Monday 11'th 2015

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 11 May, 2015 12:13 pm

NonOxCol wrote:Morning.

I have read the entire weekend thread on this forum, and taken on board many points. However, I'm afraid to say I feel the same way as adam and TSGO. In fact I've probably hardened since Friday. Go to the Guardian website and there's Mandelson and Umunna (and IDS!); listen to the BBC News and apparently Cameron is "going to restore fairness" to Britain. No really. A six-year-old lie and a few months of scaremongering about Scotland cut through more than everything that *actually* happened in the last five years, Murdoch and Cameron got away with absolutely, literally everything and Labour will come under severe pressure to turn right again.

I cannot be optimistic about a country that voted for proto-fascist filth. By that I don't mean the Tories in general, however much I despise them. I mean *this* Tory party. We're on the brink of something all right; it certainly isn't "something special".

Ditto. I can't shake those self same feelings off. I'm too scared to read or watch the news in case it tips me right over the top. Not reading all my Twitter posts either in case I react too violently to some of them.
FTN is my only contact with the outside world at present.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Mon 11 May, 2015 12:15 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
minch wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:
Worth a read https://blog.lboro.ac.uk/general-electi ... -report-4/
Well those of us thinking that the influence of the press - print and TV might be waning - probably need to think again after looking at that. It's very stark. There's one instance where the amount of national press coverage for the two main parties mirror the percentages of votes they won on the night itself ... And the rest is pretty scary when you look at the positive/negative coverage and the relative lack of coverage of substantive policy rather than coverage about the 'horse race' itself and the characters.

Thank you. I think.

It is undoubtedly waning, down but not yet out. Twitter and other forms of social media were very effective in taking down some of Shapps and TCC's dafter ideas, and that fed back into the MSM; printed newspapers are in terminal decilne and, as more people switch to online sources for their news, the social media effect will only intensify. We may have overestimated its impact this time around (and I genuinely think it did have an impact) but that doesn't mean it should be discounted for the future.

However, and it is a significantly sized however*, it shouldn't be relied on entirely for the time being. Back in my marketing days we saw many Dotcom companies go under, but also saw bricks & mortar businesses struggling too; the successful ones were, on the whole, either those which seemed to have endless resources (Amazon made a loss for aeons) or those which used both methods in harmony with each other (Waitrose/Ocado springs to mind). Similarly the way forward for Labour should be continuing with the social media avenues (which they used effectively) but in conjunction with a solid and ongoing ground campaign .... and making sure the message on the bloody leaflets matches that online!!!

* With apologies to Tim Fenton

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 11 May, 2015 12:25 pm

HappyChickie wrote:Top of the day to you nesters, and what a glorious past few days it has been. F A N T A S T I C

Even the sun is shining on all those new Conservative MPs starting their new roles.

Wasn’t that election exciting? Full and proper majority Conservative government. Brilliant. Even better was the bloodbath that Labour took.

The educated and sane electorate had their say, and boy did they talk.

331 seats.

Bet you never saw that coming. Thought Labour had it the bag. LOL

I’ve had had the pleasure of watching you all shriek, holler and howl over various forums about how bad the Tories were and how they would take a beating and well gosh, I can almost feel your pain.

I’m enjoying it.

IDS is staying in his current role and it fills me with complete joy!

I don’t want to know the details of where the 12 billion in cuts are going to be, but the deserving underclass and those on the beg should brace themselves. IDS will take a chainsaw to welfare. Hard public sector cuts are around the corner too. Bring it on!

I also hope those who went door to door campaigning for Labour, distributing leaflets etc whilst say they are too sick to work are motivated to look for work.  Something for nothing has now come to an end. And I don’t think Maximus has any new openings. Just saying…

The envy of the world (NHS) will now be sold off and about time too. The haemorrhaging money pit is no longer fit for purpose, Labour saw to that with their PFI deals. It was easy for you lefties to demand more money for the NHS. It's not you who are going to end up paying for it.

We are onto 5 years of economic stability, Britain is open for business again, more money in our pockets and many tax cuts to come, for those of us who work that is.

Long may it continue and it will. I predict 500 seats for the Conservatives in 2020.

I’ll now leave you all in your cauldron of lunacy, but rest assured, I’ll be in the front row of that audience when the lefty orchestra is being conducted on CIF when you are all whipped into a frenzy over hard core Conservative policies. I expect there will be many encores.

One more thing before I go, I too left CIF because of the complete and utter rubbish many of you posted.

Have to run, work to do, and a life to lead.

I remain as always, a very HappyChickie.

PS – Rog you still owe me an apology.

Oh Bless. Have you peed your pants with joy yet you naughtie boy? I bet you have.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Mon 11 May, 2015 12:25 pm

This seem to answer a question that I posed over the weekend but didn't see an answer at the time.

http://www.cityam.com/215474/senior-tor ... ming-weeks

A Conservative member of the last coalition Cabinet said yesterday that chancellor George Osborne could unveil a new Budget “relatively soon”.

Eric Pickles, who served as secretary of state for communities and local government, said that the move would be needed to outline Tory attempts to reduce the state’s huge annual deficit.

Osborne revealed his last Budget just over seven weeks ago, on 18 March. Yet having returned to government without the Liberal Democrats in tow, he may be keen to outline a statement of intent on behalf of the new all-Conservative executive.

“I would anticipate that we would do a Budget relatively soon, in order to get Conservative measures through,” Pickles told BBC Radio 5 Live’s John Pienaar.

If we thought the measures in the Budget were bad enough, I suspect we ain't seen nothin' yet...

I wouldn't out it past them to abolish inheritance tax completely.

NB whatever happened to that Office for Tax Simplification - they don't seem to have done anything...or not done anything which has been implemented anyway.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Mon 11 May, 2015 12:30 pm

IIRC HappyChickie was the simpering sycophant that used to follow Rusty around making "Oh you're so clever Mr rustinpeace" inanities. No surprise that it followed him over here to have a good gloat.

Classy...

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Mon 11 May, 2015 12:31 pm

ohsocynical wrote:... Oh Bless. Have you peed your pants with joy yet you naughtie boy? I bet you have.

Something's ruffled his feathers, ohso.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Mon 11 May, 2015 12:32 pm

I am liking the Eagles more and more.

They could sub for each other. They could do PMQs together - TCC would think he was seeing double after his lunchtime claret.

This is brilliant, the more I think about it, the more I like it.

I like the other Eagles too.

"You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave" followed by a bit of splendid geeeetarrrr.......

The UK is a dysfunctional place that I can't leave. My personal situation is a difficult one and I can't leave that either.

So I won't check out - of here, of my campaigning, my ideas for helping out in my community. I just won't.

I'm not going to lie down and let them roll over me without a scrap. Game on.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Mon 11 May, 2015 12:33 pm

AS has the new shadow cabinet - no real surprises Chris Leslie as Shadow Chancellor and Hilary Benn as Shadow Foriegn Sec.

Leader of the Opposition and Acting Leader of the Labour Party
Harriet Harman MP
Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer
Chris Leslie MP
Shadow Foreign Secretary
Hilary Benn MP
Shadow Home Secretary
Yvette Cooper MP

Shadow Lord Chancellor, Shadow Secretary of State for Justice
Lord Falconer of Thoroton

Opposition Chief Whip
Rosie Winterton MP

Shadow Secretary of State for Health
Andy Burnham MP

Shadow Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills
Chuka Umunna MP

Shadow Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
Rachel Reeves MP

Shadow Secretary of State for Education
Tristram Hunt MP

Shadow Secretary of State for Defence
Vernon Coaker MP

Shadow Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government
Emma Reynolds MP
Shadow Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change
Caroline Flint MP

Shadow Leader of the House of Commons and Chair of the National Policy Forum
Angela Eagle MP

Shadow Secretary of State for Transport
Michael Dugher MP

Shadow Secretary of State for Northern Ireland
Ivan Lewis MP

Shadow Secretary of State for International Development
Mary Creagh MP

Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland
Ian Murray MP
Shadow Secretary of State for Wales
Owen Smith MP

Shadow Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Maria Eagle MP

Shadow Minister for the Cabinet Office
Lucy Powell MP

Shadow Minister without Portfolio and Deputy Party Chair
Jon Trickett MP

Shadow Minister for Women and Equalities
Gloria De Piero MP

Shadow Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport
Chris Bryant MP

Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury
Shabana Mahmood MP

Shadow Leader of the House of Lords
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon

Lords Chief Whip
Lord Bassam of Brighton

Also attending Shadow Cabinet:
Shadow Minister for Care and Older People
Liz Kendall MP
Shadow Attorney General
Lord Bach

So no Sadiq Khan as Justice?

Looks like a bid for Mayor of London on the cards then.

Disappointed not to see Starmer in there although as he's only just been elected it may be too early.

NonOxCol · Post by **NonOxCol** » Mon 11 May, 2015 12:35 pm

Lord Sugar never, ever convinced me he belonged in the Labour party. I'd like to thank him for revealing his woefully narrow view of politics and its purpose. Now go away and enjoy your poxy little sinecure on publicly-funded television, with your equally ignorant Tory peer by your side.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 11 May, 2015 12:36 pm

Please may we have the "thanks" button back today, if possible? This might seem silly, but I think it's part of the human contact glue which contributes to holding us together. A sort of passing smile or nod when time doesn't necessarily allow for a full response.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Mon 11 May, 2015 12:36 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:IIRC HappyChickie was the simpering sycophant that used to follow Rusty around making "Oh you're so clever Mr rustinpeace" inanities. No surprise that it followed him over here to have a good gloat.

Classy...

Odd how their writing style (if one can call it that) is so similar......

There are too many trolls over there who are actually the same person. We know this. It's very tedious.

Still, they'll have a bit of fun trying to wind us up. It won't work.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Mon 11 May, 2015 12:44 pm

ephemerid wrote:I am liking the Eagles more and more.

They could sub for each other. They could do PMQs together - TCC would think he was seeing double after his lunchtime claret.

This is brilliant, the more I think about it, the more I like it.

I like the other Eagles too.

"You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave" followed by a bit of splendid geeeetarrrr.......

The UK is a dysfunctional place that I can't leave. My personal situation is a difficult one and I can't leave that either.

So I won't check out - of here, of my campaigning, my ideas for helping out in my community. I just won't.

I'm not going to lie down and let them roll over me without a scrap. Game on.

Busy cleaning behind my fridge at the moment but just popped in to say I'm not leaving, just getting things - which I really have neglected over the past 12 months or more - sorted at home. I will contribute, just not as often, for now.
I've not gone off in a huff or anything, I just need some time to heal and not have the scabs picked off as fast as they start to cover the wounds.
One thing I will do is add to the "candidates" list as and when they declare.
Back laters

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Mon 11 May, 2015 12:47 pm

PorFavor wrote:Please may we have the "thanks" button back today, if possible? This might seem silly, but I think it's part of the human contact glue which contributes to holding us together. A sort of passing smile or nod when time doesn't necessarily allow for a full response.

I'm missing it too.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 11 May, 2015 12:48 pm

PorFavor wrote:Please may we have the "thanks" button back today, if possible? This might seem silly, but I think it's part of the human contact glue which contributes to holding us together. A sort of passing smile or nod when time doesn't necessarily allow for a full response.

Please, dear darling Dan. You will save our sanity...That's if you're okay and it's doable.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Mon 11 May, 2015 12:52 pm

Thanks all for the comments. I shall be back

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 11 May, 2015 12:57 pm

@AngryAsWell

I've been listening to "Wasted Time". I'm a glutton for punishment. Some bits of it strike a chord (although I know that it's basically a love song). Take care.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Mon 11 May, 2015 12:58 pm

ephemerid wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote:IIRC HappyChickie was the simpering sycophant that used to follow Rusty around making "Oh you're so clever Mr rustinpeace" inanities. No surprise that it followed him over here to have a good gloat.

Classy...
Odd how their writing style (if one can call it that) is so similar......

There are too many trolls over there who are actually the same person. We know this. It's very tedious.

Still, they'll have a bit of fun trying to wind us up. It won't work.

They seem to have mistaken winning for being right.

There's a quote somewhere at the back of my head..... “Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it.” ― Leo Tolstoy (courtesy of google).

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Mon 11 May, 2015 12:59 pm

Labour says that 20,000 people have joined the party since Thursday night, taking the membership to 221,247. Some 60% of the new members are under 35.

(this will not be because Ed has gone, more like the way I felt after GB lost and I re-joined (after dropping out following the war) to show solidarity with the party)

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Mon 11 May, 2015 12:59 pm

HappyChickie wrote:
ephemerid wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote:IIRC HappyChickie was the simpering sycophant that used to follow Rusty around making "Oh you're so clever Mr rustinpeace" inanities. No surprise that it followed him over here to have a good gloat.

Classy...
Odd how their writing style (if one can call it that) is so similar......

There are too many trolls over there who are actually the same person. We know this. It's very tedious.

Still, they'll have a bit of fun trying to wind us up. It won't work.
Most amusing how you are all still in denial. You have convinced yourself for so long that Labour is your saviour.
I'm really looking forward to those deep swinging welfare cuts. You could always get a job delivering Labour leaflets. Just saying eh?

Have a fantastic day. I'm enjoying my immensely reading your inane rubbish. You've all seem to have lost the plot over Labour's complete and utter demise

As you were...

You presumably assume people here care about anything you actually post, a mistake you should review.

You also assume everybody here is a consumer of funds from the welfare state rather than a contributor, also something you should review.

Now with a Euro referendum to worry about and an impossible set of promises to meet I suggest you go back to working on creating a Tory magic money tree.

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Mon 11 May, 2015 1:23 pm

Written by someone who voted UKIP. Something for Labour to think about.

Note to Blair, Prescott, Mandleson and any of the other architects of the New Labour experiment.
We want TRUE Labour not New Labour. You sold millions of working class people out for your quest for power.
Your careerist, professional politicians have no understanding of the Working Class.
We want to believe, we want to value and support a movement that cares for the vast majority of folk in our country, those law abiding, honest people who just want a fair deal.
My own message to Labour is don't lurch back to an experiment that made you loose your heart, your identity and your soul. Be true to your values, be honest and hold out a protective hand to the working classes of our country

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 11 May, 2015 1:29 pm

Temulkar wrote:Written by someone who voted UKIP. Something for Labour to think about.

Note to Blair, Prescott, Mandleson and any of the other architects of the New Labour experiment.
We want TRUE Labour not New Labour. You sold millions of working class people out for your quest for power.
Your careerist, professional politicians have no understanding of the Working Class.
We want to believe, we want to value and support a movement that cares for the vast majority of folk in our country, those law abiding, honest people who just want a fair deal.
My own message to Labour is don't lurch back to an experiment that made you loose your heart, your identity and your soul. Be true to your values, be honest and hold out a protective hand to the working classes of our country

But I don't see how Ed Miliband's plans didn't meet those criteria. What didn't he do?

Edited

Crieria. Dear God . . . .

ylwnlm · Post by **ylwnlm** » Mon 11 May, 2015 1:31 pm

HappyChickie wrote:Top of the day to you nesters, and what a glorious past few days it has been. F A N T A S T I C
...

.

Well you have made it quite clear what the left is really up against. Sadism. Cruelty.

You and all your kind are a net liability to the human race.

A link which would educate you:

http://www.truthdig.com/avbooth/item/au ... s_20150509

You and your kind will perhaps be satisfied when you have destroyed the very basis of life on this planet.

UNITE AND FIGHT.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Mon 11 May, 2015 1:32 pm

Two things about this latest infestation:

1. Ignore it now
2. Delete the account now

It's not here to debate...

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 11 May, 2015 1:35 pm

PorFavor wrote:
Temulkar wrote:Written by someone who voted UKIP. Something for Labour to think about.

Note to Blair, Prescott, Mandleson and any of the other architects of the New Labour experiment.
We want TRUE Labour not New Labour. You sold millions of working class people out for your quest for power.
Your careerist, professional politicians have no understanding of the Working Class.
We want to believe, we want to value and support a movement that cares for the vast majority of folk in our country, those law abiding, honest people who just want a fair deal.
My own message to Labour is don't lurch back to an experiment that made you loose your heart, your identity and your soul. Be true to your values, be honest and hold out a protective hand to the working classes of our country
But I don't see how Ed Miliband's plans didn't meet those criteria. What didn't he do?

Edited

Crieria. Dear God . . . .

They did overlap. Which brings it to the words used, filtering of medium transmitted or the front man,or a combination thereof. Frank polling is needed.

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Mon 11 May, 2015 1:35 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:Two things about this latest infestation:

1. Ignore it now
2. Delete the account now

It's not here to debate...

I concur.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 11 May, 2015 1:36 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:Two things about this latest infestation:

1. Ignore it now
2. Delete the account now

It's not here to debate...

I think posts like that serve a useful purpose, actually. Keeps the home-fires burning. But I agree that we should ignore them. They're definitely not here for the debate.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 11 May, 2015 1:36 pm

TechnicalEphemera wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote:Two things about this latest infestation:

1. Ignore it now
2. Delete the account now

It's not here to debate...
I concur.

Ignore what?

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Mon 11 May, 2015 1:46 pm

StephenDolan wrote:
PorFavor wrote:
Temulkar wrote:Written by someone who voted UKIP. Something for Labour to think about.

Note to Blair, Prescott, Mandleson and any of the other architects of the New Labour experiment.
We want TRUE Labour not New Labour. You sold millions of working class people out for your quest for power.
Your careerist, professional politicians have no understanding of the Working Class.
We want to believe, we want to value and support a movement that cares for the vast majority of folk in our country, those law abiding, honest people who just want a fair deal.
My own message to Labour is don't lurch back to an experiment that made you loose your heart, your identity and your soul. Be true to your values, be honest and hold out a protective hand to the working classes of our country
But I don't see how Ed Miliband's plans didn't meet those criteria. What didn't he do?

Edited

Crieria. Dear God . . . .
They did overlap. Which brings it to the words used, filtering of medium transmitted or the front man,or a combination thereof. Frank polling is needed.

They're sick pf proffesional politicians, which they dont see the Fuhrage as. Labours best bet is that the grandees get down on their hands and knees and beg Dan Jarvis to stand and throw everything the party has behind him. Because he is the only one you have who will coonnect with those voters. Give him anything and everything he needs to do the job.

I like Hunt (he's hopefully reviewing my book) but him Umana, Eagle and the rest will turn off the voters you need back.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 11 May, 2015 1:46 pm

StephenDolan wrote:
TechnicalEphemera wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote:Two things about this latest infestation:

1. Ignore it now
2. Delete the account now

It's not here to debate...
I concur.
Ignore what?

Quite.

(And I take your point in your previous post. Thanks.)

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Mon 11 May, 2015 1:51 pm

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Morning all.

Very good piece by Dan Jarvis in LabourList. Sets out the problems rather better than Chuka imo.

http://labourlist.org/2015/05/im-ready- ... as-leader/

Still comes out with the guff about "aspiration" though - a bit disappointing tbh.

It was "identity" stuff which really did for Labour this time round - both sides of the border.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 11 May, 2015 1:58 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Morning all.

Very good piece by Dan Jarvis in LabourList. Sets out the problems rather better than Chuka imo.

http://labourlist.org/2015/05/im-ready- ... as-leader/
Still comes out with the guff about "aspiration" though - a bit disappointing tbh.

It was "identity" stuff which really did for Labour this time round - both sides of the border.

Care to say a little more on that, AK?

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Mon 11 May, 2015 2:02 pm

TechnicalEphemera wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:
Willow904 wrote:@SpinningHugo

You ask "How do we persuade those who voted Tory to vote for us, who is the best person to do that?"

The obvious answer to your question is that the best person to do that is a Tory.

You might want to give that some thought.

I don't agree.

If the last 5 years didn't show you the difference between an elected Labour government and the Tories, the next five is going to with bells on.
Yes I agree with that last point.

However there are a number of conflicting issues.

1. We need to get UKIP Labour back. This is a very different group from 2 (hint Chukka is toxic here).
2. We need to start to grab soft Tories including those tactically voting Lib Dems.
3. We need to re-build Labour North of the border.
4. We need to kill off the SNP contamination in England and Wales (the key reason we lost and the Lib Dems got slaughtered).

The fantasy that if only we moved rightwards business would love us and we would get our Kippers back is dangerous rubbish (The Peter Mandleson I met back in the day would have thought more deeply about this). We actually need to simultaneously face about three ways, very tricky to do. We must not appoint a London metropolitan playboy, or a failed charisma free policy wonk.

However the landscape will change in 5 years, not sure which way though. The Tories are going to make a huge number of people very poor, but the arguments will move to the right. So we need flexibility and yes we do need a bigger tent.

So we need a candidate who can address these issues, it isn't Umanna, it definitely isn't David Useless Miliband. It might have been Jarvis (the only candidate the Tories were scared of), who should be asked to reconsider.

Burnham maybe he guy, Hunt definitely is not it.

Oh and whoever wins get AC back in charge of media messaging and put in a local machine to access disengaged voters, plus do a deal with the rump of the Lib Dems because we need them to recover in the South West.

Still hoping that Stella Creasy can be persuaded to stand, tbh. And I do note that Liz Kendall refused to say yesterday that the solution to all Labour's problems was to return to the Blairite comfort zone (despite being bludgeoned to by Brillo Pad) So she might be worth watching, too......

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 11 May, 2015 2:03 pm

Temulkar wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:
PorFavor wrote: But I don't see how Ed Miliband's plans didn't meet those criteria. What didn't he do?

Edited

Crieria. Dear God . . . .
They did overlap. Which brings it to the words used, filtering of medium transmitted or the front man,or a combination thereof. Frank polling is needed.

They're sick pf proffesional politicians, which they dont see the Fuhrage as. Labours best bet is that the grandees get down on their hands and knees and beg Dan Jarvis to stand and throw everything the party has behind him. Because he is the only one you have who will coonnect with those voters. Give him anything and everything he needs to do the job.

I like Hunt (he's hopefully reviewing my book) but him Umana, Eagle and the rest will turn off the voters you need back.

Yes, but to get away with persuading people that you're not a professional politician when you are one (which Nigel Farage quite patently is) you need the collusion of the press.

And as I've said before - there are career politicians and there are conviction politicians whose convictions have led them into a career in politics. I concede that we need more of those latter. But "amateurs" won't be of much use.

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Mon 11 May, 2015 2:04 pm

NonOxCol wrote:Lord Sugar never, ever convinced me he belonged in the Labour party. I'd like to thank him for revealing his woefully narrow view of politics and its purpose. Now go away and enjoy your poxy little sinecure on publicly-funded television, with your equally ignorant Tory peer by your side.

His political sincerity isn't exactly reinforced by his other recent tweets:
Lord Sugar@ Lord_Sugar 1h
I have resigned today from the Labour party. Full statement here...

Lord Sugar retweeted
Dr Leah@ DrLeahTotton 4h
Dr Leah Clinic awarded "Best Cellulite Treatment" by OK! Magazine. 10% OFF CELLULITE
REDUCTION THIS MONTH ONLY

and (my favourite)

Lord Sugar
@ Lord_Sugar
16h
We have won twice . All you have won is twat of the year award . twitter.com/piersmorgan/

Damn, didn't realise nominations had closed,
Wonder who other runners up were.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 11 May, 2015 2:06 pm

John Rentoul ‏@JohnRentoul 6m6 minutes ago
Catch-Up Service: Everyone accepts Labour's next leader must be a Blairite @IndyVoices http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/com ... 40321.html …

I'm not going to read it ...

How long will this tired, out of date, one-note message continue to be peddled? Thank goodness we've got OMOV in this time. And isn't it ironic that the reform designed to lessen the unions' say in choice of leader because they supposedly put the 'wrong' leader in place ... the one the parliamentary party didn't want ... might this time round still deliver someone other than the one the parliamentary party want if the members don't toe what seems to be the media's version of the PLP line?

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Mon 11 May, 2015 2:07 pm

Temulkar wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:
PorFavor wrote: But I don't see how Ed Miliband's plans didn't meet those criteria. What didn't he do?

Edited

Crieria. Dear God . . . .
They did overlap. Which brings it to the words used, filtering of medium transmitted or the front man,or a combination thereof. Frank polling is needed.

They're sick pf proffesional politicians, which they dont see the Fuhrage as. Labours best bet is that the grandees get down on their hands and knees and beg Dan Jarvis to stand and throw everything the party has behind him. Because he is the only one you have who will coonnect with those voters. Give him anything and everything he needs to do the job.

I like Hunt (he's hopefully reviewing my book) but him Umana, Eagle and the rest will turn off the voters you need back.

Hi Tem, I couldn't agree more on Jarvis.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Mon 11 May, 2015 2:08 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Morning all.

Very good piece by Dan Jarvis in LabourList. Sets out the problems rather better than Chuka imo.

http://labourlist.org/2015/05/im-ready- ... as-leader/
Still comes out with the guff about "aspiration" though - a bit disappointing tbh.

It was "identity" stuff which really did for Labour this time round - both sides of the border.
Care to say a little more on that, AK?

Fairly simple, innit. Crosby and the captive Tory press played off English nationalism against Scottish nationalism - with devastating effects both sides of Hadrian's Wall.

Blairite wonkery and smooth lifelong career politicians will not address this.

What will is community based politics and values, authenticity and sincerity.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 11 May, 2015 2:15 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote: Still comes out with the guff about "aspiration" though - a bit disappointing tbh.

It was "identity" stuff which really did for Labour this time round - both sides of the border.
Care to say a little more on that, AK?
Fairly simple, innit. Crosby and the captive Tory press played off English nationalism against Scottish nationalism - with devastating effects both sides of Hadrian's Wall.

Blairite wonkery and smooth lifelong career politicians will not address this.

What will is community based politics and values, authenticity and sincerity.

Thank you. I thought you most likely meant nationalism. And I agree entirely with your last sentence.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Mon 11 May, 2015 2:19 pm

Temulkar wrote:Written by someone who voted UKIP. Something for Labour to think about.

Note to Blair, Prescott, Mandleson and any of the other architects of the New Labour experiment.
We want TRUE Labour not New Labour. You sold millions of working class people out for your quest for power.
Your careerist, professional politicians have no understanding of the Working Class.
We want to believe, we want to value and support a movement that cares for the vast majority of folk in our country, those law abiding, honest people who just want a fair deal.
My own message to Labour is don't lurch back to an experiment that made you loose your heart, your identity and your soul. Be true to your values, be honest and hold out a protective hand to the working classes of our country

You can doubtless point to lots of parties in Europe currently thriving by doing what you want?

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 11 May, 2015 2:29 pm

Kerry McCarthy ‏@KerryMP 4m4 minutes ago
Travelled to London with the new Bristol MPs & bumped into 4 new SNP MPs at Paddington. Please to hear that SNP firmly opposes fox hunting.

So am I. Given that quite a few Conservatives oppose it as well ... Cameron might have a tougher fight on his hand to reintroduce it. If the SNP are involved in any vote that is. Cameron will try and ensure they aren't.

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Mon 11 May, 2015 2:29 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Temulkar wrote:Written by someone who voted UKIP. Something for Labour to think about.

Note to Blair, Prescott, Mandleson and any of the other architects of the New Labour experiment.
We want TRUE Labour not New Labour. You sold millions of working class people out for your quest for power.
Your careerist, professional politicians have no understanding of the Working Class.
We want to believe, we want to value and support a movement that cares for the vast majority of folk in our country, those law abiding, honest people who just want a fair deal.
My own message to Labour is don't lurch back to an experiment that made you loose your heart, your identity and your soul. Be true to your values, be honest and hold out a protective hand to the working classes of our country
You can doubtless point to lots of parties in Europe currently thriving by doing what you want?

It's not really anything to do with what I want. Eco-socialist groups are doing well across the EU, so... I have more personal interest in our own election for speaker next year. I merely thought that the opinion of a kipper towards labour might be interesting to Labour supporters. Given how many votes you lost to them.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Mon 11 May, 2015 2:30 pm

Bringing back fox hunting is not going to pass on a free HoC vote, that is virtually a certainty.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 11 May, 2015 2:33 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Bringing back fox hunting is not going to pass on a free HoC vote, that is virtually a certainty.

There's no such thing as certainty.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 11 May, 2015 2:34 pm

Temulkar wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Temulkar wrote:Written by someone who voted UKIP. Something for Labour to think about.

Note to Blair, Prescott, Mandleson and any of the other architects of the New Labour experiment.
We want TRUE Labour not New Labour. You sold millions of working class people out for your quest for power.
Your careerist, professional politicians have no understanding of the Working Class.
We want to believe, we want to value and support a movement that cares for the vast majority of folk in our country, those law abiding, honest people who just want a fair deal.
My own message to Labour is don't lurch back to an experiment that made you loose your heart, your identity and your soul. Be true to your values, be honest and hold out a protective hand to the working classes of our country
You can doubtless point to lots of parties in Europe currently thriving by doing what you want?
It's not really anything to do with what I want. Eco-socialist groups are doing well across the EU, so... I have more personal interest in our own election for speaker next year. I merely thought that the opinion of a kipper towards labour might be interesting to Labour supporters. Given how many votes you lost to them.

It is to me. And I've noted it.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Mon 11 May, 2015 2:40 pm

Lovely to see you Temulkar - and what you posted!

This is part of the problem - Labour is not seen as "Old" Labour by many. Me included.
But the upper echelons have to work out if they would lose the Blairite "aspirational" vote by getting the old voters back.

Personally, I think that it is a gamble either way - and I think Ed lost voters because he was seen as more of the same, people didn't buy the "Red Ed" thing, and that's because Labour worked hard to get rid of that. They thought it was not appealing.

The difficulty now is what do the voters want? I have no idea.
It would appear that despite not liking tuition fees, they voted for more; despite being generally anti-privatisation of the NHS, they voted for more and saying now that they wanted a return to "Old" Labour when they actually voted for the antithesis is just bizarre.

For 5 years, the Tories have perpetuated the myth that Labour caused the crash, that Labour spent more on benefits, that Labour did this that and the other, that the EU rules this country, etc.etc. - and most of it is manifestly untrue. How can the voters believe that and think the Tories will be better for them? They won't. The working class vote, the sort of person Tem quotes here, is not going to benefit from a Tory government. How they can think this is beyond me, and I have no idea how to deal with it.

I would like to see Labour go left - very left - and try to form a grand coalition with the Greens, the TUSC, NHA party, and what's left of the LibDems. Somehow I don't think that will happen, partly because the parties involved (all of them) won't be willing to compromise, and because I think the higher-ups in Labour will go along with that prat Blair and continue to be Tories with red ties as it worked before.

Change has to come from the grass roots. It's the only way. We'll see who the membership chooses as the new leader - that will give us an idea of the direction of travel. If it's a PPE/SPAD clone, or a Blairite-type, Labour can say goodbye to my membership - repeating the same mistake over and over again will be hopeless. The Tories will get their boundary changes in, there will be fewer seats for Labour to contest in England, and unless Labour finds a way to get its mojo back we'll be stuck with the bloody Tories forever.

To all - I'm willing to do some FTN Tweeting.
Someone will have to show me how to do it with the FTN account (I'm quite active on my own account) and show me how to do the links and what not (I'm useless at it). Do I need permission to quote names/posts etc. all that sort of stuff.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 11 May, 2015 2:57 pm

PorFavor wrote:
Temulkar wrote:Written by someone who voted UKIP. Something for Labour to think about.

Note to Blair, Prescott, Mandleson and any of the other architects of the New Labour experiment.
We want TRUE Labour not New Labour. You sold millions of working class people out for your quest for power.
Your careerist, professional politicians have no understanding of the Working Class.
We want to believe, we want to value and support a movement that cares for the vast majority of folk in our country, those law abiding, honest people who just want a fair deal.
My own message to Labour is don't lurch back to an experiment that made you loose your heart, your identity and your soul. Be true to your values, be honest and hold out a protective hand to the working classes of our country
But I don't see how Ed Miliband's plans didn't meet those criteria. What didn't he do?

Edited

Crieria. Dear God . . . .

Thanked.

Given that we're in Europe I don't see how much further Ed could have gone on Imigration.
Stopping employers hiring direct from abroad would have helped a lot. As would getting rid of ZH.
Building massive numbers of council or HA houses would solve the bad feelings about council houses being taken by imigrants and single mothers. Would also have created a lot of unskilled jobs.

I'm working class and housing and job losses to imigrants can and does cause ill feeling. I hear it all the time.
Pandering to them won't make them faithful voters though.
I swear it'll only be those two things that made them vote UKIP, because everything else Farage came up with would work against them if they thought about it.
If they had a decency gene in their body they'd not have voted UKIP in the first place. They're spiteful, mean spirited and vengeful. Where once you'd only get a hint of their bigotry, since the rise of UKIP, they're in your face with it.
I know a few and these days try to avoid them if possible. Many would be BNP if they had the nerve. As it is, UKIP is the perfect home for them because [especially thanks to the BBC] UKIP is a tad more socially acceptable.

I can guarantee they haven't given a thought to what happens if we come out of the EU. And they'd never have been happy with the length of time taken to get the housing etc off the ground.

Farage gave them a voice. That's all......

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 11 May, 2015 3:00 pm

Why it’s OK to cry about this election
Rhiannon Lucy Cosslett
Emotion is derided as a weakness of the left, but many of us have loved ones likely to suffer under the Tories – or simply feel empathy for those who will
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... es-empathy

This probably comes closest to articulating where I have been with this result - and still am. Read it - it's good.

I haven't been able to weep properly yet - although close to it most of the time. When I finally let go it will probably be because I allow myself to let in the certainty of mass slaughter of wildlife and their habitats - and how little, if anything, I will be able to do about it now or in the future.

We - and many people I know - will suffer more under the Tories. I wish I could shut off the part of me that knows and cares about that - but I can't.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 11 May, 2015 3:05 pm

Met police taking hundreds to hospital after ambulances fail to arrive on time

http://gu.com/p/48axq

Still safe in their hands....

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 11 May, 2015 3:06 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Why it’s OK to cry about this election
Rhiannon Lucy Cosslett
Emotion is derided as a weakness of the left, but many of us have loved ones likely to suffer under the Tories – or simply feel empathy for those who will
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... es-empathy
This probably comes closest to articulating where I have been with this result - and still am. Read it - it's good.

I haven't been able to weep properly yet - although close to it most of the time. When I finally let go it will probably be because I allow myself to let in the certainty of mass slaughter of wildlife and their habitats - and how little, if anything, I will be able to do about it now or in the future.

We - and many people I know - will suffer more under the Tories. I wish I could shut off the part of me that knows and cares about that - but I can't.

I haven't actually cried. At least not in my conscious moments - although I get a bit lip trembly. But I do know that I've been crying in my sleep. I've never felt like this before. I went through the Neil Kinnock thing and John Smith's death. But neither touched this level of despair.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Mon 11 May, 2015 3:09 pm

Ed didn't lose us votes.
Just listened (well a while ago) to Olli Grenda (SP?) on the radio, LibDems have already done their analysis (fewer voter base to look at) and conclude the last ditch letter sent on the day before polling to all marginal seats (not sure if she meant just LibDem marginals, that needs investigating) clinched it for the torys. In it he pleaded that the SNP would have such a hold over Labour that (virtually) the whole world would collapse. They have already made voter contact and that letter was the over whelming reason given by those voters (who had already committed to vote LibDem during the campaign) changing at the last minute was fear of the SNP.
Perhaps Labour should contact the LibDem and pool inquest enquires. We need to know if that letter went out to all marginals.
We were expecting a dirty last ditch dirt throwing, but didn't expect it to land such a direct hit on marginal seats.
Two more tory voters I've spoken to both said they couldn't risk the SNP holding power over Labour. So that's three I've spoken to. I don't know any more to ask.