2006, Tribune magazine revealed that Danczuk's company Vision 21 had sent questionnaires to Labour members in Rochdale on behalf of the regional party—giving him an alleged unfair advantage as he had access to members' views. Danczuk reported that he received death threats during the selection process. The postal ballot got a 78% turnout and Danczuk received almost twice as many votes as the second-placed candidate.

As I said in the other place, if it's true, isn't it odd that Simon failed to be so upset at irregularities alleged to have been involved in him securing his own nomination? It's revealing - again - that the problem some MPs seem to have with Corbyn has nothing to do with entryism or voting and everything to do with their dislike of who might win.

He's also talking up a day one coup.

http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2015/08/ ... on-day-one

We do so much damage to ourselves. It's the thing that gets me down the most, sometimes.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 10:45 am

AngryAsWell wrote:
yahyah wrote:Found the Morning Star link:

''The Need For A Labour Government Is Greater Than Ever Before’
LIZ KENDALL explains how she would seek to shape Britain, should she be elected Labour leader''

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-03 ... cr2lnFVikp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Thanks for posting this. It reads well, but I still don't feel she has enough experience to be Leader.

The BTL comments are interesting.....

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 10:45 am

yahyah wrote:& if Mike's reading please can you link Liz Kendall's article for the Morning Star ?

I can find the MS's editorial on her, but not the article.
Thanks if you can.

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-4c ... crz5XFVikp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks (both of you - great joint effort!) for the link.

From it -

I’m not offering myself as leader because I believe I have all of the answers that Britain seeks — I’m standing because I believe that knowledge lies with the British people.

Run that by me again . . .

Good morfternoon, everyone.

@AngryAsWell

Thanks for your reply last night. I still haven't caught up with the Yvette Cooper thing but, rightly or wrongly, I got the impression that you weren't bowled over.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 10:48 am

mikems wrote:Do try and catch up Robert. It's Wednesday.

To be fair to Robert, Danzcuk does this on Tuesdays too, And Wednesdays, Sundays, Mondays, Saturdays.....he rarely has a day off.

He must be a hardworkingtaxpayerhelpingtobringdownthecorbyn. Sorry - hardworkingtaxpayerfamilybriningdownthedeficit(TM).

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 11:01 am

onebuttonmonkey wrote:
He's also talking up a day one coup.

http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2015/08/ ... on-day-one

We do so much damage to ourselves. It's the thing that gets me down the most, sometimes.

If there is truth in that article, it is absolutely reprehensible behaviour by those who claim to be democratic.

mikems · Post by **mikems** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 11:02 am

The tories all know they are protecting their class and interests, it's just a question of tactics for them. On our side, principle comes into play, and that allows for much greater misunderstanding, both innocent and deliberate.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 11:06 am

gilsey wrote:Martin Rowson on twitter
Well, I'm not registering to vote in Labour's election, tho I hope Corbyn wins. No business of satirists to support anyone even vaguely...

...interested in political power, unless they promised to abolish all political & every other form of power, their own included...

Meanwhile, I eagerly look forward to the new Realist Electable Party (Hodgesite-Rentoulian) winning every single seat in Commons in 2020...

..and bringing in their heroic programme of smug whining from the cradle to the grave (about 10 mins before we die of boredom)

"Rentoulian-Aaronovitchian-Collinsite-Kammite", more like

(seriously, DFH is more of an opportunist-populist)

You will note that three of those names are intimately linked with a certain newspaper - the same one, amazingly enough, that has been running almost daily Kendall puff pieces.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 11:06 am

PorFavor wrote:
yahyah wrote:& if Mike's reading please can you link Liz Kendall's article for the Morning Star ?

I can find the MS's editorial on her, but not the article.
Thanks if you can.

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-4c ... crz5XFVikp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Thanks (both of you - great joint effort!) for the link.

From it -

I’m not offering myself as leader because I believe I have all of the answers that Britain seeks — I’m standing because I believe that knowledge lies with the British people.
Run that by me again . . .

Good morfternoon, everyone.

@AngryAsWell

Thanks for your reply last night. I still haven't caught up with the Yvette Cooper thing but, rightly or wrongly, I got the impression that you weren't bowled over.

To be honest I didn't really catch very much of her as I'd had the vac on and just heard her voice as I turned it off. I posted she was on, and my flippin (BT!) connection dropped (again...).
I'll try to find a link to it...

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 11:11 am

Re the Danczuk f***wittery, hasn't Corbyn said he favours yearly leadership elections anyway?

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 11:28 am

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Re the Danczuk f***wittery, hasn't Corbyn said he favours yearly leadership elections anyway?

Oooh, you mean we could have this level of 'fun' every year?

One thing we are not going to get is yearly elections for leader.

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 11:29 am

TobyLatimer wrote:It doesn't help that those in Westminster who ought to know better keep playing devils advocate

Deleted the picture as I am sick of seeing him.

Yes but Danczuk is just a constant pain. He can be ignored by everybody. When the mutterings don't come from Danczuk and Stringer things get more serious.

As long as the party doesn't split, and there is no indication it will, then Labour will survive whoever is actually elected. The next leader may however not lead the party into the GE in 2020.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 11:36 am

RobertSnozers wrote:
ephemerid wrote:
onebuttonmonkey wrote:
He's also talking up a day one coup.

http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2015/08/ ... on-day-one

We do so much damage to ourselves. It's the thing that gets me down the most, sometimes.

If there is truth in that article, it is absolutely reprehensible behaviour by those who claim to be democratic.
That's why they're busy undermining the credibility of the vote, so they can claim the result is undemocratic

That only works if it is close. It won't be. Burnham is the only soft left candidate on the stacks, and he has proven as useless as he did in 2010. Corbynmania has grown like religious awakening.

Kendall at least has the excuse that she only became an MP in 2010 and has never even shadowed a Sec of State. She is too callow to win, but she is now a name, and I have more respect for her than for Chuka. Andy "Not a Member of the Westiminster Bubble" Burnham has been an MP since 2001 and been Sec of State for Health and Education. He won't get another chance. Certainly it is a bit odd seeing anyone who is not a Corbyn supporter gloating about how badly Kendall has done.

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 11:38 am

RobertSnozers wrote:
ephemerid wrote:
onebuttonmonkey wrote:
He's also talking up a day one coup.

http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2015/08/ ... on-day-one

We do so much damage to ourselves. It's the thing that gets me down the most, sometimes.

If there is truth in that article, it is absolutely reprehensible behaviour by those who claim to be democratic.
That's why they're busy undermining the credibility of the vote, so they can claim the result is undemocratic

The vote is a shambles and as such it has limited credibility. I certainly don't view it as legitimate, but it is however not to be tossed aside lightly.

I doubt anybody will launch a coup against Corbyn on day one. If he is elected (and I hope he isn't) he should have at least 6 months just to see what happens.

I am pretty certain it won't be good, but I could be wrong.

Corbyn will be in an odd situation though, many of his policies will not be accepted by the parliamentary party, so he will have to compromise to survive even a week. Unilateral nuclear disarmament and expensive nationalisation projects will get dropped and I suspect he will have to accept a strong shadow chancellor to hold to virtual purse strings. However not everything he says is so problematic, some of it will open up interesting lines of attack and compromises will also have to be made by the 80%

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 11:40 am

If that is a reference to me SH, Kendall has played her hand extremely poorly and deep down she (and I suspect her campaign team) knows it.

Why should her lack of front bench experience have been, in itself, such an insuperable handicap? After all, it hasn't exactly been for Corbyn......

Indeed her very own slogan, "a fresh start", recognised this could be an asset. Its just that her actual campaign has been lousy.

(it is picking up slightly now - but far, far, too late)

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 11:41 am

@yahyah

I'm confused. I've been going back over the posts - was the Morning Star link all your own work after all? If it was - apologies for splitting the credit!

mikems · Post by **mikems** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 11:53 am

I would caution against predictions about what Corbyn will do as leader as regards particular policies. He won't try and impose his views, in my opinion, and will try to gain consensus for everything. I expect he sees his role more as a Harold Wilson figure, holding the party together from the centre-left and allowing ministers to operate, but as a balanced team, rather than predominantly centre-right, as we have become used to.

At the moment he is laying out his own views and asking for support, but he is not the sort of person to impose his views on anyone, as far as I can tell.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 11:54 am

@PF
I can't find the YC link having looked all over R5, all I turned up was this (so I'm now wondering if I imagined it)
Yvette Cooper wants care worker wage rise

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33839316" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(I'm now also wondering if it was on R4....)

mikems · Post by **mikems** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 11:54 am

I was hoping you wouldn't notice, PorFavor, and was busy polishing my fingernails.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 12:04 pm

mikems wrote:I would caution against predictions about what Corbyn will do as leader as regards particular policies. He won't try and impose his views, in my opinion, and will try to gain consensus for everything. I expect he sees his role more as a Harold Wilson figure, holding the party together from the centre-left and allowing ministers to operate, but as a balanced team, rather than predominantly centre-right, as we have become used to.

At the moment he is laying out his own views and asking for support, but he is not the sort of person to impose his views on anyone, as far as I can tell.

No Labour leader can change policy at a whim. Policy is set via the NEC and National Policy Forum, after consultation.

http://www.labour.org.uk/pages/labours- ... committee1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Which is why none of the candidates are issuing hard and fast changes to the current 2015 Manifesto, and why AB talks about his Health & Care proposals in terms of setting up a committee to examine the proposals before they are adopted.
Any change of direction proposed by any of them will have to win the approval of the NEC.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 12:09 pm

TechnicalEphemera wrote:
RobertSnozers wrote:
ephemerid wrote:
If there is truth in that article, it is absolutely reprehensible behaviour by those who claim to be democratic.
That's why they're busy undermining the credibility of the vote, so they can claim the result is undemocratic
The vote is a shambles and as such it has limited credibility. I certainly don't view it as legitimate, but it is however not to be tossed aside lightly.

I doubt anybody will launch a coup against Corbyn on day one. If he is elected (and I hope he isn't) he should have at least 6 months just to see what happens.

I am pretty certain it won't be good, but I could be wrong.

Corbyn will be in an odd situation though, many of his policies will not be accepted by the parliamentary party, so he will have to compromise to survive even a week. Unilateral nuclear disarmament and expensive nationalisation projects will get dropped and I suspect he will have to accept a strong shadow chancellor to hold to virtual purse strings. However not everything he says is so problematic, some of it will open up interesting lines of attack and compromises will also have to be made by the 80%

If it were close, then I could have seen the legitimacy problem. Certainly, there is no way Labour will be re-running the £3 scheme, and never again will someone the PLP don't trust be nominated in order to "widen the debate". Membership for over a year will be introduced. For preference, I'd return to the pre-Benn days of having the PLP choose the leader, but that will never happen.

But, I don't think this is stolen. This has happened.

It is a form of religious awakening.

We are at the dawn of the rapture brothers and sisters. Believe!

[Oh, and death to the heretics.]

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 12:10 pm

mikems wrote:I was hoping you wouldn't notice, PorFavor, and was busy polishing my fingernails.

Ha! I now have a mental picture of you as Robert de Niro in Angel Heart (?). (Which, in my opinion, was quite a good film but not a revisiter. As in, once was enough.)

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 12:14 pm

"How we work
How the party works

As a democratic, socialist party we welcome people to join the party from all walks of life, have their say and influence policy. We welcome membership applications from individuals, families, young people, students, workers, unemployed, older people – anyone with an interest in building a better Britain – a One Nation Britain

To newcomers, working out how everything fits together can seem a bit of a maze – but don’t let that put you off as there’s a common goal: ensuring the party remains open and democratic and help maintain contact between the party, the people and the government. Our structure, and our open policy development process enables more people than ever before to have their say."

..more here:

http://www.labour.org.uk/pages/how-we-work" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 12 Aug, 2015 12:14 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
TechnicalEphemera wrote:
RobertSnozers wrote: That's why they're busy undermining the credibility of the vote, so they can claim the result is undemocratic
The vote is a shambles and as such it has limited credibility. I certainly don't view it as legitimate, but it is however not to be tossed aside lightly.

I doubt anybody will launch a coup against Corbyn on day one. If he is elected (and I hope he isn't) he should have at least 6 months just to see what happens.

I am pretty certain it won't be good, but I could be wrong.

Corbyn will be in an odd situation though, many of his policies will not be accepted by the parliamentary party, so he will have to compromise to survive even a week. Unilateral nuclear disarmament and expensive nationalisation projects will get dropped and I suspect he will have to accept a strong shadow chancellor to hold to virtual purse strings. However not everything he says is so problematic, some of it will open up interesting lines of attack and compromises will also have to be made by the 80%
If it were close, then I could have seen the legitimacy problem. Certainly, there is no way Labour will be re-running the £3 scheme, and never again will someone the PLP don't trust be nominated in order to "widen the debate". Membership for over a year will be introduced. For preference, I'd return to the pre-Benn days of having the PLP choose the leader, but that will never happen.

But, I don't think this is stolen. This has happened.

It is a form of religious awakening.

We are at the dawn of the rapture brothers and sisters. Believe!

[Oh, and death to the heretics.]

Hello.

I read your post bottom up - but somehow I knew it was you before I got to the point of Revelation!