Wednesday 14th October 2015

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 12:54 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Consensus seem to be that Corbyn did pretty OK?

Hard to say. I'm watching it right now and Cameron is certainly getting pretty red and shouty. The calm from last time hasn't lasted long. My husband thinks Corbyn looks like a geography teacher and there were a couple of looks from him today towards trouble makers on the government benches which were very teacher like, as he waited for enough quiet to continue. The most noticeable difference is that Cameron has to be careful with put downs and jokes when questions are coming from the public. It's put a stop to "I won't be lectured by the party that..." at least.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 12:57 pm

refitman wrote:Oh FFS. From Peter Kellner:
I fear that an excessively courteous PMQs would go the way of Liaison Committee meetings: civilised, but little noticed. The biggest single reason why PMQ attracts so much attention is that it is often dramatic. And it is usually dramatic precisely because it is raw and rumbustious – or, in the words of our question for the Hansard Society, ‘noisy and aggressive’.
It would only become "little noticed" if the media stopped reporting on it, not if it was more polite.

Yes - first he says it's an improvement (the figures show increased approval and interest) and then he says it will lose the interest of the public. (Although we're always being told that hardly anyone (general public-wise) is interested in PMQs anyway.) He seems a bit miffed at the survey's results.

Anyway, I thought the press had some sort of duty to report on the workings of government regardless of how exciting, or otherwise, they might find them. Or are they all merely sensation-seekers now and want everything served up to them on a plate? If PMQs is conducted in a "civilised" way they won't have access to instant, lazy headlines and might have to do some actual journalism.

(Personally, I'd consider David Cameron giving a straight answer to a question sensational head-line news.)

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 12:58 pm

As they say in reponse to your last point - zing!

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 1:05 pm

I have just discovered that a reporter on Sky has compared Jeremy Corbyn negatively to a supply geography teacher. I'd just like to clarify that I think geography teachers are cool and my husband's comparison was a compliment - he thought people would be more inclined to trust and respect him because he resembled a favourite teacher from school.

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 1:07 pm

Blimey when I look at pig-fucker spouting on about tax credits and dismissing in work poverty why is it that I see a millionaire who was more than happy to claim DLA for his young child? I appreciate that it is not a means tested benefit and that there are many that really depend on it, nevertheless when my wife and I were told to claim it for our own child from the age of two we just couldn't. She was our child and our responsibility but even so we were not in anything like the position that the Cameron's found themselves in.

I was a struggling small businessman who often put his staff before his own needs and had also had to cope with my wife's ill health, her having been in hospital for some months following the birth of our third child. Granted, as I have said before, we did claim her DLA a year or so after my late wife suffered a stroke but for the life of me cannot comprehend a man that makes such claims in his position yet goes on to deny others in far more serious or precarious situations their assistance. He thoroughly sickens me, even moreso than putting his dick in a pig's mouth.

I'm not sure that I can return to PMQs just now... a change of scenery is in order I think.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 1:16 pm

Peter Jukes ‏@peterjukes 49m49 minutes ago
So it turns out that this week-long onslaught against @tom_watson was based on one unreliable source. A WMD moment for the British media

Brian M A ‏@brianma68 11m11 minutes ago
@peterjukes @Sunnyclaribel @tom_watson What's the name of this source?

Allegedly a police officer, Jukes names him.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 1:29 pm

Clegg, as infuriating as ever.
It wasn't what he did that did for the Lib Dems, it was where he sat

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 93196.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 1:33 pm

yahyah wrote:Peter Jukes ‏@peterjukes 49m49 minutes ago
So it turns out that this week-long onslaught against @tom_watson was based on one unreliable source. A WMD moment for the British media

Brian M A ‏@brianma68 11m11 minutes ago
@peterjukes @Sunnyclaribel @tom_watson What's the name of this source?

Allegedly a police officer, Jukes names him.

Oh, I do eagerly await Nick Cohen's response to this

Watson is, indeed, quite easy to dislike. That does not mean that he is wrong.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 1:42 pm

That photograph (Politics Live, Guardian,13.33) of David Cameron with another, facing, of Jeremy Corbyn: Has DC not got his teeth in today?

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 1:43 pm

There won't be a response though.

The media seem more interested in whether it is racist to make a joke about why Mrs Hunt bothers with Britain, or sexist to say someone looks like Thatcher.

Nick Cohen got his re-tweets, all will be well in his over-paid world.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 1:46 pm

PorFavor wrote:That photograph (Politics Live, Guardian,13.33) of David Cameron with another, facing, of Jeremy Corbyn: Has DC not got his teeth in today?

Looks inky, as if he's been chewing on a biro.

nickyinnorfolk · Post by **nickyinnorfolk** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 1:53 pm

yahyah wrote:Clegg, as infuriating as ever.
It wasn't what he did that did for the Lib Dems, it was where he sat

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 93196.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Most of the comments are spot on about the LibDems' destruction being much less to do with seeing Clegg sitting next to Cameron at PMQs than with their supine role in the Coalition government. Someone said his biggest regret should have been not pissing in Cameron's tea after he'd made it.

I heard Clegg on WATO not long after the last election - I expected him to sound vaguely contrite, but instead he was bragging about LibDem membership going up

and *still* slagging off Labour. It was astonishingly appalling. What a weird and deluded specimen he is.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 1:54 pm

@yahyah

I hadn't noticed that one! I was referring to the one that accompanies Jason Beattie's "Tweet". (Sorry - I can't do "screengrabs" - if that's the right term.)

Edited

To move a (bracket related) full stop.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 1:54 pm

James Forsyth ✔ @JGForsyth
One feature of this new PMQs is that Cameron takes out his pent up aggression on the SNP's Angus Robertson when he asks his two questions

That'll probably be something that Murdoch brokered between Cameron & St Sturgeon.
Makes Cameron look tough and gives the cybernats something to moan about.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 1:56 pm

PorFavor wrote:@yahyah

I hadn't noticed that one! I was referring to the one that accompanies Jason Beattie's "Tweet". (Sorry - I can't do "screengrabs" - if that's the right term).

This looks like the one.

nickyinnorfolk · Post by **nickyinnorfolk** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 1:59 pm

Haven't seen PMQs yet, but it sounds as if JC did well - particularly in following up his questions. I'll watch it whilst muting Cameron for the sake of my blood pressure.

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 2:00 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:Good day all. Thought I'd poke my head back in despite yesterday as it seems that the issue is perhaps more misunderstanding than genuine disagreement. I am in great despair these days, and this may be clouding both my communcation and my understanding of others. I see the matter is being discussed this morning, which is good.

So here's where I am. The election of Corbyn has, to my mind, demonstrated a very great thirst for something different (of the kind that Nigel Farage has been able to benefit from, and even Nick Clegg mined successfully prior to 2010 before proving his own point about politics spectacularly by shafting everyone who had bought into it). The way the media and the establishment has responded to this shows, as I see it, that they are not prepared to accept something different. I don't see why a newly elected leader of a major political party can't have a bit of time to set out his stall and settle into the job, nor do I see why his ideas should not receive a fair hearing and reasoned discussion of their merits. It is clear that this is not something the media is willing to do, and I can't help but feel that this proves that the media in this country is neither free nor interested in objectivity.

In short, this isn't the ordinary case of a leader being elected to a party. This is a debate about whether the country is willing to accept politics as it has been done for the last few decades, or change into something more inclusive, less polished, more about ideas and less about narrative.

So for this reason I think criticism of Corbyn isn't the same as criticism of any other party leader, even Ed, who was after all part of the establishment of the Labour Party, and wasn't brought to the leadership on a groundswell of popular sentiment against the wishes of the few who say what's allowed and what isn't. I'm not saying this means there should be no criticism. I'm not sure what I am saying. But a lot of criticism is driven by people who want things to stay the same, the way things have been arranged to suit the interests of the few, and I can't help feeling that repeating and discussing criticism that's framed in that way only helps the existing establishment. Look at the spat over women in 'top roles'. Literally no-one cared about the relative statuses of cabinet posts as established in the 18th century bar a few Westminster correspondents - but within hours of Corbyn beginning to pick his cabinet the media had leftwing feminists tearing Corbyn a new arsehole, despite the fact that he was appointing far more women to more significant roles than Cameron ever has. Even Cameron has never had a woman in any other of these 'top roles' than Theresa May, in the Home Office post that no-one seems to have noticed is distinctly less powerful since the Justice brief was split from it, and has managed to sack most of the women he did put in cabinet posts - yet apart from the occasional bit of chin-scratching about Cameron's 'woman problem' he has been given an easy ride over it. You might say Corbyn has presented the media with open goals. I'm not sure about this. A lot of the issues feel trivial, and surely if it weren't for them, it would be something else. The alternative would be for the leadership to become so timid they never say or do anything.

Then there's the 'he's doing what we want but not how we want him to do it' meme - people claim to want Labour to be a grassroots movement as much as a party, and want Corbyn to offer strong opposition, but complain when something like Momentum gets set up. I don't get this.

I don't have much time for the 'we're doomed, Corbyn's a disaster' view. Maybe that's true, but repeating it endlessly only destroys the morale of those who are trying to make the best of things. Those people may want rid of Corbyn, which is their right but it doesn't say much for their respect for the party they claim to support. All I'd say about that is, there are probably better places than here to make the point.

This is all circular. I have a point and I don't seem to be able to make it. It feels as though people are picking over important stuff elsewhere in the garden while powerful forces attempt to stamp a delicate seedling that might actually change things. It's probably pointless anyway, but I'd like to see the seedling at least given a chance. We basically have a boot on our throats, but the pressure is kept light unless we try to get out from under it. It feels as though some are arguing for a softer sole rather than the removal of the boot. Not necessarily fiddling while Rome burns, but not running for water either. This is what gets me down.

Nice to see you, to see you, nice!

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 2:02 pm

nickyinnorfolk wrote:Haven't seen PMQs yet, but it sounds as if JC did well - particularly in following up his questions. I'll watch it whilst muting Cameron for the sake of my blood pressure.

The Independent seemed quite impressed...the Guardian, in the form of Twat Sparrow, less so but then quelle surprise!

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 2:04 pm

There will be better days RS, both for you personally and more generally. In the meantime, just keep going the best you can.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 2:09 pm

Don't be hard on yourself Rob. You are making a point, and it is one well worth reading.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 2:10 pm

@yahyah

Thanks for the pitcher!

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 2:15 pm

My husband's been a supporter of Halifax Town since knee high to his mill worker dad.
The sort of patience needed for that comes in handy at times like this, watching the new Labour team find their feet.

NonOxCol · Post by **NonOxCol** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 2:16 pm

From a comment on Politics Live:

"Interesting news from Lord Gnome today.

The Graun's political editor Patrick Wintour is soon to move on and the new editor is keen to replace him with a woman, Allegra Stratton has been mentioned.

Wintour's natural replacement, Nicholas Watt, the paper's chief political correspondent is naturally a bit miffed and has made it clear that if he doesn't get the job he will resign."

As amusing as it might be to contemplate Watt's resignation, is there even the tiniest hint there that the Guardian is aware of how much it has already pissed off left-leaning readers?

A bit of all-too-familiar tokenism and the possibility of Allegra Stratton replacing Wintour.

Genius response.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 2:23 pm

Speaking of crap journalists . . . .

MichaelWhite @MichaelWhite

#PMQs This week's score. Well, no great substance or drama, but Corbyn kept his dignity & Cam was civil. So let's call it 3 all.Can it last?
12:47 PM - 14 Oct 2015 (Politics Live, Guardian - my emphasis)

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 2:26 pm

TobyLatimer wrote:I missed this little exchange yesterday. I love Dennis in Beast mode to bits, but Soubry is hard faced as they come too.with barrister training. Was it really sexist to say "She even looks like Thatcher"?

[youtube]7HsYL2zQO4g[/youtube]

I think Dennis came off best out of that exchange. Soubry set out to embarrass him but, to me, ended up simply embarrassing herself.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 2:28 pm

refitman wrote:Oh FFS. From Peter Kellner:
I fear that an excessively courteous PMQs would go the way of Liaison Committee meetings: civilised, but little noticed. The biggest single reason why PMQ attracts so much attention is that it is often dramatic. And it is usually dramatic precisely because it is raw and rumbustious – or, in the words of our question for the Hansard Society, ‘noisy and aggressive’.
It would only become "little noticed" if the media stopped reporting on it, not if it was more polite.

I think if PMQs as we know it goes away completely, then something is lost. It does take down the PM down a notch by having lots of people hooting at his bullshit on the news.

But we need something more like a select committee too. The media don't bother with those, do they? Even though they were often good in the last parliament.

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 2:33 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
refitman wrote:Oh FFS. From Peter Kellner:
I fear that an excessively courteous PMQs would go the way of Liaison Committee meetings: civilised, but little noticed. The biggest single reason why PMQ attracts so much attention is that it is often dramatic. And it is usually dramatic precisely because it is raw and rumbustious – or, in the words of our question for the Hansard Society, ‘noisy and aggressive’.
It would only become "little noticed" if the media stopped reporting on it, not if it was more polite.
I think if PMQs as we know it goes away completely, then something is lost. It does take down the PM down a notch by having lots of people hooting at his bullshit on the news.

But we need something more like a select committee too. The media don't bother with those, do they? Even though they were often good in the last parliament.

But the news always portrayed him in a good light - you had to watch it all to get a sense of his incompetence

We cannot have it all ways, complain of the yah boo and then complain when it is more civilised!

Anyway PMQ doesn't really matter that much - Hague used to beat Blair at it a lot and it did him no good

Corbin bringing more gravitas may be a help in the long run...and it may actually mean Cameron starts to get frustrated and he is then more likely to lose his rag. As said on Sparrow's blog - it is much more difficult for him to slag off the questions now when it comes from the public - and he has all this pent up anger within him - it is bound to explode inappropriately at some point - that may make tv!

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 2:42 pm

Sean BiggerstaffVerified account ‏@Seanchuckle 32m32 minutes ago
Re Corbyn/Cameron. Why do you get ridiculed for looking like a geography teacher but not for looking like a colossal arsehole?

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 2:46 pm

McTurdman is suggesting someone, but only one should stand against Corbyn for leader at next year's conference.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... -step.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 2:52 pm

howsillyofme1 wrote:

But the news always portrayed him in a good light - you had to watch it all to get a sense of his incompetence

We cannot have it all ways, complain of the yah boo and then complain when it is more civilised!

Anyway PMQ doesn't really matter that much - Hague used to beat Blair at it a lot and it did him no good

Corbin bringing more gravitas may be a help in the long run...and it may actually mean Cameron starts to get frustrated and he is then more likely to lose his rag. As said on Sparrow's blog - it is much more difficult for him to slag off the questions now when it comes from the public - and he has all this pent up anger within him - it is bound to explode inappropriately at some point - that may make tv!

I wasn't complaining.

Sometimes it'll be necessary to get stuck in to Cameron in the old style. Sometimes the current Corbyn approach works well, and I've praised him for the innovation. The idea of other shadow cabinet members leading is good too.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 2:53 pm

Was McTernan ever elected to anything himself ? Let alone a win like Corbyn's.

& wasn't he involved with helping Jim 'Get Ed' Murphy in Scotland, look how well that turned out for Labour. So why does anyone pay him to ~~write crap~~, tell Labour what to do now ?

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 2:56 pm

TobyLatimer wrote:McTurdman is suggesting someone, but only one should stand against Corbyn for leader at next year's conference.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... -step.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This John McTernan? The John McTernan who was "Chief of Staff to the 2014–2015 leader of the Scottish Labour Party, Jim Murphy, who resigned after the Labour Party lost all but one seat in Scotland, including Murphy's, in the 2015 general election"?

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 2:56 pm

Laura KuenssbergVerified account ‏@bbclaurak 17m17 minutes ago
Boss of Fire Brigade Union, Matt Wrack says Lab MPs who don't like Corbyn should "wind your neck in and shut up" - recipe for harmony...

She's worried she won't have anything to smirk about if Labour present a unified front.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 3:00 pm

nickyinnorfolk wrote:
yahyah wrote:Clegg, as infuriating as ever.
It wasn't what he did that did for the Lib Dems, it was where he sat

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 93196.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Most of the comments are spot on about the LibDems' destruction being much less to do with seeing Clegg sitting next to Cameron at PMQs than with their supine role in the Coalition government. Someone said his biggest regret should have been not pissing in Cameron's tea after he'd made it.

I heard Clegg on WATO not long after the last election - I expected him to sound vaguely contrite, but instead he was bragging about LibDem membership going up and *still* slagging off Labour. It was astonishingly appalling. What a weird and deluded specimen he is.

Clegg's whole vision for his party was wrong. He never seemed to ask himself- "Who's going to vote for this stuff?" He came into the Coalition with a big following among young people, pissed this away, while one of his own party (Steve Webb) shored up the Tory pensioner vote.

He ended up with an economically very right wing party who were a bit liberal. Which is the sort of image Cameron projects anyway.

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 3:00 pm

I was reading in the same rag one of Hodges recent contributions, in which he told us how nice IDS is, thoroughly good chap that one - Dan even had tea with him which made him realise what a pleasant good egg Smiffy is.

I wonder if Glenda ever rebukes him in private, she tore IDS to shreds in the chamber last year she was equally hard in W&P committee .

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 3:01 pm

PorFavor wrote:
TobyLatimer wrote:McTurdman is suggesting someone, but only one should stand against Corbyn for leader at next year's conference.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... -step.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This John McTernan? The John McTernan who was "Chief of Staff to the 2014–2015 leader of the Scottish Labour Party, Jim Murphy, who resigned after the Labour Party lost all but one seat in Scotland, including Murphy's, in the 2015 general election"?

The very same. And the same as this John McTernan too

During 2012–13, while McTernan was director of communications to the Australian prime minister, Julia Gillard, a political scandal erupted over his employment. Accusations were made that Gillard had not attempted to find a suitable Australian candidate for the director of communications post, but had flouted Australia's visa process to employ John McTernan, a British citizen, on a 457 visa – a foreign workers scheme which is designed for employers who cannot find local candidates to fill jobs.[14] When a reporter from Australia's ABC News asked McTernan if he was working in Australia on a 457 Visa, he replied "hardly fucking relevant"

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 3:05 pm

Willow904 wrote:
refitman wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:It's probably not Skinner's best line but the accusation of sexism is borderline in my view. He's hardly suggesting that it's because she's a woman that she wants to close steelworks.
Sounds like Political Correctness Gone Mad to me.
I have no idea if it's sexist, but it made me laugh, and that's a rare thing in politics these days. We are becoming more like the USA with the doom and gloom siege mentality of the media, where every wobble is a disaster. Ties in with the Monbiot piece linked earlier. People are basically nice but the media tells us everyone else is selfish and nasty and our response is to look to ourselves and batten down the hatches and, in extreme cases, vote Tory to protect what little we have from the (media invented) nasty, greedy people, not realising it's the Tories themselves that are the threat, not immigrants/lefties/Scottish nationlists/benefit claimants/disabled/public sector workers etc.

Mr. Speaker pointed out that he had not heard any sexist comment - and my lip-reading is not good (if the camera was even on Skinner at the time) so I'd be interested to see whether or not anyone has identified what on earth it was that Soubry cried 'sexism' upon.

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 3:09 pm

yahyah wrote:Laura KuenssbergVerified account ‏@bbclaurak 17m17 minutes ago
Boss of Fire Brigade Union, Matt Wrack says Lab MPs who don't like Corbyn should "wind your neck in and shut up" - recipe for harmony...

She's worried she won't have anything to smirk about if Labour present a unified front.

Thing is he is right...I probably would have phrased it differently but it is time some of them shut up and did go in for a big of neck winding!

That does not mean that sensible constructive criticism and advice should be ignored but this running to the Tory press every day is what needs to stop

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 3:11 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
howsillyofme1 wrote:

But the news always portrayed him in a good light - you had to watch it all to get a sense of his incompetence

We cannot have it all ways, complain of the yah boo and then complain when it is more civilised!

Anyway PMQ doesn't really matter that much - Hague used to beat Blair at it a lot and it did him no good

Corbin bringing more gravitas may be a help in the long run...and it may actually mean Cameron starts to get frustrated and he is then more likely to lose his rag. As said on Sparrow's blog - it is much more difficult for him to slag off the questions now when it comes from the public - and he has all this pent up anger within him - it is bound to explode inappropriately at some point - that may make tv!
I wasn't complaining.

Sometimes it'll be necessary to get stuck in to Cameron in the old style. Sometimes the current Corbyn approach works well, and I've praised him for the innovation. The idea of other shadow cabinet members leading is good too.

I agree completely with what you have said there but it didn't come across in that way in your first comment

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 3:17 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
PorFavor wrote:
This John McTernan? The John McTernan who was "Chief of Staff to the 2014–2015 leader of the Scottish Labour Party, Jim Murphy, who resigned after the Labour Party lost all but one seat in Scotland, including Murphy's, in the 2015 general election"?
The very same. And the same as this John McTernan too

During 2012–13, while McTernan was director of communications to the Australian prime minister, Julia Gillard, a political scandal erupted over his employment. Accusations were made that Gillard had not attempted to find a suitable Australian candidate for the director of communications post, but had flouted Australia's visa process to employ John McTernan, a British citizen, on a 457 visa – a foreign workers scheme which is designed for employers who cannot find local candidates to fill jobs.[14] When a reporter from Australia's ABC News asked McTernan if he was working in Australia on a 457 Visa, he replied "hardly fucking relevant"
Now *that's* a shambles with your media strategy.

Doubtless the problem was blamed on people not getting behind the leader.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 3:23 pm

@TobyLatimer

It was the making of a film "Tea with Smitholini"

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 3:26 pm

''Meanwhile, McTernan appeared to revel in his status as Murphy's top dog.
Under Johann Lamont, the then general secretary Ian Price had occupied the sole private office in the party's Bath Street headquarters. With Murphy in charge, McTernan got the office, while new general secretary Brian Roy used a desk in the open-plan area.

McTernan was also unpopular among some colleagues at Holyrood and acquired a reputation for making bold statements that were rarely borne out by reality.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/1321 ... from_hell/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It was said he claimed that Sturgeon would struggle in the first UK leaders' debate, and announced that an event by Gordon Brown in Margaret Curran's constituency would have a big effect on the campaign. In the end, Sturgeon shone in London and the Brown press conference sank without trace. One source said McTernan had two modes: nice guy or wannabe Malcolm Tucker.''

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 3:27 pm

HindleA wrote:@TobyLatimer

It was the making of a film "Tea with Smitholini"

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 3:27 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
RobertSnozers wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote: The very same. And the same as this John McTernan too

Now *that's* a shambles with your media strategy.
Doubtless the problem was blamed on people not getting behind the leader.

Well it is partly true as there were a number of Labor MPs only too happy to suck on Murdoch's teat, but I do not think that Corbyn has done anything comparable has he?

He can be rightly questioned whether he has a robust enough media presence but as I said earlier he has only been in the job a few months - and he has not exactly been planning his leadership for years has he?

Also, I repeat myself here again. The true shambles of Labour media strategy was post the 2010 election when there was a complete lack of any challenge to the Tory and Lib Dem lies about the reasons for the economy being in crisis and that cost us the 2015 election more than anything else....who was to blame then...perhaps Liam Byrne for writing that stupid note, perhaps Darling for completely walking away after the election, perhaps Brown, perhaps Harman

You can also argue that Harman made a complete mess of the post election communication 2015 - the shambles over the welfare bill, the inexplicable decision to appoint that fud Leslie as Shadow Chancellor and then you had all the neoliberals running around slagging off Ed and preparing the ground for the Second Coming

None of this was due to Corbyn

Labour has had poor media strategies since Campbell was about - and that was in a period when he had a far easier situation to manage

There have been mistakes but there has been no vacuum and I do not think things have been as one-sided as the press would try to make you believe.....

There is some part of the communication from Corbyn that worked - the fact that Labour is adding thousands of new members a week at the moment.

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 3:32 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Temulkar's posts were sobering reading yesterday. I wouldn't go quite as far as him tbh, but these are high stakes times politically speaking at the moment.

One of my main objections to much of the MSM and the anti-Jez "usual suspects" within Labour is that they come across as so fundamentally frivolous and unserious.

It really *is* just a game to them......

Ah well the thing about revolutionary change is its a bit like the Spanish Inquisition.

On a serious note, we are still very much in the midst of the financial crisis. 2008 was the most serious blow to the global economic system in history, I think now it outweigghs the Great Depression. The problem we have now is that the levers governments use in a crisis, interest rates/QE for eg, have already been pushed. We are still in crisis management mode from the last crash and a lot of things are pointing to another seizure in the system - esp when the fed raises its rates as it has to do. ON top of that we have a china slowdown and recent SM crash that could well a foreshock to the real quake. Every one knows chinas stock market is rigged and overvalued. On top of that we have the bonfire in the middle east. So, all in all, the global outlook is not very good. Domestically we have tax credit cuts and the EU referendum next year (most likely) and as we saw in Scotland referendums can get quite ugly.

Increased inequality and massive self inflicted polarisation politically and then the next stage of the financial crash happens, throw in a couple of enviromental disasters, and bob is very much your uncle.

My late father sent me a rare text when the run on Northern Bank happened. 'Marx was right; It's the begginnig of the end. Vive la Revolution!' I mocked him mercilessly about it. Sadly he cant hear me say, the old sod may have been right.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 3:36 pm

Yes, the periods immediately post both election defeats were incredibly bad. There's a big lesson there.

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 3:45 pm

howsillyofme1 wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
RobertSnozers wrote: Now *that's* a shambles with your media strategy.
Doubtless the problem was blamed on people not getting behind the leader.

Well it is partly true as there were a number of Labor MPs only too happy to suck on Murdoch's teat, but I do not think that Corbyn has done anything comparable has he?

He can be rightly questioned whether he has a robust enough media presence but as I said earlier he has only been in the job a few months - and he has not exactly been planning his leadership for years has he?

Also, I repeat myself here again. The true shambles of Labour media strategy was post the 2010 election when there was a complete lack of any challenge to the Tory and Lib Dem lies about the reasons for the economy being in crisis and that cost us the 2015 election more than anything else....who was to blame then...perhaps Liam Byrne for writing that stupid note, perhaps Darling for completely walking away after the election, perhaps Brown, perhaps Harman

You can also argue that Harman made a complete mess of the post election communication 2015 - the shambles over the welfare bill, the inexplicable decision to appoint that fud Leslie as Shadow Chancellor and then you had all the neoliberals running around slagging off Ed and preparing the ground for the Second Coming

None of this was due to Corbyn

Labour has had poor media strategies since Campbell was about - and that was in a period when he had a far easier situation to manage

There have been mistakes but there has been no vacuum and I do not think things have been as one-sided as the press would try to make you believe.....

There is some part of the communication from Corbyn that worked - the fact that Labour is adding thousands of new members a week at the moment.

And further to communication I repeat what, I think, Robert has been saying from his own experience - the media only listen if you have something they want to hear

At the moment though Labour hasn't anything

BBC - Oliver just mentions charter renewal and they just follow the press anyway now
Mail, Telegraph, Murdoch, Desmond - focused on avoiding Leveson, any measures to reduce wealth accumulation of proprietors. More interested in influencing next Tory leader
Guardian, Independent - fuck knows where they stand, definitely to the right of Labour though
Mirror - only paper supportive and has its own problems with credibility over hacking
ITN - has good moments and bad moments. C4 probably still best news but no-one watches it and ITV is lightweight
Sky - in some ways can be better than BBC (shows how far BBC has moved) but we know whose side they are on don't we?

There are still some good journalists out there - Mason for one and I find Andrew Neil actually quite robust with everyone (although the twats on the 'panel' on the Sunday Politics are fucking awful)

So looking at that I would ask how easy will it be to have an effective media strategy? The best bet would be to use the new forms of social media but the problem is that the users are disengaged and apolitical in a certain sense.

He could ask Campbell to come back - Campbell hates the Tories and we know the media were scared of him - would they be scared of him now though?

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 3:53 pm

I find Andrew Neil to be just as robust against the Tories as he is with the others, his oppo Jo Coburn less so, couldn't be more biased if she had a blue rosette on.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 3:55 pm

I don't think Campbell would come back as he seems to have a dislike of Abbott and McDonnell if not others.

Chief Labour anti-Corbyn stirrer, MP Mike Gapes, retweeted one of Campbell's critical tweets the other day.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 3:56 pm

Anyone willing to make a guess as to how Labour MPs will vote tonight ?