Weekend Edition - Saturday/Sunday 22nd/23rd August

[yahyah]

Thank you How Silly. You have put it so much better than I ever could.

[howsillyofme1]

@SpinningHugo

The world (and NATO) are somewhat different now, though.

NATO is arguably as important now as it was in the Cold War. Any Labour Party arguing to leave it would only get my vote if I believed they couldn't win the election outright.

Has the party policy changed....Corbyn is not a fan of NATO and to be honest neither am I, ever since it became an extension of the US Armed Forces. How does NATO develop into the future is an important question for us to consider

Does it mean that we leave, or perhaps focus on improving it? Since when has the leader determined policy on his own without listening to the party

I can understand if you decide that Corbyn is too anti-NATO for you but that does't mean it is likely we will leave, and I would not support leaving myself but has NATO been undermined by the neoliberal doctrine in recent years?

[gilsey]

I don't endorse Corbynomics. The People's QE and tax gap stuff is the worst kind of "free ponies" politics.

It is true that at the zlb and with poor productivity, borrowing more to invest at this point make sense. So to that extent I agree with the 40 Economists (and indeed Keegan).

But, like them, that doesn't mean I endorse Corbyn. Far from it.

My bold.

So is another of the leadership candidates advocating this? I haven't heard them do so.
Seems to me, if borrowing to invest is the right policy, Corbyn's the man.

[TechnicalEphemera]

@SpinningHugo

The world (and NATO) are somewhat different now, though.

NATO is arguably as important now as it was in the Cold War. Any Labour Party arguing to leave it would only get my vote if I believed they couldn't win the election outright.

Has the party policy changed....Corbyn is not a fan of NATO and to be honest neither am I, ever since it became an extension of the US Armed Forces. How does NATO develop into the future is an important question for us to consider

Does it mean that we leave, or perhaps focus on improving it? Since when has the leader determined policy on his own without listening to the party

I can understand if you decide that Corbyn is too anti-NATO for you but that does't mean it is likely we will leave, and I would not support leaving myself but has NATO been undermined by the neoliberal doctrine in recent years?

Exactly how has NATO become undermined with neo liberal doctrine?

It isn't involved in the ongoing stupidity in the Ukraine and it remains a defensive alliance. Right now it is acting as the stabilising force in Eastern Europe, which it is doing by not lifting a finger.

[HindleA]

A claim to "fame" I have is that I was last in the Marathon of the World Student Games of 1991(for which the recently demolished Don Valley stadium was built,where Ennis trained.I wasn't a student you also gained entry via doing the previous years Sheffield Marathon).I got a police motor cycle escort for the last few miles,including a glass of orange which a pub gave me on the police announcing "last person to finish the Marathon"They had to radio ahead to keep the finish open,and I got a ride to the train station on finishing.They didn't drug test me for some reason.

[SpinningHugo]

I don't endorse Corbynomics. The People's QE and tax gap stuff is the worst kind of "free ponies" politics.

It is true that at the zlb and with poor productivity, borrowing more to invest at this point make sense. So to that extent I agree with the 40 Economists (and indeed Keegan).

But, like them, that doesn't mean I endorse Corbyn. Far from it.

My bold.

So is another of the leadership candidates advocating this? I haven't heard them do so.
Seems to me, if borrowing to invest is the right policy, Corbyn's the man.

You shouldn't cherry pick the one and only reasonable part of his programme and say "there wecp are then."

Further, there is an enormous difference between the economic policies I think are sensible, and what Labour needs to say to win. On the latter, whatvit needs to establish, and has spent 5 years not bothering to do, is establish an image of stern fiscal rectitude

Again, and for the avoidance of doubt, the main problem with Corbyn is with the substance of his proposals. That he will lose is a second order consideration, and cannot be proven.

[howsillyofme1]

Thank you How Silly. You have put it so much better than I ever could.

It seems this is where I have the disagreement with Tubby, TE and Hugo - they assume that Corbyn cannot win in 2020 and the others can.

I am of the opinion that Labour will only win in 2020 by causing a major disruption and Corbyn is the only one who can do this. I doubt he can win in 2020 either to be fair but the Labour Party may be different from the one we have now which I can only see disappearing up its own backside!

We are looking at the future of Labour here....I feel the party is being taken down a road by the right wing of the party that I ill not be able to support in the future.

Fundamentally, I do not think I want to support a party that continues on this path - perhaps the others can but I can't. If that is the case then fine....if what I believe in in not supported by the rest of the electorate I don't really care. I have a low opinion of the UK voters. My grandfather left school at 14 to work as a fitter - he had far more political acumen than most of people who I talk to now.

In fact I would be worried if people like that agreed with me to be fair

[yahyah]

At least such proposals would be aired Hugo.
At the moment they are left to the fringe parties.

I'm beginning to understand the arguments of some who in the past I've seen as unrealistic.
There comes a point where the same old no longer works.
What was New Labour is old hat.

Sometimes change is very uncomfortable. It is scary.
There was a famous American body work therapist who used to say you have to stop doing what you've been used to doing. It will be painful. Something different will emerge in time.

Many of us are finding that it is just too painful to carry on doing what we've been doing.

If Corbyn wins I hope the result will show that many, many regular Labour members are 'shy' lefties.
The next step is to allow voters to unleash their shy left wing personas.
If we keep telling them, as Labour people, that being left wing is not an option why should they be ?

[LadyCentauria]

Problem is that the whole premise is utter bollocks. When it is sold by HM Government it is sold. A new government can't turn up and demand more cash, the contract will be signed.

If that is the best McDonnell can do he would be better off staying silent and leaving politics to grown ups.

Perhaps, just perhaps, you might be able to surcharge ministers for failing to get value for money on behalf of the tax payer. That could be passed into law and used as a basis to proceed retrospectively. Vince Cable having to pay half a billion out of his own pocket for the Royal Mail would be funny.

Compulsory purchase order?

Just sayin'.

I think that is what McDonnell is implying.

A really terrible idea. There are good reasons oflong term commercial credibility why governments respect property rights and the contracts it has signed.

But they haven't respected the property rights of people who signed secure lifetime tenancies in social housing yet have had those rights removed by dint of introduction of the Under-occupancy Penalty and, more recently, by introducing an income-related-rents scheme for middle-to-high earning households - with both of these measures introduced retrospectively.

[rebeccariots2]

But they haven't respected the property rights of people who signed secure lifetime tenancies in social housing yet have had those rights removed by dint of introduction of the Under-occupancy Penalty and, more recently, by introducing an income-related-rents scheme for middle-to-high earning households - with both of these measures introduced retrospectively.

Very good point Lady C.

They haven't even respected the property rights of those housing associations which are truly independent / charitable organisations - who have raised their funds from non government sources to build and provide housing. These organisations are going to have their rights to retain those properties in social / charitable ownership stripped away from them.

[LadyCentauria]

So fed up of commentators / pain in the arses from other parties (e.g. Mensch, Toby Young) feeling entitled to stick their mucky oars in to the Labour leadership organisation.

I just can't imagine wanting to play a part in the Tory, SNP, Green, Plaid leadership contests. I must lack whatever that particular quality / characteristic is. When local Plaid activists were bombarding us with emails inviting us to join them for £1 so we could vote for the leader they wanted (Leanne Wood) I felt no stirring of passion to join - not even at that knock down price. And there wasn't any big media shout out about entryism etc when Leanne Wood subsequently won.

Nor I. Even though I'm entitled to do so (as someone on the Electoral Register within the London area) I will not take the Tories up on their 'Register for £1, no questions asked' offer to help them select their candidate for Mayor of London. I didn't when they made the same offer in the selection process that saw Boris Johnson take up that position. I might have thought differently were I a tory-leaning floating voter or a tory-voting non-member but I'm neither and never have been - and I've never felt it right to take part in similar contests for other parties. It still shocks and saddens me that I've met so many people who joined that Open Primary to select Boris, and then went on to vote for him, "because he's funny!" :shudder:

[howsillyofme1]

At least such proposals would be aired Hugo.
At the moment they are left to the fringe parties.

I'm beginning to understand the arguments of some who in the past I've seen as unrealistic.
There comes a point where the same old no longer works.
What was New Labour is old hat.

Sometimes change is very uncomfortable. It is scary.
There was a famous American body work therapist who used to say you have to stop doing what you've been used to doing. It will be painful. Something different will emerge in time.

Many of us are finding that it is just too painful to carry on doing what we've been doing.

If Corbyn wins I hope the result will show that many, many regular Labour members are 'shy' lefties.
The next step is to allow voters to unleash their shy left wing personas.

If we keep telling them, as Labour people, that being left wing is not an option why should they be ?

It is well known that for a change to work there has to be a 'letting go' of the past. It seems that this is the problem for Labour - the 'past' in this case was the 1997-2010 period - what work, or partly worked, for then is no longer appropriate. That is not to say it was all wrong and we should maintain and build on the good policies from then but the situation has changed massively and so a new approach is needed

It seems some in the party hierarchy either have difficulty letting go (which isn't easy) or do not see the need for change.

If the former case there should be engagement and discussion on how to resolve this, if the latter case then I would say they then have to choose if they stay in the party

I am clear there is a need for change, fundamental as well, - do others agree?

[rebeccariots2]

I wonder if the political cartoonists have already been mocking up their versions of Jerry & Tom caricatures for post leadership results announcement ... could be interesting.

The plots of each short usually center on Tom's numerous attempts to capture Jerry and the mayhem and destruction that follows. Tom rarely succeeds in catching Jerry, mainly because of Jerry's cleverness, cunning abilities, and luck. However, there are also several instances within the cartoons where they display genuine friendship and concern for each other's well-being. At other times, the pair set aside their rivalry in order to pursue a common goal, such as when a baby escaped the watch of a negligent babysitter, causing Tom and Jerry to pursue the baby and keep it away from danger.

The cartoons are known for some of the most violent cartoon gags ever devised in theatrical animation such as Tom using everything from axes, hammers, firearms, firecrackers, explosives, traps and poison to kill Jerry. On the other hand, Jerry's methods of retaliation are far more violent due to their frequent success, including slicing Tom in half, decapitating him, shutting his head or fingers in a window or a door, stuffing Tom's tail in a waffle iron or a mangle, kicking him into a refrigerator, getting him electrocuted, pounding him with a mace, club or mallet, causing trees or electric poles to drive him into the ground, sticking matches into his feet and lighting them, tying him to a firework and setting it off, and so on.[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_and_Jerry" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Shame Cameron isn't going to be cast as 'Tom'.

[howsillyofme1]

NATO is arguably as important now as it was in the Cold War. Any Labour Party arguing to leave it would only get my vote if I believed they couldn't win the election outright.

Has the party policy changed....Corbyn is not a fan of NATO and to be honest neither am I, ever since it became an extension of the US Armed Forces. How does NATO develop into the future is an important question for us to consider

Does it mean that we leave, or perhaps focus on improving it? Since when has the leader determined policy on his own without listening to the party

I can understand if you decide that Corbyn is too anti-NATO for you but that does't mean it is likely we will leave, and I would not support leaving myself but has NATO been undermined by the neoliberal doctrine in recent years?

Exactly how has NATO become undermined with neo liberal doctrine?

It isn't involved in the ongoing stupidity in the Ukraine and it remains a defensive alliance. Right now it is acting as the stabilising force in Eastern Europe, which it is doing by not lifting a finger.

Libya and the current secretary general worries me more every time he opens his mouth!

[Tonibel]

@SpinningHugo

The world (and NATO) are somewhat different now, though.

NATO is arguably as important now as it was in the Cold War. Any Labour Party arguing to leave it would only get my vote if I believed they couldn't win the election outright.

Has the party policy changed....Corbyn is not a fan of NATO and to be honest neither am I, ever since it became an extension of the US Armed Forces. How does NATO develop into the future is an important question for us to consider

Does it mean that we leave, or perhaps focus on improving it? Since when has the leader determined policy on his own without listening to the party


As far as I am aware the Labour Party is still a social democraticparty and the leader cannot just impose his opinions.
Equally, why should it be assumed that Margaret Beckett could win an election against JC . Or will elections be suspended and she will be returned unopposed?

[yahyah]

Margaret Beckett...have I missed something ?

[howsillyofme1]

Margaret Beckett...have I missed something ?

Latest crackpot idea.....fortunately, it is only the intelligence vacuum Mensch who has said anything at the moment though

Looking for a has-been to join the ABC bandwagon!

[rebeccariots2]

Margaret Beckett...have I missed something ?

You are better off having missed it. Believe me.

[Willow904]

But they haven't respected the property rights of people who signed secure lifetime tenancies in social housing yet have had those rights removed by dint of introduction of the Under-occupancy Penalty and, more recently, by introducing an income-related-rents scheme for middle-to-high earning households - with both of these measures introduced retrospectively.

Very good point Lady C.

They haven't even respected the property rights of those housing associations which are truly independent / charitable organisations - who have raised their funds from non government sources to build and provide housing. These organisations are going to have their rights to retain those properties in social / charitable ownership stripped away from them.

Well, they haven't done that yet and I'm not sure they would need to meddle with property rights in order to achieve their ultimate goal, which I suspect is to undermine the financial viability of social housing. They merely need to cut subsidies to any housing association which refuses to sell at discount to tenants, which will be most of them because their financing agreements won't let them. That's my theory, anyway.

[ohsocynical]

We hear a lot about 'The Spirit of 45' but I'd never read the 1945 Labour manifesto.

Have cherry picked but the full document, 'Let Us Face the Future:
A Declaration of Labour Policy for the Consideration of the Nation' can be found here
http://www.politicsresources.net/area/uk/man/lab45.htm

''In the years that followed [the First World War], the "hard-faced men" and their political friends kept control of the Government.
They controlled the banks, the mines, the big industries, largely the press and the cinema.
They controlled the means by which the people got their living.
They controlled the ways by which most of the people learned about the world outside. This happened in all the big industrialised countries.

Great economic blizzards swept the world in those years.
The great inter-war slumps were not acts of God or of blind forces.
They were the sure and certain result of the concentration of too much economic power in the hands of too few men.
These men had only learned how to act in the interest of their own bureaucratically-run private monopolies which may be likened to totalitarian oligarchies within our democratic State.
They had and they felt no responsibility to the nation.''

Nothing's changed, has it ?

& just look at the actual headlines in the 1945 manifesto.
Read the document for the actual flesh of the policies.

JOBS FOR ALL
INDUSTRY IN THE SERVICE OF THE NATION
AGRICULTURE AND THE PEOPLE'S FOOD
HOUSES AND THE BUILDING PROGRAMME
THE LAND
HEALTH OF THE NATION AND ITS CHILDREN
SOCIAL INSURANCE AGAINST THE RAINY DAY

There's alot in it, but one thing that brought a tear was:

''National and local authorities should co-operate to enable people to enjoy their leisure to the full, to have opportunities for healthy recreation. By the provision of concert halls, modern libraries, theatres and suitable civic centres, we desire to assure to our people full access to the great heritage of culture in this nation.''

A Britain with bombed cities, troops still overseas - my father-in-law was still 'enjoying' Japanese hospitality as a p.o.w., could still dream of a nation with good schools, health for all, even music venues and wonderful libraries.

Can you imagine if our current Labour party were there when they were drafting it ?
It probably wouldn't get past the first few lines, someone would be saying ''You can't call the Japanese barbaric''. '' 'Jobs for all' the press will call us Commies, got to tone that down''.
''How are we going to pay for this, we have to be seen to be economically cerdible, look at how much we owe the Yanks.''

The pro-Nato, pro- American position of the party of Attlee and Bevin was a very long way away from Corbyn.As was the stern fiscal rectitude of Stafford Cripps.

Yes but in those days the US hadn't sold its soul completely to Capitalism and veered away from the values we're still trying to hang on to.
They are waiting to get their hands on the NHS...They should be avoided at all costs.

[rebeccariots2]

Cathy Newman ‏@cathynewman 1m1 minute ago
Next on #c4news: @CarolineFlintMP on why she and @Corbyn4Leader could be a "dream ticket"...

[yahyah]

When will people like Beckett realise we have as much right to our vote as her ?

For cripes sake, I have fallen out with people here in the past, and had many a boozy conversation with friends arguing that Labour had to be pragmatic, and centre-ist.
For years and years we [Mr YahYah as well] did it.

We aren't the Militant tendency. To pretend we all are is silly.

[Willow904]

NATO is arguably as important now as it was in the Cold War. Any Labour Party arguing to leave it would only get my vote if I believed they couldn't win the election outright.

Has the party policy changed....Corbyn is not a fan of NATO and to be honest neither am I, ever since it became an extension of the US Armed Forces. How does NATO develop into the future is an important question for us to consider

Does it mean that we leave, or perhaps focus on improving it? Since when has the leader determined policy on his own without listening to the party


As far as I am aware the Labour Party is still a social democraticparty and the leader cannot just impose his opinions.
Equally, why should it be assumed that Margaret Beckett could win an election against JC . Or will elections be suspended and she will be returned unopposed?

I think the point of a stalking horse is you need someone willing to risk their reputation in a challenge which may not come off. If the sitting leader fails to see them off, the contest is opened up to all-comers. Or something. It strikes me as a Tory thing, though. Not sure if it works that way in Labour.

[yahyah]

Cathy Newman ‏@cathynewman 1m1 minute ago
Next on #c4news: @CarolineFlintMP on why she and @Corbyn4Leader could be a "dream ticket"...

Hadn't seen that coming.

[rebeccariots2]

But they haven't respected the property rights of people who signed secure lifetime tenancies in social housing yet have had those rights removed by dint of introduction of the Under-occupancy Penalty and, more recently, by introducing an income-related-rents scheme for middle-to-high earning households - with both of these measures introduced retrospectively.

Very good point Lady C.

They haven't even respected the property rights of those housing associations which are truly independent / charitable organisations - who have raised their funds from non government sources to build and provide housing. These organisations are going to have their rights to retain those properties in social / charitable ownership stripped away from them.

Well, they haven't done that yet and I'm not sure they would need to meddle with property rights in order to achieve their ultimate goal, which I suspect is to undermine the financial viability of social housing. They merely need to cut subsidies to any housing association which refuses to sell at discount to tenants, which will be most of them because their financing agreements won't let them. That's my theory, anyway.

Will have to wait and see what - if any - grounds are used to bring a legal challenge against this latest Tory hatchet job on social housing provision. They won't be able to look into that until the relevant legislation / decision is made. I'm assuming it's still at the Osborne / Tory pledge status ... It's too important and game changing - as you rightly say - for housing associations (and councils because of the knock on effect on them) to not challenge.

[ohsocynical]

Thank you How Silly. You have put it so much better than I ever could.

It seems this is where I have the disagreement with Tubby, TE and Hugo - they assume that Corbyn cannot win in 2020 and the others can.

I am of the opinion that Labour will only win in 2020 by causing a major disruption and Corbyn is the only one who can do this. I doubt he can win in 2020 either to be fair but the Labour Party may be different from the one we have now which I can only see disappearing up its own backside!

We are looking at the future of Labour here....I feel the party is being taken down a road by the right wing of the party that I ill not be able to support in the future.

Fundamentally, I do not think I want to support a party that continues on this path - perhaps the others can but I can't. If that is the case then fine....if what I believe in in not supported by the rest of the electorate I don't really care. I have a low opinion of the UK voters. My grandfather left school at 14 to work as a fitter - he had far more political acumen than most of people who I talk to now.

In fact I would be worried if people like that agreed with me to be fair

So did my dad. born 1921. Grew up through the depression, left school at 14 too. Apprentice Electrician. Brainy enough to go to University, but had to contribute to the family finances.
A deep divide between the have's and have not. We are sinking back to those days at an alarming rate.

[howsillyofme1]

Cathy Newman ‏@cathynewman 1m1 minute ago
Next on #c4news: @CarolineFlintMP on why she and @Corbyn4Leader could be a "dream ticket"...

Hadn't seen that coming.

It is quite a smart move....don't want her particularly but makes a change from the frothing we see from elsewhere

[ohsocynical]

Cathy Newman ‏@cathynewman 1m1 minute ago
Next on #c4news: @CarolineFlintMP on why she and @Corbyn4Leader could be a "dream ticket"...

Hadn't seen that coming.

Do you know, it feels like they're all scrabbling for power or to hold on to it...It's almost grovelling. And it's seriously off putting.

[PorFavor]

Margaret Beckett joins Tewsingham Society in order to become Labour's stalking horse.

[rebeccariots2]

Hadn't seen that coming.

It is quite a smart move....don't want her particularly but makes a change from the frothing we see from elsewhere

I think that makes several Deputy candidates who have made it clear they will work with and fully support Corbyn if he is elected - Watson, Eagle, Creasy (I think?) and now Flint. Not sure about Bradshaw.

[ohsocynical]

Should have added, the only one who is getting out there, reaching a huge amount of people and getting his message across, is Corbyn.

Like it or not he's doing the business....

[citizenJA]

The Labour government returned in 1945 establishing the NHS is an astounding accomplishment.
Given US hegemony and paranoia of everything socialist it's nothing less than extraordinary.
The men and women of the Labour party made it happen.
That political determination isn't a myth, it's not gone or lost now, nothing stops men and women in the Labour party now from renewed dedication to socialist principles.

[TechnicalEphemera]

Should have added, the only one who is getting out there, reaching a huge amount of people and getting his message across, is Corbyn.

Like it or not he's doing the business....

No, he is enthusing a tiny self selecting electorate. It is a huge mistake to map that to the other 98% of the population.

[Willow904]

Margaret Beckett joins Tewsingham Society in order to become Labour's stalking horse.

Eugh!

[ohsocynical]

Should have added, the only one who is getting out there, reaching a huge amount of people and getting his message across, is Corbyn.

Like it or not he's doing the business....

No, he is enthusing a tiny self selecting electorate. It is a huge mistake to map that to the other 98% of the population.

So the others are drawing in hundreds of people day after day, and then having to speak separately to all those who can't get into the halls?

Right. We'll take your word for it.

[ohsocynical]

Margaret Beckett joins Tewsingham Society in order to become Labour's stalking horse.

Eugh!

I tried to imagine that and my brain shut down....

[TechnicalEphemera]

So interesting on China.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34033208

Are Chinese shares overvalued with companies struggling against reduced demand and high debt levels?

Or

Is the crisis itself called by falling stock prices triggering margin calls from over-leveraged investors?

If the latter throwing pension money at the problem might help, but if the fundamentals are bad this is just throwing good money into a pit. In the same way rich investors tried to (and failed to) reverse market trends by making headline big investments after the Wall Street crash.

[TechnicalEphemera]

Should have added, the only one who is getting out there, reaching a huge amount of people and getting his message across, is Corbyn.

Like it or not he's doing the business....

No, he is enthusing a tiny self selecting electorate. It is a huge mistake to map that to the other 98% of the population.

So the others are drawing in hundreds of people day after day, and then having to speak separately to all those who can't get into the halls?

Right. We'll take your word for it.

No, but as 1983 shows filling halls counts for sod all in elections. The challenge is reaching out to the swing voters not a relatively small number of activists. I see no evidence Corbyn is doing that, and his program doesn't look credible enough to me to achieve that.

[Willow904]

Should have added, the only one who is getting out there, reaching a huge amount of people and getting his message across, is Corbyn.

Like it or not he's doing the business....

I'm afraid my cynicism is such that I can't help feeling he's only getting his message out there because the right-wing press is letting him. It may all be phrased in a negative 'Corbyn's policies are madness' kind of way, but it is effectively spreading his message, nonetheless. With the others it's all selective quoting and sneering, evidence-free, put downs and as little reference to their manifestos as possible. It's deliberate and manipulative and makes me uneasy. I don't like being played and that's how it feels, right down to the polls that put him in the lead - after the GE where inaccurate polls shaped the entire media output in the last few weeks of the campaign to the Tories advantage, I distrust the narrative they have helped create in this leadership contest.

[howsillyofme1]

No, he is enthusing a tiny self selecting electorate. It is a huge mistake to map that to the other 98% of the population.

So the others are drawing in hundreds of people day after day, and then having to speak separately to all those who can't get into the halls?

Right. We'll take your word for it.

No, but as 1983 shows filling halls counts for sod all in elections. The challenge is reaching out to the swing voters not a relatively small number of activists. I see no evidence Corbyn is doing that, and his program doesn't look credible enough to me to achieve that.

This argument cuts no ice with me......I do not believe any of the other contenders can win either.

Your argument is predicated on the fact that the others actually stand a chance in 2020...I don't think they will at all

I am taking a risk but continuity with the other 3 sees no win.....

[ohsocynical]

Should have added, the only one who is getting out there, reaching a huge amount of people and getting his message across, is Corbyn.

Like it or not he's doing the business....

No, he is enthusing a tiny self selecting electorate. It is a huge mistake to map that to the other 98% of the population.

dd; except Ohso.

You're being quite dismissive in some of your replies. Some of us might not have had the education you've had, but we're not stupid and we have better manners.

[ephemerid]

At least such proposals would be aired Hugo.
At the moment they are left to the fringe parties.

I'm beginning to understand the arguments of some who in the past I've seen as unrealistic.
There comes a point where the same old no longer works.
What was New Labour is old hat.

Sometimes change is very uncomfortable. It is scary.
There was a famous American body work therapist who used to say you have to stop doing what you've been used to doing. It will be painful. Something different will emerge in time.

Many of us are finding that it is just too painful to carry on doing what we've been doing.

If Corbyn wins I hope the result will show that many, many regular Labour members are 'shy' lefties.
The next step is to allow voters to unleash their shy left wing personas.
If we keep telling them, as Labour people, that being left wing is not an option why should they be ?

Good post, yahyah.

Insanity is endlessly repeating the same behaviour in the hope of a different result.

It is not true that all who intend to vote for Corbyn, or have voted for him already, are in agreement with everything he proposes.
It is not true that Corbyn's policies represent a return to the past; they are left-wing ideas which appear more radical than they are because the centre has now shifted so far to the right it's hard to tell the difference between the policies of the 2 main parties.
It is not true that a Corbyn-led cabinet would necessarily insist that all the policies in his manifesto must be adopted, far from it.

It is also not true, despite some assertions to the contrary, that the only job of the Leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition is to look like he/she could be a Prime Minister. That leader has the job of mounting an effective and robust opposition to the executive.

Some of us here, me included, think that Corbyn could do that - but he can only do it if he has the support of his party behind him.
When politicians as senior as Cooper, a politician who aspires to lead her party, refuses to work with a person she doesn't approve of irrespective of what her party decides, the Labour Party is heading for trouble. When others like Umunna and Hunt decide to form a new backbench alliance, when as yet they do not know the outcome of the election nor whether they will be called to serve whoever wins, the Labour Party is heading for trouble. If a split happens, it will be a split they are engineering right now.

Corbyn will be blamed for their personal failings and their lack of party loyalty on the grounds that none of this would be happening if their colleagues hadn't supported his nomination. Well, they did. And now he's winning, they don't like it. Tough.

I am a Milifan. I think he somehow managed to gain the respect - if grudging in some quarters - from the PLP and I think he is the best PM we haven't had yet. I hope he comes back, and I hope it's sooner rather than later. But right now, we are where we are.

The Labour Party must vote, then the heirarchy and the PLP must get behind whoever wins, and must do it wholeheartedly. Whatever the result, the membership will have spoken, even if these hubristic and arrogant people refuse to see that change is coming and it might not be change they want to see. Never mind - they can argue their case and work for unity. That's their job.

[citizenJA]

Should have added, the only one who is getting out there, reaching a huge amount of people and getting his message across, is Corbyn.

Like it or not he's doing the business....

No, he is enthusing a tiny self selecting electorate. It is a huge mistake to map that to the other 98% of the population.

Corbyn is Labour and the media is giving him a lot of attention.
There's nothing wrong with him.
If he inspires the electorate with his use of public transportation, jumpers knit by his mother, sandals and cooperative socialism - good.

Labour General Election 2015 - a decent campaign, excellent manifesto, responsible policies and a fine leader.
The electorate made a mistake not returning that Labour government.
But that's what we've got so, what the hell?

Let Corbyn bring Labour to people if that's what media want to do.
He's a Labour party MP.

[SpinningHugo]

So the others are drawing in hundreds of people day after day, and then having to speak separately to all those who can't get into the halls?

Right. We'll take your word for it.

No, but as 1983 shows filling halls counts for sod all in elections. The challenge is reaching out to the swing voters not a relatively small number of activists. I see no evidence Corbyn is doing that, and his program doesn't look credible enough to me to achieve that.

This argument cuts no ice with me......I do not believe any of the other contenders can win either.

Your argument is predicated on the fact that the others actually stand a chance in 2020...I don't think they will at all

I am taking a risk but continuity with the other 3 sees no win.....[/quodes

A counsel of despair.

Please. Don't vote Corbyn.

[ephemerid]

A claim to "fame" I have is that I was last in the Marathon of the World Student Games of 1991(for which the recently demolished Don Valley stadium was built,where Ennis trained.I wasn't a student you also gained entry via doing the previous years Sheffield Marathon).I got a police motor cycle escort for the last few miles,including a glass of orange which a pub gave me on the police announcing "last person to finish the Marathon"They had to radio ahead to keep the finish open,and I got a ride to the train station on finishing.They didn't drug test me for some reason.

Perhaps they should have done, A.

Your competitors from Korea, Japan, and the Peoples' Republic Of North Korea who deprived you of your medal - not to mention the other how ever many it was who pipped you to the post - might have tampered with your Robinsons.

I would have been jolly suspicious.

[citizenJA]

I know I am probably, like most human beings would do, looking for confirmation bias to make me feel better about my vote choice.
But one thing in Corbyn's piece in the Observer really resonated with me.

Corbyn says 'We need a Labour government in 2020, but we cannot wait until then.
Labour has to be a strong and constructive opposition in the next five years.
If we can win the argument in the country, then perhaps we can force this government to change course.'

All the focus on 'he can't win an election' misses that point.

The leader of the opposition has one function, he has to win an election, and he has to look like he can win an election.

Michael Foot was a very strong critic of Thatcher, she totally ignored him. You can only influence politics by looking like a winner. Cameron will trim to the left only if he thinks he is at risk of losing the election. Corbyn simply hasn't got a hope in hell of getting any sort of result, Cameron will just laugh at him and treat him with high handed contempt.*

*citation needed

Cameron will laugh with high handed contempt at any Labour party leader but that will likely stop soon enough.
Tory government probably already understand winning the 2015 GE was a bad career move for them all.

[ephemerid]

Should have added, the only one who is getting out there, reaching a huge amount of people and getting his message across, is Corbyn.

Like it or not he's doing the business....

No, he is enthusing a tiny self selecting electorate. It is a huge mistake to map that to the other 98% of the population.

dd; except Ohso.

You're being quite dismissive in some of your replies. Some of us might not have had the education you've had, but we're not stupid and we have better manners.

Quite.

I've got a Degree in Stating The Obvious from The University of Life.

Oh yes.

If you're willing to ignore your decades of experience and observation, I'll ignore the alphabet soup I can put after my name.

Meanwhile, it is a truth not universally acknowledged that all supporters of all people in all situations are self-selecting.

Just trying to save a bit of time engaging in circular argument, like.

[ephemerid]

Corbyn simply hasn't got a hope in hell of getting any sort of result, Cameron will just laugh at him and treat him with high handed contempt.*

*citation needed[/quote]

**there isn't one

[PaulfromYorkshire]

Evening All

I still really really don't like this or any leadership contest and just regret that Ed has gone.

So, I'm still very much out of the loop and I'm sure this has already been covered. But what outcome does Cameron most fear? I read that Tories are signing up with Labour to vote Corbyn. But why would they? While I can see that Corbyn might struggle to win an election, there is no doubt he will be an outspoken and coherent critic of Cameron.

[citizenJA]

So interesting on China.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34033208

Are Chinese shares overvalued with companies struggling against reduced demand and high debt levels?

Or

Is the crisis itself called by falling stock prices triggering margin calls from over-leveraged investors?

If the latter throwing pension money at the problem might help, but if the fundamentals are bad this is just throwing good money into a pit. In the same way rich investors tried to (and failed to) reverse market trends by making headline big investments after the Wall Street crash.

The global financial infrastructure is falling apart some more.