FlyTheNest

Lol. I don't think it needs any super powers to know what Khan thinks of Corbyn, or Corbyn's attitude towards all who moved against him.

Forgive and forget is not the Campaign group way

Just stop posting this shite please - it is meaningless drivel

SpinningHugo wrote:

AnatolyKasparov wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:I know we don't do polls, but that yougov poll is astonishing. The Tories are defying gravity considering their complete disarray.

Brexit, Brexit and Brexit.

Which opens at least the possibility that polls are in fact overstating their likely support in an election campaign when the focus *will* significantly be on other issues.

You think the Tories are doing well on the issue of Brexit?

Do you follow the news?

Have you ever met any people who voted Leave?

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... bligations" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Tory-run council runs out of money to meet obligations
Northamptonshire county council bans spending on almost all services

FWIW using CT increases for adult social care in lieu of adequate funding is a particularly bad way,not least since the imposition to lessen the income to lower than the law allows(I notice BBC's Watson presents exempting the low incomed as some kind of radical agenda when just sense and fairer).Particular pernicious given receivers of cost saving social care have majoratively seen an increase in charging,the poorest of which therefore hit with a double whammy.

Goodnight, everyone
love,
cJA

AK's comment re "self reliant" exactly the pitch Derbyshire (to be fair the default guff not so obfuscatory misanthropy) making to further reduce support.I have stopped getting angry as a previous recipient of vast cost saving minimal support which facillitated continued employment and independence,the.exact opposite of the false portrayal/misrepresentation as takers/burdensome when exactly the opposite.

(Mis)perceptions are interesting,to the outside World ability to" discuss" vigorously was a sign of tension/ever impending split,when in fact the opposite ie the ability to without fear of.We did "play" with it to be honest.

Night night.

Not just Leave,Remain voters of the we've made the decision let's get on with it view.

There is a place for meaningless drivel,if it isn't allowed I am rather screwed.

#blatant discrimination.

Black balaclava morons do their best to ensure Rees-Mogg is elected ader of o Tories.

Rees-Mogg v Corbyn. The lunatic id of both parties against each other. How did we get to this?

Kudos to SH for playing "fill the gaps"

LE F THE?

Two local council byelections yesterday - both Labour defences, but with rather differing results:

Sunderland - the LibDems followed their impressive by-election gain on this council just over a year ago with another decisive gain from Labour in a ward that had voted Labour in every previous election since duly returning three members for them in the 2004 all out elections; they took over half the vote and increased by almost 50 points since coming a poor fourth in the last election here in 2016 - Labour got a little over half then, but dropped by 16 points now. The similar pre-2004 ward here sometimes elected Tories, and they came reasonably close to getting a seat in those all outs and on a few occasions since such as 2008 - but they have fallen away badly in recent years and more than halved to a new low of 5% now. In 2014 UKIP overtook the Tories for second place, and retained that in both 2015 and 2016 - but collapsed by 25 points now to finish even behind the slumping Tories. Greens also saw their share halved - LibDems gaining from everybody here, it seems - as they finished with less than 2%.

Cornwall - Labour hold with 60 per cent, a jump of 20 points since last year. To illustrate the change here in recent years, the original 2009 unitary elections here (where this ward was unchanged from now, even if under a different name) saw a remarkably fragmented contest which saw an Independent win with a modest 24% of the vote, whilst Labour finished fifth and last even if "only" some 10 points behind. In that disastrous election (for them) Labour did not take a single seat, though they duly corrected that winning this ward (and several others) in 2013 - the Indies still came second then, though did not even contest this seat in 2017 as party politics took over. Indeed it was the same four parties as now standing, and they finished in the same order - though the Tories (down 7 points) beat the LibDems (only a slight drop) for second by all of a single vote. Greens lost two thirds of their share last May, ending up last with 5% of the poll.

Things start to get busy next week, with seven contests.

Thanks

I hadn't actually realised what the 'Nunes Memo' was before today, I thought it was some piece of inter or inner agency paperwork bringing something significant to light.

With apologies for those who are far more with it than me, Devin Nunes is the Republican chair of the House Intelligence Committee, and was a member of Trump's campaign team. He has written a report on how he views some of the behaviour of the FBI during the Trump/Russia investigation, particularly with regard to UK intelligence agent Christopher Steele.

A decent UK analogy wold be Jacob Rees-Mogg writing a report for David Davis on how the leave vote means we must leave the single market and the customs union.

Seth Abramson has a current thread going through the thing here.

SpinningHugo wrote:Black balaclava morons do their best to ensure Rees-Mogg is elected ader of o Tories.

Rees-Mogg v Corbyn. The lunatic id of both parties against each other. How did we get to this?

That sounds an excellent idea about Rees-Mogg. Corbyn got elected because when Miliband lost Labour's putative leadership all ran away and agreed with Toby Young that Labour needed to be more like the conservatives, and the membership and potential membership wouldn't have it.

SpinningHugo wrote:Black balaclava morons do their best to ensure Rees-Mogg is elected ader of o Tories.

Rees-Mogg v Corbyn. The lunatic id of both parties against each other. How did we get to this?

Well lets be brutal about it shall we.

Largely because "sensible centrists" (whether of the Blairite, Orange Book or Cameroon variety) in their "TINA" arrogance and know-all complacency, messed so many things up.

And, with few exceptions, still refuse to admit that they got anything wrong.

adam wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:Black balaclava morons do their best to ensure Rees-Mogg is elected ader of o Tories.

Rees-Mogg v Corbyn. The lunatic id of both parties against each other. How did we get to this?

That sounds an excellent idea about Rees-Mogg. Corbyn got elected because when Miliband lost Labour's putative leadership all ran away and agreed with Toby Young that Labour needed to be more like the conservatives, and the membership and potential membership wouldn't have it.

I really must not have been playing close enough attention to anything Yvette Cooper, say, said. She sounds awful.

SpinningHugo wrote:

adam wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:Black balaclava morons do their best to ensure Rees-Mogg is elected ader of o Tories.

Rees-Mogg v Corbyn. The lunatic id of both parties against each other. How did we get to this?

That sounds an excellent idea about Rees-Mogg. Corbyn got elected because when Miliband lost Labour's putative leadership all ran away and agreed with Toby Young that Labour needed to be more like the conservatives, and the membership and potential membership wouldn't have it.

I really must not have been playing close enough attention to anything Yvette Cooper, say, said. She sounds awful.

That was what I saw happen at the time. Tell me why you think Corbyn won.

AnatolyKasparov wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:Black balaclava morons do their best to ensure Rees-Mogg is elected ader of o Tories.

Rees-Mogg v Corbyn. The lunatic id of both parties against each other. How did we get to this?

Well lets be brutal about it shall we.

Largely because "sensible centrists" (whether of the Blairite, Orange Book or Cameroon variety) in their "TINA" arrogance and know-all complacency, messed so many things up.

And, with few exceptions, still refuse to admit that they got anything wrong.

Iraq? yes, marched against it.

Most other things? nah.

I just don't think Labour under Blair was the same as the Tories under Cameron. I think that deeply foolish.

adam wrote:
That was what I saw happen at the time. Tell me why you think Corbyn won.

This is a good explanation.

http://stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com ... shame.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

SpinningHugo wrote:

adam wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:Black balaclava morons do their best to ensure Rees-Mogg is elected ader of o Tories.

Rees-Mogg v Corbyn. The lunatic id of both parties against each other. How did we get to this?

That sounds an excellent idea about Rees-Mogg. Corbyn got elected because when Miliband lost Labour's putative leadership all ran away and agreed with Toby Young that Labour needed to be more like the conservatives, and the membership and potential membership wouldn't have it.

I really must not have been playing close enough attention to anything Yvette Cooper, say, said. She sounds awful.

Yvette Cooper was responsible for the abomination that was Atos and WCA which will be a blot on her record - a big one

She ran an appalling leadership campaign and deserved to lose.......it was almost like she expected to win

Personally, I don't warm to her but understand she can be an effective operator when she is minded to

To become the leader of the Labour Party you have to actually try to win it - both she and Miliband Snr before her seemed to think they were entitled to it and that the members would just fall in line

It is also not Corbyn's fault that she is married to Ed Balls - he wasn't popular post-2015 GE

SpinningHugo wrote:

adam wrote:
That was what I saw happen at the time. Tell me why you think Corbyn won.

This is a good explanation.

http://stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com ... shame.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

well that brings lightweight to a new level - you know an article is poor when the comments bring more insight than the article itself

SpinningHugo wrote:

AnatolyKasparov wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:Black balaclava morons do their best to ensure Rees-Mogg is elected ader of o Tories.

Rees-Mogg v Corbyn. The lunatic id of both parties against each other. How did we get to this?

Well lets be brutal about it shall we.

Largely because "sensible centrists" (whether of the Blairite, Orange Book or Cameroon variety) in their "TINA" arrogance and know-all complacency, messed so many things up.

And, with few exceptions, still refuse to admit that they got anything wrong.

Iraq? yes, marched against it.

Most other things? nah.

I just don't think Labour under Blair was the same as the Tories under Cameron. I think that deeply foolish.

No he wasn't - he started off better but then got taken in with is own self-love

He ended up very like Cameron though - a failure who left no legacy behind him. Much of what he did has been undone and other parts used by the Tories in a way he never intended (I hope!) - he had the Tory disdain for the poor though.

He was also one of the most authoritarian PM we have ever seen - the number of laws he introduced or tried to introduce curtailing rights to protest and to lock people up without charge made me embarrassed to be a Labour supporter at times

howsillyofme1 wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:

adam wrote:
That was what I saw happen at the time. Tell me why you think Corbyn won.

This is a good explanation.

http://stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com ... shame.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

well that brings lightweight to a new level - you know an article is poor when the comments bring more insight than the article itself

Dillow has rather changed his tune since then, it is fair to say.

HindleA wrote:There is a place for meaningless drivel,if it isn't allowed I am rather screwed.

#blatant discrimination.

Haha MrA

I would never describe your posts as meaningless drivel......

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
Dillow has rather changed his tune since then, it is fair to say.

About why Corbyn won? No he hasn't.

Dillow is excellent. The most brilliant Marxist commentator on current politics I know.

Dismissing him (I know you wouldn't) just shows astonishing stupidity.

To be fair,much of the WCA,million not really ill stuff was a function of decades of mutual collusive mythology whereby each blamed the other for hiding unemployment,still repeated to this day,zero evidence,in fact legacy benefits,facillitation of self care/care in the community,otherwise bemoaned as not enough.The fact that receivers of JSA may well have health problems,the excuse that IDS et al,on the basis of "fairness" reduced ESA to JSA levels for WRAG.Saying get rid of the WCA is not enough,,what is meant by holistic approach in practical terms,will there be further simplification and service replacement in lieu of income more contigency.Let's see,the jury is out as far as I am concerned.

HindleA wrote:To be fair,much of the WCA,million not really ill stuff was a function of decades of mutual collusive mythology whereby each blamed the other for hiding unemployment,still repeated to this day,zero evidence,in fact legacy benefits,facillitation of self care/care in the community,otherwise bemoaned as not enough.The fact that receivers of JSA may well have health problems,the excuse that IDS et al,on the basis of "fairness" reduced ESA to JSA levels for WRAG.Saying get rid of the WCA is not enough,,what is meant by holistic approach in practical terms,will there be further simplification and service replacement in lieu of income more contigency.Let's see,the jury is out as far as I am concerned.

I bow to your better information.....

SpinningHugo wrote:

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
Dillow has rather changed his tune since then, it is fair to say.

About why Corbyn won? No he hasn't.

Dillow is excellent. The most brilliant Marxist commentator on current politics I know.

Dismissing him (I know you wouldn't) just shows astonishing stupidity.

I check his blog every day, so no

@howsilly View,not information,contentious

Ie not black/white.

HindleA wrote:@howsilly View,not information,contentious

I don't know much on this subject so can just jump to ill-informed conclusions too easily.

I get annoyed at the "look at economic inactivity" stuff because a myriad of situations/circumstances.

My salient point is accounting for sickness/disability,indeed there was/still are people on higher rates according to long/short term and the sticking people on benefits theme is no more/less false portrayal wherever it is uttered.

Evening all.

Back from that Oxford having secured a reader's card ( a new one - the old expired in 2012...) and spent the rest of the day in a library...well, reading.

In order of preference.

1.yes
2.The alphabet backwards
3.Tebahpla eht
4 z,y,x etc.

RogerOThornhill wrote:Evening all.

Back from that Oxford having secured a reader's card ( a new one - the old expired in 2012...) and spent the rest of the day in a library...well, reading.

I love proper libraries

Shhh

I wasn't talking loudly...that was Roger

Scotland confirm non involvement of private sector in assessments/social security system,fair enough but they were working under the auspices of the State.

howsillyofme1 wrote:

RogerOThornhill wrote:Evening all.

Back from that Oxford having secured a reader's card ( a new one - the old expired in 2012...) and spent the rest of the day in a library...well, reading.

I love proper libraries

And me. I discovered that the Bodleian held 8 volumes of an early 20th century directory for my area (and no, I have no idea why) which we haven't got in ours. Result - me booked in for a week in Oxford later this month to pore over them and grab as much info as possible out of them.

https://academic.oup.com/ije/advance-ar ... 50/4079898" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Re-employment, job quality, health and allostatic load biomarkers: prospective evidence from the UK Household Longitudinal Study