Wednesday 14th October 2015

Post by **refitman** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 7:11 am

Morning all.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 8:30 am

Good morfternoon.

(I don't like to think of anyone sitting out there like a lonely little petunia in an onion patch.)

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 8:39 am

I found this an interesting read -

We’re not as selfish as we think we are: here’s the proof
George Monbiot

Stories of greed and ego bombard us. But a new study shows that humans are inherently good

I blow hot and cold on this - but, overall, I think (possibly over-optimistically) it's true.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ently-good

Edited to remove a wandering "i"

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 8:42 am

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]

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 8:43 am

Report on the same here http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/10 ... _hp_ref=uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 8:56 am

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.

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 9:00 am

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... et-surplus

Osborne said: “A fortnight ago, Labour told voters they were ready to back our plans. But now, they have confirmed they want to go on borrowing forever – loading debts onto our children that they can never hope to repay. This is not socialist compassion – it’s economic cruelty. As Labour’s Great Recession showed, those who suffer most when government run unsustainable deficits are not the richest but the poorest.
“So today, with Labour’s economic policy in obvious chaos, I call on all moderate, progressive Labour MPs to defy their leadership and join with us to vote for economic sanity. Failing that, they should at least follow the advice of the former shadow chancellor and abstain.”

Rather like the Belgrano, the economy was heading in the other direction when the Tories torpedoed it.

Surely any Labour MPs who are swayed by the above call, really should be considering their future?

Edited, to replace Bismarck with Belgrano.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 9:01 am

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 thought this at the time but she definitely says that there is an over-consumption of steel in the world and yet hansard...

Anna Soubry: So have I. [Interruption.] You know what, that is so out of order. [Interruption.] Well, I do. I find it offensive and sexist, and the hon. Gentleman should know better. I know he has a bigger majority than me, but in Broxtowe more people voted for me than for him in Bolsover. He needs to understand that there is under-consumption of steel in the world. The price of steel has almost halved. Fine words are not enough. Realism and action are required. We have to live in the real world, not the fantasy world of the ’60s.

I remember in that programme about the Commons, Rees-Mogg used to go back and get things corrected - presumably Soubry went back and said "I didn't mean over...I meant to say under"

Post by **refitman** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 9:03 am

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.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 9:05 am

Morning all.

Good to hear Stephanie Flanders blowing a big fat raspberry at at Osborne's fiscal responsibility pile of nonsense.

Also interesting to then hear Gauke try to defend it but there's a bit of a gap in the logic.

Gauke said that the trend rates for GDP are in the 2-2.5 percent. But then says that anything under 1% would be classed as outside 'normal times'.

So what about the 1-2% range then? According to Osborne's rule...that's 'normal'.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 9:11 am

Have to admit to being genuinely confused by Ohso's comment yesterday evening suggesting "you lot need to get with the programme". Let me make my position clear, what I am attempting to do is critique, pointing out some shortcomings in the Corbyn strategies in the hope that we can all recognize it, amend them, and move forward; however it seems that a good number of posters on here take such critique as outright condemnation of Corbyn and support for the machinations of the Blairite right of the Party. If you genuinely think that then I, and others, are wasting our time here and this place will become the echo chamber the vile Rusty has always claimed it to be.

Over to you folks.

Post by **refitman** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 9:23 am

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Have to admit to being genuinely confused by Ohso's comment yesterday evening suggesting "you lot need to get with the programme". Let me make my position clear, what I am attempting to do is critique, pointing out some shortcomings in the Corbyn strategies in the hope that we can all recognize it, amend them, and move forward; however it seems that a good number of posters on here take such critique as outright condemnation of Corbyn and support for the machinations of the Blairite right of the Party. If you genuinely think that then I, and others, are wasting our time here and this place will become the echo chamber the vile Rusty has always claimed it to be.

Over to you folks.

Good words TGS.

While there are constructive non-pro-Corbyn comments (he would do better if... etc), it seems that the overwhelmingly negative ones (he's killed the party, Labour are doomed, he's useless) appear to be holding peoples attention.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 9:39 am

refitman wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Have to admit to being genuinely confused by Ohso's comment yesterday evening suggesting "you lot need to get with the programme". Let me make my position clear, what I am attempting to do is critique, pointing out some shortcomings in the Corbyn strategies in the hope that we can all recognize it, amend them, and move forward; however it seems that a good number of posters on here take such critique as outright condemnation of Corbyn and support for the machinations of the Blairite right of the Party. If you genuinely think that then I, and others, are wasting our time here and this place will become the echo chamber the vile Rusty has always claimed it to be.

Over to you folks.
Good words TGS.

While there are constructive non-pro-Corbyn comments (he would do better if... etc), it seems that the overwhelmingly negative ones (he's killed the party, Labour are doomed, he's useless) appear to be holding peoples attention.

And if anybody can show me where I've said any of that I'll be very surprised. My posts have been an attempt to suggest "he would do better if .... - for example, by not giving the Fourth Estate such easy opportunities on a plate, of by giving himself chances to respond to and refute Cameron in PMQs - , but it seems that doing so puts me on a par with Simon Danczuk for some here (not you Ohso, please don't think I was singling you out, I was just surprised by the vehemence of your post).

I think the majority of his Cabinet appointments were good (apart from the return of serial liability Dianne Abbott), especially John McDonnell as Chancellor; those of us who lived in London back in the GLC days will remember McDonnell did a pretty decent job as Ken's Chair of Finance and Deputy Leader, in tough funding circumstances not dissimilar to those facing us today ....well, up until the point where they fell out over rate capping. My views on Watson are known, and that appointment was not Jeremy's but due to the Labour Party electorate; I have to respect that decision, but I've always feared we would regret it.

Critique is not negativity, it is about suggesting people look at things dispassionately. But passion seems to be ruling the roost at the moment here, on Twitter and elsewhere, something I think will be damaging in the long run; if people like me feel that they are being silenced then we are at the top of a very long & slippery slope. I hope I'm wrong, but increasingly I feel without hope.

Post by **refitman** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 9:49 am

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
refitman wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Have to admit to being genuinely confused by Ohso's comment yesterday evening suggesting "you lot need to get with the programme". Let me make my position clear, what I am attempting to do is critique, pointing out some shortcomings in the Corbyn strategies in the hope that we can all recognize it, amend them, and move forward; however it seems that a good number of posters on here take such critique as outright condemnation of Corbyn and support for the machinations of the Blairite right of the Party. If you genuinely think that then I, and others, are wasting our time here and this place will become the echo chamber the vile Rusty has always claimed it to be.

Over to you folks.
Good words TGS.

While there are constructive non-pro-Corbyn comments (he would do better if... etc), it seems that the overwhelmingly negative ones (he's killed the party, Labour are doomed, he's useless) appear to be holding peoples attention.
And if anybody can show me where I've said any of that I'll be very surprised. My posts have been an attempt to suggest "he would do better if .... - for example, by not giving the Fourth Estate such easy opportunities on a plate, of by giving himself chances to respond to and refute Cameron in PMQs - , but it seems that doing so puts me on a par with Simon Danczuk for some here (not you Ohso, please don't think I was singling you out, I was just surprised by the vehemence of your post).

I think the majority of his Cabinet appointments were good (apart from the return of serial liability Dianne Abbott), especially John McDonnell as Chancellor; those of us who lived in London back in the GLC days will remember McDonnell did a pretty decent job as Ken's Chair of Finance and Deputy Leader, in tough funding circumstances not dissimilar to those facing us today ....well, up until the point where they fell out over rate capping. My views on Watson are known, and that appointment was not Jeremy's but due to the Labour Party electorate; I have to respect that decision, but I've always feared we would regret it.

Critique is not negativity, it is about suggesting people look at things dispassionately. But passion seems to be ruling the roost at the moment here, on Twitter and elsewhere, something I think will be damaging in the long run; if people like me feel that they are being silenced then we are at the top of a very long & slippery slope. I hope I'm wrong, but increasingly I feel without hope.

Sorry, wasn't accusing you of being in the "we're doomed" group.

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 9:53 am

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Have to admit to being genuinely confused by Ohso's comment yesterday evening suggesting "you lot need to get with the programme". Let me make my position clear, what I am attempting to do is critique, pointing out some shortcomings in the Corbyn strategies in the hope that we can all recognize it, amend them, and move forward; however it seems that a good number of posters on here take such critique as outright condemnation of Corbyn and support for the machinations of the Blairite right of the Party. If you genuinely think that then I, and others, are wasting our time here and this place will become the echo chamber the vile Rusty has always claimed it to be.

Over to you folks.

Good morning

I am not a great supporter of Corbyn and wish that we had managed to find a genuine left wing radical who did not have the baggage but those type of people were weeded out of the party since the Blair years - only now did we see them start return in the 2010 and 2015 intakes

In the end though Corbyn won a crushing victory and he clearly has a mandate from the party etc move things to the left. Personally I think he has tried pretty hard to allay some of these fears and, in fact, it is this that has caused him the most problems. The McDonnell austerity bill statement a few weeks ago, Trident and others have actually been pushed by the right of the party screeching for him to set out his agenda or they will take their ball home with them

There have been some fair critiques from a number of posters on here and we, as true members of the left will always be dissenters to an extent. In fact I have seen very little to suggest that Corbyn is demanding a blind following of ultra-left policies. Tubby, TGS, Willow and HindleA have all contributed to the debate and have made some good points about where Corbyn has made mistakes and how he could possibly rectify them. They clearly are not ideological soulmates of Corbyn, and they should not change their views just because he is leader.

I do not agree with some of their comments but that is mainly because I have a much more cynical view of the media and the neoliberal wing of the party. I think there are some members who are not just dissenting but are being used as willing pawns by the Tories and their allies in undermining the party. There are not that many and we could probably name most of them but they are vocal and have unfettered access to the media

Labour still has some very good politicians and I hope over time we can see less tension - people like Burnham, Cooper, Starmer, Nandy, Jarvis etc are still the future of the party post-2020 and I hope they can work with Corbyn to marry his ability to reach out to the radicals and disenfranchised with their understanding of how to frame the argument. If he can get Ed back in some capacity as well that would be a real bonus

The upshot is that there may need to be some bloodletting...in order to change there has to be a break with the past, people like Mandelson, and some of the acolytes of the neoliberal ring may need to be cut out of things if they cannot accept that the party is going to move to the left. If they want to cross the floor then good luck to them....or even move to the Lib Dems lol. It may cause a storm now but the sooner they make up their minds the better. It is FiFo. And before you say it...yes, Corbyn was always a dissenter himself in the past but the way he went about int was different - and he never used it to undermine the party to the benefit of the Tories. He could always articulate his reasoning as well - based upon his own principles. If you hear a Chris Leslie or a Danczuk - they have no real reasoning.

To me the argument made that Miliband was the final straw. He tried to move the party to the left in his own way and was supported by many on here and in the party. A truly talented and courageous politician. And who did for him.....the same forces that are going after Corbyn...the same names and he same newspapers. It was not the left that lost the election in 2015 it was the same people who want to lose it in 2020 so they, in their own minds, can bring it back to the right.

This is why I do not believe there is an way that a 'media strategy' will have any effect with the MSM - their die is cast and it shall stay the same until 2020 - if Corbyn was replaced by someone like Jarvis or Starmer there will be an initial attempt to pull them back to the right. If they resist they will be attacked as well (all Starmer's decisions in the CPS will be raked over, and Jarvis will have his army career looked at as well for skeletons). The only way is the neoliberal way for these people....raping of the poor to enrich the wealthy

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 10:07 am

refitman wrote: Sorry, wasn't accusing you of being in the "we're doomed" group.

Sorry Dan, realized you weren't, but others appear to be doing just that. I looked in for a while before I started posting again, and saw something of a mob mentality emerging where anybody not eulogizing Corbyn was being leapt on, which definitely made me think twice about posting again and (I suspect) has silenced more than one person. But if that is what people want ......

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 10:16 am

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.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 10:23 am

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
refitman wrote: Sorry, wasn't accusing you of being in the "we're doomed" group.
Sorry Dan, realized you weren't, but others appear to be doing just that. I looked in for a while before I started posting again, and saw something of a mob mentality emerging where anybody not eulogizing Corbyn was being leapt on, which definitely made me think twice about posting again and (I suspect) has silenced more than one person. But if that is what people want ......

It depends on your interpretation of 'not eulogizing Corbyn'. I can't think of anyone here who does eulogize him, tbh.

I think people, by which I suppose I mean me, hear enough criticism of Corbyn and McDonnell in the MSM and prefer something a bit more positive here.

Also I prefer it when we're not engaged in Labour party introspection, there's a big world out there and nesters have lots of different experiences to share.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 10:32 am

If we can't even muck along here, how can we expect the wider party to operate effectively ?

These are strange times, it isn't business as usual.
Well presented sound bites from those now on the back benches, and slick media communications didn't win Labour the election in May.

Must admit that McDonnell's original stance on the budget charter felt odd, but I swallowed it and thought 'ok, not what I expected but I should trust him' as I did with many things from Labour over the years, be it under Blair, Brown, Ed.

Maybe that's a sort of blind loyalty, but to some extent unless you are an economist or an expert in parliamentary process you have to take a lot on trust.

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 10:33 am

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?

I don't know, Toby, but was it on my part to suggest she may be pig-headed?

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 10:41 am

I've been looking for tabloid and Murdoch media apologies to Tom Watson after the revelation that the police had already interviewed Brittan.
Search seems to be in vain.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 10:48 am

howsillyofme1 wrote: Good morning

I am not a great supporter of Corbyn and wish that we had managed to find a genuine left wing radical who did not have the baggage but those type of people were weeded out of the party since the Blair years - only now did we see them start return in the 2010 and 2015 intakes

In the end though Corbyn won a crushing victory and he clearly has a mandate from the party etc move things to the left. Personally I think he has tried pretty hard to allay some of these fears and, in fact, it is this that has caused him the most problems. The McDonnell austerity bill statement a few weeks ago, Trident and others have actually been pushed by the right of the party screeching for him to set out his agenda or they will take their ball home with them

There have been some fair critiques from a number of posters on here and we, as true members of the left will always be dissenters to an extent. In fact I have seen very little to suggest that Corbyn is demanding a blind following of ultra-left policies. Tubby, TGS, Willow and HindleA have all contributed to the debate and have made some good points about where Corbyn has made mistakes and how he could possibly rectify them. They clearly are not ideological soulmates of Corbyn, and they should not change their views just because he is leader.

I do not agree with some of their comments but that is mainly because I have a much more cynical view of the media and the neoliberal wing of the party. I think there are some members who are not just dissenting but are being used as willing pawns by the Tories and their allies in undermining the party. There are not that many and we could probably name most of them but they are vocal and have unfettered access to the media

Labour still has some very good politicians and I hope over time we can see less tension - people like Burnham, Cooper, Starmer, Nandy, Jarvis etc are still the future of the party post-2020 and I hope they can work with Corbyn to marry his ability to reach out to the radicals and disenfranchised with their understanding of how to frame the argument. If he can get Ed back in some capacity as well that would be a real bonus

The upshot is that there may need to be some bloodletting...in order to change there has to be a break with the past, people like Mandelson, and some of the acolytes of the neoliberal ring may need to be cut out of things if they cannot accept that the party is going to move to the left. If they want to cross the floor then good luck to them....or even move to the Lib Dems lol. It may cause a storm now but the sooner they make up their minds the better. It is FiFo. And before you say it...yes, Corbyn was always a dissenter himself in the past but the way he went about int was different - and he never used it to undermine the party to the benefit of the Tories. He could always articulate his reasoning as well - based upon his own principles. If you hear a Chris Leslie or a Danczuk - they have no real reasoning.

To me the argument made that Miliband was the final straw. He tried to move the party to the left in his own way and was supported by many on here and in the party. A truly talented and courageous politician. And who did for him.....the same forces that are going after Corbyn...the same names and he same newspapers. It was not the left that lost the election in 2015 it was the same people who want to lose it in 2020 so they, in their own minds, can bring it back to the right.

This is why I do not believe there is an way that a 'media strategy' will have any effect with the MSM - their die is cast and it shall stay the same until 2020 - if Corbyn was replaced by someone like Jarvis or Starmer there will be an initial attempt to pull them back to the right. If they resist they will be attacked as well (all Starmer's decisions in the CPS will be raked over, and Jarvis will have his army career looked at as well for skeletons). The only way is the neoliberal way for these people....raping of the poor to enrich the wealthy

You'd have to be going some to be more cynical about the MSM than me!!

And while I agree that a 'media strategy' will have little, if any, effect that doesn't mean that there shouldn't be one; as I said yesterday I know Jeremy's USP is his "I'm a political rule breaker" approach, something that will prove to be a strength in the long run, that doesn't mean he can pretend that the rules don't exist - they do exist, at the moment they are set by the Fourth Estate, so the approach should be to find a way to nullify them and get the Labour message to the electorate. Miliband was beginning to look at ways of doing that (the online unit, Gloria De Piero's Doorstep teams etc) and, although they proved not to be as effective as they should have been they were a sensible first step; I think Corbyn should be building on that, not ignoring it, but it seems I may be in a minority here.

I think people, by which I suppose I mean me, hear enough criticism of Corbyn and McDonnell in the MSM and prefer something a bit more positive here.

Fair comment, but I think we also need to acknowledge that some of the MSM stuff (albeit not much) needs to be taken on board, it can't just be ignored however much we think it should. But I'm a lone voice on that one, so probably wrong.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 10:48 am

Some good news.

UKIP lose control of Thanet Council as their fifth party member quits.

http://www.thanetgazette.co.uk/Ukip-los ... story.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 10:49 am

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......

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 10:50 am

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
refitman wrote: Sorry, wasn't accusing you of being in the "we're doomed" group.
Sorry Dan, realized you weren't, but others appear to be doing just that. I looked in for a while before I started posting again, and saw something of a mob mentality emerging where anybody not eulogizing Corbyn was being leapt on, which definitely made me think twice about posting again and (I suspect) has silenced more than one person. But if that is what people want ......

I haven't sensed this to be honest - I think there is a difference in not supporting Corbyn but in a constructive manner - which makes up the vast majority of the posts and attacking everything he says and does using the same arguments as the Tories do. A good Labour supporter will find enough to challenge Corbyn on without resorting to the stale and spun arguments of the Tories

The example of the austerity bill is a good example. There was a lot of criticism of the choice of McDonnell over Eagle on here and elsewhere when it was made from all sides. He reacted to the criticisms by trying to make himself look 'credible' by accepting to play along with Osborne (he made this clear at the time that he saw it all as a crass game) - this was demanded by people. When it became clear it was a silly move then he was again criticised....by the same people who were demanding he do it in the first place!

Then there was the Shadow Cabinet composition - focus on the so-called 'high offices' when he had actually done some great things in his appointment. 50% women, minister for mental health, a strong team on housing, appointments of opponents. the focus though was on this lack of women in certain roles and his appointment of Abbot (not one I support but if he hadn't appointed her then I can imagine cries of disloyalty and snubbing)

Finally all the guff about Trident.....it was made out that this argument was all of Corbyn's making - it wasn't it was the right that kept demanding an answer and making up all sorts of nonsense scenarios. What it did do was expose the problems with MAD as an argument

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 10:57 am

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
howsillyofme1 wrote: Good morning

I am not a great supporter of Corbyn and wish that we had managed to find a genuine left wing radical who did not have the baggage but those type of people were weeded out of the party since the Blair years - only now did we see them start return in the 2010 and 2015 intakes

In the end though Corbyn won a crushing victory and he clearly has a mandate from the party etc move things to the left. Personally I think he has tried pretty hard to allay some of these fears and, in fact, it is this that has caused him the most problems. The McDonnell austerity bill statement a few weeks ago, Trident and others have actually been pushed by the right of the party screeching for him to set out his agenda or they will take their ball home with them

There have been some fair critiques from a number of posters on here and we, as true members of the left will always be dissenters to an extent. In fact I have seen very little to suggest that Corbyn is demanding a blind following of ultra-left policies. Tubby, TGS, Willow and HindleA have all contributed to the debate and have made some good points about where Corbyn has made mistakes and how he could possibly rectify them. They clearly are not ideological soulmates of Corbyn, and they should not change their views just because he is leader.

I do not agree with some of their comments but that is mainly because I have a much more cynical view of the media and the neoliberal wing of the party. I think there are some members who are not just dissenting but are being used as willing pawns by the Tories and their allies in undermining the party. There are not that many and we could probably name most of them but they are vocal and have unfettered access to the media

Labour still has some very good politicians and I hope over time we can see less tension - people like Burnham, Cooper, Starmer, Nandy, Jarvis etc are still the future of the party post-2020 and I hope they can work with Corbyn to marry his ability to reach out to the radicals and disenfranchised with their understanding of how to frame the argument. If he can get Ed back in some capacity as well that would be a real bonus

The upshot is that there may need to be some bloodletting...in order to change there has to be a break with the past, people like Mandelson, and some of the acolytes of the neoliberal ring may need to be cut out of things if they cannot accept that the party is going to move to the left. If they want to cross the floor then good luck to them....or even move to the Lib Dems lol. It may cause a storm now but the sooner they make up their minds the better. It is FiFo. And before you say it...yes, Corbyn was always a dissenter himself in the past but the way he went about int was different - and he never used it to undermine the party to the benefit of the Tories. He could always articulate his reasoning as well - based upon his own principles. If you hear a Chris Leslie or a Danczuk - they have no real reasoning.

To me the argument made that Miliband was the final straw. He tried to move the party to the left in his own way and was supported by many on here and in the party. A truly talented and courageous politician. And who did for him.....the same forces that are going after Corbyn...the same names and he same newspapers. It was not the left that lost the election in 2015 it was the same people who want to lose it in 2020 so they, in their own minds, can bring it back to the right.

This is why I do not believe there is an way that a 'media strategy' will have any effect with the MSM - their die is cast and it shall stay the same until 2020 - if Corbyn was replaced by someone like Jarvis or Starmer there will be an initial attempt to pull them back to the right. If they resist they will be attacked as well (all Starmer's decisions in the CPS will be raked over, and Jarvis will have his army career looked at as well for skeletons). The only way is the neoliberal way for these people....raping of the poor to enrich the wealthy
You'd have to be going some to be more cynical about the MSM than me!! And while I agree that a 'media strategy' will have little, if any, effect that doesn't mean that there shouldn't be one; as I said yesterday I know Jeremy's USP is his "I'm a political rule breaker" approach, something that will prove to be a strength in the long run, that doesn't mean he can pretend that the rules don't exist - they do exist, at the moment they are set by the Fourth Estate, so the approach should be to find a way to nullify them and get the Labour message to the electorate. Miliband was beginning to look at ways of doing that (the online unit, Gloria De Piero's Doorstep teams etc) and, although they proved not to be as effective as they should have been they were a sensible first step; I think Corbyn should be building on that, not ignoring it, but it seems I may be in a minority here.

I actually agree with you and hope he puts something in place...he is only a couple of months in though so he needs to be given some time. It took Ed a long time and the party as a whole made the much, much worse mistake post 2010 of not attacking the 'Labour spent all the money' argument. This was not helped by Liam Byrne (not a Corbynite) and his note.

The fact is though this lack of a media rebuttal team is presented as being a catastrophic thing when Labour has not been good at this since the Campbell years and, in my opinion, would have a limited effect anyway (this is why I say it is not so important) at the moment.

The MSM want two right-wing parties and will only be happy when that is the case. It will never happen in my view but they are still fighting hard for it. No Labour leader who tries to have a different approach stands a chance...

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 10:57 am

It is easy to read something and think it is aimed at you, when it isn't.
Or maybe you realise that you have done whatever it is that the poster complains about, and that makes you bridle because you know it is true but won't admit it.

If that makes sense.

I often make a comment after quoting someone else, it doesn't mean that all my thoughts are aimed at that person specifically, just that it has triggered something.
Considering we communicate via the net it is maybe surprising how well we do manage to get along.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 10:58 am

Blanchflower also said it was a “surprise” when John McDonnnell originally said Labour would back the charter. But the party was in the right place now, he said.

This is early days, policy making is messy and it takes some time to work out what you are going to do ... There are clearly political things going on. I think the right decision has now been reached.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blo ... ive-debate" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yep, I agree with Blanchflower's assessment. Osborne's fiscal charter is a joke, a stunt. Even if you agree with running a surplus in good times, it isn't sensible to legislate for it. I really hope all Labour MPs vote against it as it will piss Osborne off no end that a policy solely aimed at splitting the Labour party ends up doing little more than making him look really stupid trying to pass a law to make himself do something he says he wants to do anyway.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 11:16 am

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
I think people, by which I suppose I mean me, hear enough criticism of Corbyn and McDonnell in the MSM and prefer something a bit more positive here.
Fair comment, but I think we also need to acknowledge that some of the MSM stuff (albeit not much) needs to be taken on board, it can't just be ignored however much we think it should. But I'm a lone voice on that one, so probably wrong.

I think we do take it on board, just don't necessarily want to hear it again here?

What's the point of a FTN that reads like the MSM?

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 11:17 am

Willow904 wrote:
Blanchflower also said it was a “surprise” when John McDonnnell originally said Labour would back the charter. But the party was in the right place now, he said.

This is early days, policy making is messy and it takes some time to work out what you are going to do ... There are clearly political things going on. I think the right decision has now been reached.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blo ... ive-debate" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yep, I agree with Blanchflower's assessment. Osborne's fiscal charter is a joke, a stunt. Even if you agree with running a surplus in good times, it isn't sensible to legislate for it. I really hope all Labour MPs vote against it as it will piss Osborne off no end that a policy solely aimed at splitting the Labour party ends up doing little more than making him look really stupid trying to pass a law to make himself do something he says he wants to do anyway.

Spot on. Mind you, always worth running a little stat past the Tory boys; in 18 years of Thatcher/Major the Tories managed to run a surplus only 3 times, in the 13 Labour years they managed it 4 times and would probably have managed more but for the global credit crash.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 11:18 am

With all the issues of agency work, zero hours and under employment, affecting so many, surely the media reporting headlines of 'Unemployment down' is pretty meaningless ?

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 11:19 am

gilsey wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
I think people, by which I suppose I mean me, hear enough criticism of Corbyn and McDonnell in the MSM and prefer something a bit more positive here.
Fair comment, but I think we also need to acknowledge that some of the MSM stuff (albeit not much) needs to be taken on board, it can't just be ignored however much we think it should. But I'm a lone voice on that one, so probably wrong.
I think we do take it on board, just don't necessarily want to hear it again here?

What's the point of a FTN that reads like the MSM?

So that is shut up or sod off then? Fair enough.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 11:20 am

It's up again in the northeast.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 11:23 am

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
gilsey wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote: Fair comment, but I think we also need to acknowledge that some of the MSM stuff (albeit not much) needs to be taken on board, it can't just be ignored however much we think it should. But I'm a lone voice on that one, so probably wrong.
I think we do take it on board, just don't necessarily want to hear it again here?

What's the point of a FTN that reads like the MSM?
So that is shut up or sod off then? Fair enough.

That's not what I said.

Mix up your critiques of Corbyn with your other excellent insights, that's all I ask. And if you don't, I'll just skip your posts, no problem. Others will have their own views.

nickyinnorfolk · Post by **nickyinnorfolk** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 11:26 am

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 used to think Soubry was one of the least worst Tories (mostly due to her run ins with Farage and co). Melanie Phillips quoted her as saying, about her time as a barrister, that her clients got in trouble with the law mostly because they had 'shitty lives'. Phillips said she was puzzled as to why Soubry had consequently nailed her colours to the Tory mast, rather than Labour. As it was 'Mad Mel' writing in the Mail, she probably asked the question for the wrong reason, but nevertheless she had a point.

Soubry has gone down in my estimation after that exchange with Dennis Skinner. She's following the creed of the 80s that heavy industry isn't worth saving. For example, the British motor cycle industry was allowed to go to the wall back then because it was losing money. The same thing was happening to the Italian motor cycle industry, due to cheaper products from Japan. However, the Italian government supported the industry, with the consequence that Italian motorbikes regained their former position as market leaders.

The human cost of decimating industry can't be underestimated - the Tories' plans for Redcar are incredibly vague, but no doubt victim blaming will play a big part.

Furthermore, Dennis had a point - Soubry *does* look like Thatcher, and how it's sexist to say she looks like another woman is difficult to fathom. I'd also say, to quote Churchill (referring to De Gaulle, who was a great source of frustration to him and his colleagues during WW2) she looks like a 'female llama outraged when found taking a bath'.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 11:28 am

gilsey wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
I think people, by which I suppose I mean me, hear enough criticism of Corbyn and McDonnell in the MSM and prefer something a bit more positive here.
Fair comment, but I think we also need to acknowledge that some of the MSM stuff (albeit not much) needs to be taken on board, it can't just be ignored however much we think it should. But I'm a lone voice on that one, so probably wrong.
I think we do take it on board, just don't necessarily want to hear it again here?

What's the point of a FTN that reads like the MSM?

Agree with that.

But this site is still a haven though, even when it is struggling.

Have just looked in at Andrew's blog.
It is a nightmare. Hard to tell whether the Labour & Corbyn haters are right wing, nats, or 'Labour supporters' like Dan Hodges. Full of stuff about Corbyn being a sad old tosser.

GetYou · Post by **GetYou** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 11:28 am

I like to think that this is a place where we can deconstruct a lot of the crap that the MSM churns out, which means we need to first acknowledge it.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 11:39 am

refitman wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Have to admit to being genuinely confused by Ohso's comment yesterday evening suggesting "you lot need to get with the programme". Let me make my position clear, what I am attempting to do is critique, pointing out some shortcomings in the Corbyn strategies in the hope that we can all recognize it, amend them, and move forward; however it seems that a good number of posters on here take such critique as outright condemnation of Corbyn and support for the machinations of the Blairite right of the Party. If you genuinely think that then I, and others, are wasting our time here and this place will become the echo chamber the vile Rusty has always claimed it to be.

Over to you folks.
Good words TGS.

While there are constructive non-pro-Corbyn comments (he would do better if... etc), it seems that the overwhelmingly negative ones (he's killed the party, Labour are doomed, he's useless) appear to be holding peoples attention.

This place is not, and has never been, to my knowledge, an echo chamber. It's my go to place for a breadth of opinion, and I love it, even when I'm not posting, and even when I think that people are mulling over the minutiae rather than seeing the bigger picture. I love the way I can come away from reading a days posts and feel both better informed and richer for having been here. There isn't another news source that does that for me.

Even the occasional disagreements are mediated rather than moderated out. It's a good place to come to.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 11:58 am

This bears repeating, in my opinion.

GetYou wrote:I like to think that this is a place where we can deconstruct a lot of the crap that the MSM churns out, which means we need to first acknowledge it.

A succinct expression of a realistic approach.

Post by **refitman** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 12:00 pm

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.

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 12:01 pm

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
Willow904 wrote:
Blanchflower also said it was a “surprise” when John McDonnnell originally said Labour would back the charter. But the party was in the right place now, he said.

This is early days, policy making is messy and it takes some time to work out what you are going to do ... There are clearly political things going on. I think the right decision has now been reached.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blo ... ive-debate" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yep, I agree with Blanchflower's assessment. Osborne's fiscal charter is a joke, a stunt. Even if you agree with running a surplus in good times, it isn't sensible to legislate for it. I really hope all Labour MPs vote against it as it will piss Osborne off no end that a policy solely aimed at splitting the Labour party ends up doing little more than making him look really stupid trying to pass a law to make himself do something he says he wants to do anyway.
Spot on. Mind you, always worth running a little stat past the Tory boys; in 18 years of Thatcher/Major the Tories managed to run a surplus only 3 times, in the 13 Labour years they managed it 4 times and would probably have managed more but for the global credit crash.

Perhaps I should interject here since I am in agreement with you TGS, albeit one of the ones who dislike the infighting on the left. I also wish RobertSnozers shall not leave but if feeling upset or despondent don't blame his taking a break. I too have been feeling somewhat despondent of late but more particularly because of Tory actions, seemingly unopposed or at least with little effect. They are the enemy and in some respects it is even worse where I'm coming from, a former LibDem to the left of the Blairites that took over the Labour party only to witness Orange-Bookers propping the Tories up... and now it's even worse with a Tory majority and all the squabbling that's going on at the moment. I'm beginning to feel a little of the despair that followed the 2010 election after first having hopes raised by Milliband's apparent sincerity and then Corbyn's idealism.

Anyway back to my point, Tories and surpluses, Osborne is a joker through and through but seemingly gets away with it, the trouble is there is nothing funny about him whatsoever. Tories only balance the books by repeatedly offloading public assets below cost or market value and if we look back to Maggie she even had the North Sea oil and gas bonanza and still sold the family silver. Time and time again we see them dragging foreigners in to invest in our future but never making the investment ourselves. The long term effect is to increase our deficit as we end up paying more for essential services and infrastructure, making it even harder to balance the books following a Tory administration, yet somehow the myth of their being good with national security or the economy persists. I really wish people would open their fucking eyes.

Since I'm here and a little irked, I'll shout it loud and clear. Why the fuck do people persist with the idiocy of MAD? Only conventional forces can correctly identify the enemy and then win hearts and minds, nuclear armaments are one of the greatest immoralities of mankind. Imagine a world where such resources had been directed toward peace keeping forces and clean energy.

Rant over.

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 12:13 pm

I totally forgot we've got a PMQs today. iPlayer daily Politics then.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 12:16 pm

TobyLatimer wrote:Report on the same here http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/10 ... _hp_ref=uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sexist?
No, not sexist.

If a Tory MP waxing lyrical about 'prudent, compulsory work without pay for prudent, working class people' with a passing resemblance to John Major, Skinner would've said:
'You even look like Major!'

If Osborne were to describe the latest Tory nightmare policy of taking the offspring away from parents earning less than UK median wage, Skinner would've opined:
'You even look like the Child Snatcher!'
That'd be complimentary part of what Skinner would have to say to Chancellor Jeff, but that's an aside.

Good-afternoon, everyone.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 12:17 pm

GetYou wrote:I like to think that this is a place where we can deconstruct a lot of the crap that the MSM churns out, which means we need to first acknowledge it.

Hear! Hear!

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 12:26 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.

He really is a reactionary curmudgeon these days

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 12:34 pm

A strange response from Soubrey to my mind,how is it extremely offensive to have it pointed out you resemble someone you admired.Does Skinner actually look like a dinosaur?

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 12:39 pm

This Gawke fellow on Daily Politics is a piece of work, isn't he. Lying and rewriting history according to the Tory Handbook. Anyway this £8bn extra put into the NHS last government, does anybody know what happened to the other £4.7 to £5bn that was repeatedly spoken of at the time?

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 12:40 pm

Consensus seem to be that Corbyn did pretty OK?

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 12:44 pm

From the BBC

'Mr Cameron takes a swipe at the unions, once again rejecting Unite's call for online voting in strike ballots, saying he doesn't know what's wrong with filling out a form.'

Cue referencing of the Conservatives mayoral candidate process by political journalists in... Oh.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Wed 14 Oct, 2015 12:51 pm

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

Seemed to get the balance better today, hit the Pig Fiddler with some follow ups that clearly discomfited him, the one area I thought he was weak on last time; Sparrow suggests OGRFG was unfazed, the red, shouty and shiny face would suggest Sparrow is wrong ....again.