Saturday 25th & Sunday 26th February 2017

[gilsey]

Sorry,bad timing.It was a jest,stress jest at howsilly's view of forum.

Or a cutting observation of how I can make any topic circle back to Brexit?

In all seriousness, I wish those who are comfortable with Labour's Brexit stance talked about it more so I can see how they believe everything will work out to the best possible outcome. How is a consensus for "soft Brexit" as opposed to "hard Brexit" to be achieved, if not by defending the benefits of the single market. Or do those who agree with Corbyn see a benefit in leaving the single market and if so, what are those benefits?

Tinyclanger2 and seeingcleary's conversation yesterday about comms strategy was very interesting but if Labour were to find a way to crack that, what would they communicate? For those willing to listen, who actively seek out articles on Labourlist, what's the message? Brexit is an inconvenient topic for Labour, but they need to communicate a basic message on it, if they want to get past it and talk about everything else.

And they need to listen carefully to Curtice's view, which no doubt chimes with your own.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... eland-ukip" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Labour seems to have decided in recent weeks that its first priority is to stave off the threat from Ukip to its traditional working-class vote, much of which supposedly voted to leave in the EU referendum.

But in so doing it seems to have forgotten (or not realised) that most of those who voted Labour in 2015 – including those living in Labour seats in the North and the Midlands – backed remain. The party is thus at greater risk of losing votes to the pro-remain Liberal Democrats than to pro-Brexit Ukip.

I've seen a better article than that, explaining his reasoning, but can't remember where it was now.

[tinyclanger2]

Airhead Clanger Enterprises presents:

Mean with beards officially more attractive
https://www.indy100.com/article/men-bea ... paign=i100" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That’s according to a study in the Journal of Evolutionary Biology, which asked 8,500 women to rate men with and without beards for their boyfriend potential. ...

Heavy stubble received the highest ratings for general attractiveness, followed by full beards and light stubble.

[HindleA]

Bollox(not hairy ones)

[gilsey]

In all seriousness, I wish those who are comfortable with Labour's Brexit stance talked about it more so I can see how they believe everything will work out to the best possible outcome.

PfY did that a lot, he didn't get a very understanding hearing imo.
I wouldn't say he was exactly comfortable with it, just thought it was the best of a bad job.

[tinyclanger2]

HINDLEA!!!!

[tinyclanger2]

In all seriousness, I wish those who are comfortable with Labour's Brexit stance talked about it more so I can see how they believe everything will work out to the best possible outcome.

PfY did that a lot, he didn't get a very understanding hearing imo.
I wouldn't say he was exactly comfortable with it, just thought it was the best of a bad job.

Agree wholeheartedly. I like hearing other views, not least because I am a lightweight when it comes to politics. Much easier to develop one's own view in light of those of others (not least the likes of AK and PfY who have obviously commanded much respect.)

I'll admit to being hard to pursuade on Brexit - I can't see it working out well - but it doesn't mean I don't want to see another view. Though can understand that saying the same thing over and over again gets demoralising. Unfortunately changing one's thinking requires things being said again and again, until one of the times it's said suddenly has resonance.

[tinyclanger2]

I would dearly like to see something substantial but easy to digest on how we could make it (BrexIT) work. Because Theresa May's weird pompous pseudo Thatcherisms merely serve to irk.

[tinyclanger2]

But equally I'm curious at a species (or at least societal) level. What's going on? And why have we collectively gone mad? And why can't those of use who believe ourselves still sane do anything about it?

[Willow904]

Sorry,bad timing.It was a jest,stress jest at howsilly's view of forum.

Or a cutting observation of how I can make any topic circle back to Brexit?

In all seriousness, I wish those who are comfortable with Labour's Brexit stance talked about it more so I can see how they believe everything will work out to the best possible outcome. How is a consensus for "soft Brexit" as opposed to "hard Brexit" to be achieved, if not by defending the benefits of the single market. Or do those who agree with Corbyn see a benefit in leaving the single market and if so, what are those benefits?

Tinyclanger2 and seeingcleary's conversation yesterday about comms strategy was very interesting but if Labour were to find a way to crack that, what would they communicate? For those willing to listen, who actively seek out articles on Labourlist, what's the message? Brexit is an inconvenient topic for Labour, but they need to communicate a basic message on it, if they want to get past it and talk about everything else.

And they need to listen carefully to Curtice's view, which no doubt chimes with your own.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... eland-ukip" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Labour seems to have decided in recent weeks that its first priority is to stave off the threat from Ukip to its traditional working-class vote, much of which supposedly voted to leave in the EU referendum.

But in so doing it seems to have forgotten (or not realised) that most of those who voted Labour in 2015 – including those living in Labour seats in the North and the Midlands – backed remain. The party is thus at greater risk of losing votes to the pro-remain Liberal Democrats than to pro-Brexit Ukip.

I've seen a better article than that, explaining his reasoning, but can't remember where it was now.

AnatolyKasperov has made the very good point that a lot of voters, regardless of how they voted, are easy either way. I certainly believe it's possible remain voters could be persuaded to get behind Brexit. So although the above threat is very real, it may not be inevitable. What I've always questioned is whether it is desirable to be seen to back Brexit. There has been much made of late of relaunching Corbyn as a left-wing populist, as an "outsider" in the way that was so successful for Trump. The problem with an "outsider", however, is they can't realistically argue the benefits of the single market. I don't know how successful electorally such an approach would be, I just know it can't involve opposing a hard Brexit as that wouldn't make any sense. As such, my faith in Labour's desire and ability to keep us in a close and economically beneficial relationship with the EU is taking quite a battering.

[gilsey]

I came across this on twitter and in an idle moment read btl, expecting the usual 'suck it up' stuff, but some of it was more interesting and better-informed than that.
https://www.businesscornwall.co.uk/news ... ouncement/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Council ‘shock’ at Growth Deal announcement

I like this, well-put:

The government COULD spend what they save in terms of contribution to the EU on aid to Cornwall, Wales etc. If there are any savings of course, which remains to be seen. However, from the article, if you had read it, it should have become clear that the government chooses NOT to do so. Your supposition is moot.
This is not accidental. None of the regions that currently receive EU aid are electorally interesting to the Tories. To sustain themselves in power they need not fear alienating the voters that live there.
This underlines a hard political truth that is as old as politics itself. That is that a fairly aloof, remote authority is far better than an overbearing local overlord. It is the reason the Scots think they would be better off as an independent nation in the EU than as a subject nation in the UK. Brussels is further away than London and that is not a merely geographical truth. Contrary to the perception pushed to the public by the Brexiteers and the tabloid press, Brussels doesn’t run the EU exclusively for the benefit of the centre, in contrast to Westminster which very much does precisely that.

[Willow904]

In all seriousness, I wish those who are comfortable with Labour's Brexit stance talked about it more so I can see how they believe everything will work out to the best possible outcome.

PfY did that a lot, he didn't get a very understanding hearing imo.
I wouldn't say he was exactly comfortable with it, just thought it was the best of a bad job.

Yes I know. And because he agreed with Corbyn's approach, when people criticised Corbyn it must have felt like people were criticising him. And for that I'm truly sorry. FWIW I didn't have a problem with Paul's personal reasons for supporting the article 50 bill. It's Corbyn's pro-EU credentials and ultimate aims that I doubt, not his. Paul may be right about the best method to get where both me and Paul want to be, but what I couldn't share was his certainty that where we want to be is where Corbyn also wants to be. On that point, I'm very far from clear.

[Willow904]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... rexit-bill" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Tory peer Michael Heseltine has vowed to rebel against Theresa May over Brexit and back opposition efforts in the House of Lords to ensure a meaningful vote on the final outcome of exit negotiations.

[tinyclanger2]

It's all a bit "lead, follow or get out of the way" really isn't it.

1) we (nearly) all agree that the Tories and UKIP will not provide us with the kind of society that we want
2) the LibDems in 2010 delivered the country back into the hands of the Tories
3) Labour, like the Tories, has a talent/experience deficit, not least because of its selection process which has left us fighting about the least worst option
4) Labour is imperfect but it's the closest thing we've got to representing us except that
5) Over many things, most recently Brexit, I have not felt Labour always represents me especially well on the other hand
6) in the absence of PR our only short-term option is to make Labour work
7) that means getting behind them as they are at present while
8) working to make it a better party in the future than it is at present - in which case
9) what would this involve?

Labour's biggest strength (diversity) is its biggest weakness; where is the strongest common ground (given the polarising components such as Leave and Remain, Blair and Corbyn, champagne socialists and "working class" - whatever that actually is) etc. And how do we get wider representation than at present?

[Willow904]

More on the comms theme:

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If you’re asking how we persuade the Brexity Trumpkins — you’re asking the wrong question

[tinyclanger2]

More on the comms theme:

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If you’re asking how we persuade the Brexity Trumpkins — you’re asking the wrong question

Mike Hind‏ @MikeH_PR
10. Leave won partly because about 3 million people who NEVER vote were persuaded to by micro-targeting with plausible disinformation.

[Willow904]

More on the comms theme:

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If you’re asking how we persuade the Brexity Trumpkins — you’re asking the wrong question

Mike Hind‏ @MikeH_PR
10. Leave won partly because about 3 million people who NEVER vote were persuaded to by micro-targeting with plausible disinformation.

The left needs to figure out what it wants to achieve and then identify the voters most likely to vote for it and target them? Does that make any sense?

[Lost Soul]

More on the comms theme:

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Mike Hind‏ @MikeH_PR
10. Leave won partly because about 3 million people who NEVER vote were persuaded to by micro-targeting with plausible disinformation.

The left needs to figure out what it wants to achieve and then identify the voters most likely to vote for it and target them? Does that make any sense?

Strategy and tactics...

[tinyclanger2]

It makes perfect sense.

[citizenJA]

Cottles Minimarket was the shop round my way who sold the out of date crisps etc. None of this is new. No frills discount supermarkets were commonplace in the 80s and 90s and items past their best before date were all sold to customers one way or another, along with broken biscuits etc. We used to be a poor country under Thatcher. North Sea Oil should have changed that, but she made sure most of us never saw any of that wealth. Membership of the EU boosted our economy and contrary to popular mythology I think a lot people did see something of that, although yellow label meat and marked down bread at the supermarket never quite disappeared. Anyway, Brexit will bring back a lot more of these things for all of us. We don't have an especially high GDP per capita to start with and it will fall with Brexit. If the Tories continue their post financial crash pattern of cushioning those on above average incomes (while taking a tiny bit more from the very wealthy to camouflage their MO) the vast majority of us will see a significant fall in our standard of living and this time we will be starting from a lower base than after 2008. The idea we need to go through this because of "democracy" and that Labour will somehow be able to recover our fortunes (doubtful) when they are duly elected in 10- 15 years time when people finally wake up, is a seriously depressing prospect for me. I'd much rather we can find a way to convince voters to support remaining in the single market so we don't have to ever live through the worst of Brexit. It may be optimistic, but one thing I am certain of is that it won't happen unless people who believe in it try to make it happen.

(cJA edit)

I can't thank you enough for your post. You're not over-dramatising the effect this is going to have upon people. It's impossible to underestimate how we're going to struggle.

[citizenJA]

Have I said, good-afternoon, yet? If not, I apologise. Good-afternoon, everyone.

[citizenJA]

Airhead Clanger Enterprises presents:

Mean with beards officially more attractive
https://www.indy100.com/article/men-bea ... paign=i100" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That’s according to a study in the Journal of Evolutionary Biology, which asked 8,500 women to rate men with and without beards for their boyfriend potential. ...

Heavy stubble received the highest ratings for general attractiveness, followed by full beards and light stubble.

I like the way Mr citizen looks when he lets his beard grow over holidays and weekends.
It makes kissing a not wholly pleasant activity though.
I hope that wasn't too much information.

[citizenJA]

But equally I'm curious at a species (or at least societal) level. What's going on? And why have we collectively gone mad? And why can't those of use who believe ourselves still sane do anything about it?

It happens all the time throughout human history. Barbara Tuchman's March of Folly. People collectively do stupid things even though sane voices point out relatively simple, alternative choices exist and it's not necessary we go off a cliff (metaphorically speaking) when we don't have too. Tuchman used the US' continued involvement in the Vietnam war for years as an example of stupid, stupid as hell waste of lives, time and resources as one example.

[tinybgoat]

It's all a bit "lead, follow or get out of the way" really isn't it.

1) we (nearly) all agree that the Tories and UKIP will not provide us with the kind of society that we want
2) the LibDems in 2010 delivered the country back into the hands of the Tories
3) Labour, like the Tories, has a talent/experience deficit, not least because of its selection process which has left us fighting about the least worst option
4) Labour is imperfect but it's the closest thing we've got to representing us except that
5) Over many things, most recently Brexit, I have not felt Labour always represents me especially well on the other hand
6) in the absence of PR our only short-term option is to make Labour work
7) that means getting behind them as they are at present while
8) working to make it a better party in the future than it is at present - in which case
9) what would this involve?

Labour's biggest strength (diversity) is its biggest weakness; where is the strongest common ground (given the polarising components such as Leave and Remain, Blair and Corbyn, champagne socialists and "working class" - whatever that actually is) etc. And how do we get wider representation than at present?

Trying to be concise & simplistic, but what's needed is a leader who covers a wide ground, so what would someone from the 'left' (say Clive Lewis) have to offer to appeal to the 'center/right', or what would someone from the 'centre/right' (say Hilary Benn) have to offer to appeal to the 'left'.

[citizenJA]

In my opinion, Brexit is as dangerous in it's way as our world leaders' failure to appropriately and effectively deal with our global environmental crisis. Naturally, f*****g with incontrovertible laws of physics is far more dangerous globally than Brexit's altering millions of peoples' citizenship status, forever altering academic, business, career, retirement, pension, and trade arrangement plans (not a comprehensive list), and crashing the UK economy.

[citizenJA]

More on the comms theme:

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Mike Hind‏ @MikeH_PR
10. Leave won partly because about 3 million people who NEVER vote were persuaded to by micro-targeting with plausible disinformation.

The left needs to figure out what it wants to achieve and then identify the voters most likely to vote for it and target them? Does that make any sense?

Does the left have enough resources to buy enough persuasion like Tories/UKIP have done?

[gilsey]

A Grandmother Has Been Deported With Just £12 In Her Pocket Despite Living In Britain For The Past 30 Years
Irene Clennell was put on a flight to Singapore on Sunday before she had the chance to speak to her lawyer, or see her British husband to say goodbye.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/emilydugan/a-g ... .uiKGLD1Ew" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

More background
https://www.buzzfeed.com/emilydugan/mps ... .diJomWw9r" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[tinyclanger2]

Christ.

[tinyclanger2]

Perhaps (on discussion above) "proper Labour" is the answer:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... s-trump-uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
the other day, I was paid the biggest compliment of my political life. It was from a stallholder at Newcastle’s historic Grainger Market, which sells everything from turnips to Doc Martens, who said he’d heard me on the radio and I was “proper Labour, not old Labour or new Labour but proper Labour”.

[tinyclanger2]

Principles endure; pragmatic solutions change. If Labour shouts our pragmatism from the rooftops – as some are doing – we appear unprincipled and untrustworthy. If Labour whispers our principles in the spaces between the noise – as others are – we appear lethargic and untrustworthy. We need an approach which shouts both our principles and our pragmatism. Now that is what I call “proper Labour”.

[tinyclanger2]

But we must not concede the principle. If we say that we want your goods but not you, we downgrade people and make them of less worth than the things we produce. The Labour party is about the value of and the people whose labour it is.

[gilsey]

I saw your cute polar bear and raise you a panda.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-39097813" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[HindleA]

Some fucking horrendous "old"Labour views,so I've never really been into the returning thing that never fully was.

[HindleA]

http://press.labour.org.uk/post/1577427 ... -by-george" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Labour Press
Debbie Abrahams MP responds to comments by George Freeman, Head of No.10 Policy Unit, regarding sick and disabled people

[HindleA]

Totally of their own making,not least by falsely portraying DLA as easy to get.

[TechnicalEphemera]

So I will chip in post Copeland, as we have actual evidence as to Labour's prospects versus speculation. Plus the immediate dust has settled.

First off the result was awful. Bear in mind that 6.7% swing is in a mid-term byelection while the Tory party was shutting down a local hospital. In an actual general election expect it to double.

There needs to be:

A change in leader.
A change in direction.

Even then it probably won't be enough but it might stop the bleeding. In case anybody asks the list of candidates earlier covers the bases.

As regards direction, Corbyn's theorum was that if you campaigned on left wing principles you could ignore soft Tory and Lib Dem voters and be swept to power on a wave of non voters who would rise up and vote for change. Tubby and myself (amongst others) doubted this but in truth it hadn't been tested. Now it has in Stoke and Copeland and it is clearly bollocks. Given that reality the party needs to recalibrate to target centerist voters (predominantly remain voters) who are appalled at the direction May is heading.

Does anybody believe Corbyn could do that?

How might he start, sack half the shadow cabinet, especially Abbott and McDonnell, make peace with the centre of his party and bring in a center left team. Anybody believe he will do that?

Corbyn won't address the fundamentals, he is too dogmatic. Since he is also electorally toxic there is no point sticking with him.

The problem is his inner circle view him as their meal ticket. These people know that they are useless, they have been roundly ignored by the media for decades, and for them even perpetual Tory government is preferable to stepping down. I suggest McDonnell would prefer remaining SC for ever to having a Labour government without him in it.

So Corbyn needs to go, but won't. All the time he is there May can do what she wants, no matter how bonkers or regressive that is.

We are on course for a far bigger Tory majority than 83 (it was never this bad under Foot). Worse than that even after getting crushed in 20xx, (where XX>16<21) Corbyn probably still won't resign.

Political opposition in this country is doomed, unless the Unions ride to the rescue. This seems unlikely given the sort of people who run Unite, but maybe faced with utter, complete and continuing defeat they will realise something must be done.

Were that to happen however, and were a credible candidate to emerge then things would change overnight. Brexit is complete bollocks, it will cost jobs, it will cost services, it will not reduce immigration. If May pursues hard brexit she could well pay a huge political price, maybe enough of one to cost her an election.

Just not when the alternative is Corbyn and Company.

[HindleA]

Pre partial duplicate

[HindleA]

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... y-analysis" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Impact assessment
Personal Independence Payment assessment criteria equality analysis


Ooh ooh "family test":-

Family formation Negative
Key transitions- "
Family Role/Responsibilities- "
Most At Risk .."
Separating-none seen

Overall negative.


Restoring to original purpose.

[tinyclanger2]

excellent panda action there.

[AnatolyKasparov]

Sorry, but I am breaking my silence to say the idea that Corbyn still wouldn't go after a crushing 2020 defeat is utterly pathetic - and just shows your personal bitterness.

I am convinced now he will step down BEFORE then as long as he is satisfied the Bitterite element in the PLP won't then attempt some sort of counter revolution - that really might finish Labour for good. Don't forget far too many people in high places despised Ed M, never mind Jez.

[tinyclanger2]

http://www.economist.com/blogs/bagehot/ ... -elections" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The result confirms a structural shift in British politics since the EU referendum. Under David Cameron the Tories struggled in working-class seats, especially in the Midlands and north, and leaked support on their right-wing flank to UKIP. By giving UKIP voters what they want, Brexit has reunited the right. Mrs May has deliberately helped this process along, tacking right on social issues (making reducing immigration her highest priority in the coming Brexit talks, for example) and left on economic ones (hailing a more interventionist industrial strategy to revive manufacturing). These have swept working-class conservatives back into her party’s fold, pushing it above 40% in most polls and carrying it forward in yesterday’s by-elections (and across the line in Copeland).

[HindleA]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... oncessions" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Article 50: Labour peers confident government will make concessions

[citizenJA]

I am convinced now he [Corbyn] will step down BEFORE then as long as he is satisfied the Bitterite element in the PLP won't then attempt some sort of counter revolution - that really might finish Labour for good. Don't forget far too many people in high places despised Ed M, never mind Jez.

(cJA edit)

Is it really like this? I've no reason to doubt you it's just depressing as hell.

[SpinningHugo]

Sorry, but I am breaking my silence to say the idea that Corbyn still wouldn't go after a crushing 2020 defeat is utterly pathetic - and just shows your personal bitterness.

I am convinced now he will step down BEFORE then as long as he is satisfied the Bitterite element in the PLP won't then attempt some sort of counter revolution - that really might finish Labour for good. Don't forget far too many people in high places despised Ed M, never mind Jez.

Always good to stay cheery,

Seems like the once chosen successor is no more

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/c ... a9b7831bc7" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Long-Bailey it is.

Corbyn's agenda is not to win an election for Labour. he (and Milne and McDonnell) are not the idiots some on the soft left must think they are.

[citizenJA]

http://www.economist.com/blogs/bagehot/ ... -elections" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The result confirms a structural shift in British politics since the EU referendum. Under David Cameron the Tories struggled in working-class seats, especially in the Midlands and north, and leaked support on their right-wing flank to UKIP. By giving UKIP voters what they want, Brexit has reunited the right. Mrs May has deliberately helped this process along, tacking right on social issues (making reducing immigration her highest priority in the coming Brexit talks, for example) and left on economic ones (hailing a more interventionist industrial strategy to revive manufacturing). These have swept working-class conservatives back into her party’s fold, pushing it above 40% in most polls and carrying it forward in yesterday’s by-elections (and across the line in Copeland).

UKIP and Tory voters split their vote (each roughly 5,100) in Stoke Central

[tinyclanger2]

In this day and age, I can imagine that buying domain names to cover various possible future eventualities is just a standard thing to do.

[HindleA]

https://www.thisoldhouse.com/ideas/safe ... old-smells" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[RogerOThornhill]

I just had a second look at that 'Trojan Horse' story...and it's even more odd than I though.

According to Gilligan the principal-elect (of the school which didn't actually open) resigned in 2013.

So when was he appointed?

http://www.oldham-chronicle.co.uk/news- ... of-its-own

In a class of its own
Date published: 03 September 2013

AN adventurer who sailed solo across the Atlantic is at the helm of a new free school which wants to open in Oldham.

Rick Hodge, a former fighter pilot, has been appointed as principal designate of the Phoenix Free School which will be staffed entirely by former military personnel.

Huh?

[SpinningHugo]

Political opposition in this country is doomed, unless the Unions ride to the rescue. This seems unlikely given the sort of people who run Unite, but maybe faced with utter, complete and continuing defeat they will realise something must be done.

What has been quite amusing is Watson calling on his old flatmate McCluskey to back Corbyn and Len saying he doesn't do politics!

the agenda of both is obviously the Unite election, with Len not wishing to get still closer to Corbyn, and Watson wanting him to lose.

What saved Labour back in the 80s were the unions. But they just don't provide that ballast that they did in the days of benn, enabling the members to take control. People like me, who joined Labour, are far to the left of the center of UK politics. The new members are far to the left of me. They're in charge.

As for whether Corbyn will resign once Labour loses in 2020, it would previously have been unimaginable that a leader would carry on with 85% of his own Parliamentary party voting no confidence. We aren't in the previous era any longer.

[citizenJA]

I've been thinking about this for awhile and I'll bring it up now, what the hell
I've noticed under certain conditions, UK people like female leadership

[citizenJA]

Rally 'round their female leadership