Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » By this time next week a large part of Labour’s selectorate

SystemSystem Posts: 5,841
edited August 2015 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » By this time next week a large part of Labour’s selectorate will have cast their votes

The experience of postal voting is that electors tend not to leave their ballots hanging around and fill them in very quickly. So a week today we must assume that a sizeable proportion of the selectorate will have filled in their ballots and put them into the post.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,124
    If Jeremy Corbyn doesn't win from here, I suggest that the opinion pollsters take a period of absence.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I still can't quite believe this is happening.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,264
    antifrank said:

    I suggest that the opinion pollsters take a period of absence.

    More chance of Liz Kendal winning...
  • Another disgraceful article from the BBC, not giving the full facts...

    "Wilson, who has since left the force, was not indicted on any charge, and a Justice Department report found "no evidence" that he had shot at Brown while the teenager was running away or trying to surrender."

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-33856907

    Just miss out the bit about Brown was a criminal that threatened the officer, attacked him and tried to seize his gun, before refusing to be arrested.

    They were still repeating on the radio this morning the "unarmed black teenager shot by a white police officer" line.

    This is highly irresponsible reporting.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,439
    Interesting to see Guardian readers overwhelmingly back Corbyn, Mirror voters are split. You would have expected it to be the other way around, especially given the way the Guardian has been getting after Corbyn.

    Are we seeing the power of the press in reverse: 'You said he was rubbish, so he must be OK.'
  • DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626
    The problem with the polling here and the adjustments made, are that there are too few data points and too much guesswork.
    They could be right (they are the experts after all), but it does look like a thumb in the air guestimate.
  • DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626
    ydoethur said:

    Interesting to see Guardian readers overwhelmingly back Corbyn, Mirror voters are split. You would have expected it to be the other way around, especially given the way the Guardian has been getting after Corbyn.

    Are we seeing the power of the press in reverse: 'You said he was rubbish, so he must be OK.'

    Who'd have thought that the Guardian would be out of touch eh?

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,439

    ydoethur said:

    Interesting to see Guardian readers overwhelmingly back Corbyn, Mirror voters are split. You would have expected it to be the other way around, especially given the way the Guardian has been getting after Corbyn.

    Are we seeing the power of the press in reverse: 'You said he was rubbish, so he must be OK.'

    Who'd have thought that the Guardian would be out of touch eh?

    That it's out of touch isn't a surprise, of course. And on reading the comments below its CiF articles rubbishing Corbyn, I should have expected this. But I am very surprised that its readers are so heavily trending for a man that they are so energetically pushing against. I had assumed the comments were unrepresentative, but clearly they are not. Even twenty years ago, that would have been pretty well unthinkable (there is a good analysis of newspaper readership and how it influenced voting patterns in this book, if anyone wants to follow it up - but clearly don't buy off Amazon)!

    Perhaps we are seeing one of the side-effects of the phone hacking scandal?
  • Since 10pm on May 7th it has been a dream to be a Tory
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    This perchance?
    Judge Durham Hall accepted that the attack was racially motivated and that the boy - from a Pakistani background - could not handle being disciplined by a black man.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 7,366
    antifrank said:

    If Jeremy Corbyn doesn't win from here, I suggest that the opinion pollsters take a period of absence.

    Yougov in particular is going to look very silly.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 20,653
    antifrank said:

    If Jeremy Corbyn doesn't win from here, I suggest that the opinion pollsters take a period of absence.

    Corbyn is far and away, the public's choice to be Labour leader.

    Labour supporters want him to win. Conservative supporters want him to win. And UKIP supporters want him to win.
  • DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626
    Plato said:

    This perchance?

    Judge Durham Hall accepted that the attack was racially motivated and that the boy - from a Pakistani background - could not handle being disciplined by a black man.


    I'd have thought this bit was more pertinent than his race:
    The court heard that the boy was on bail for a burglary at the time of the attack. He had been arrested on 3 April in a house onin Bradford with another three boys. In March 2014 he had been given a six-month referral order for attempted robbery and common assault. When just 13 he and a friend had mugged two boys and threatened to kill them.

    The boy was originally charged with attempted murder, but the Crown Prosecution Service agreed to drop that charge when he pleaded guilty to grievous bodily harm with intent.
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,974
    edited August 2015
    Dear Ed,

    Thank you for providing so much entertainment over the usually quiet summer months.

    Yours sincerely etc...
  • LadyBucketLadyBucket Posts: 590
    How bad are the other three Labour candidates, that they have let it get to this?

    Just seen Mrs Balls on Sky - as we say in Lancashire, "she has got a face that would stand clogging."

    Rumour has it, Gordon Brown is waiting in the wings to intervene and Mrs Balls is taking "the gloves off." zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    Very impressive investigative journalism from Sky on the I.S. threat. Victoria Derbyshire show doing an item on "KNITTING" !!!!!
  • LennonLennon Posts: 1,362
    I see that the Labour hierarchy have 'caught' something like 200 odd Green candidates who have registered to vote in the Labour leadership elections. Can anyone explain to me the logic of those who joined in this way? If they were joining to vote for Corbyn, then surely that is the quickest path to destruction for the Green party?
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Labour civil war explodes into the open: Alastair Campbell and 'deluded' Diane Abbott trade insults over Corbyn surge

    Former spin chief pleads for people to join party to stop Jeremy Corbyn
    Comes as poll suggests hard-left candidate is on course for victory
    Dianne Abbott said all New Labour achievements thanks to the left of party
    Mr Campbell said she was 'talking crap' and savaged Mr Corbyn's support
    Gordon Brown is understood to be preparing to intervene in the contest

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3193476/Labour-civil-war-explodes-open-Alastair-Campbell-deluded-Diane-Abbott-trade-insults-Corbyn-surge.html#ixzz3iVUomH8D

    Dear Ed,

    Thank you for providing so much entertainment over the usually quiet summer months.

    Yours sincerely etc...

  • ArtistArtist Posts: 1,386
    edited August 2015
    The Anyone but Corbyn(ers) can't even decide which one of Burnham and Cooper to back. You would have thought Burnham would be best placed to close the gap in first preferences considering he has been previously popular with members and has had some good 2020 polling.
  • DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626
    Lennon said:

    I see that the Labour hierarchy have 'caught' something like 200 odd Green candidates who have registered to vote in the Labour leadership elections. Can anyone explain to me the logic of those who joined in this way? If they were joining to vote for Corbyn, then surely that is the quickest path to destruction for the Green party?

    Perhaps they were only in the Green Party due to the left wing policies, and see a better chance of government with a Labour Party aligned similarly?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 43,024

    Plato said:

    This perchance?

    Judge Durham Hall accepted that the attack was racially motivated and that the boy - from a Pakistani background - could not handle being disciplined by a black man.
    I'd have thought this bit was more pertinent than his race:
    The court heard that the boy was on bail for a burglary at the time of the attack. He had been arrested on 3 April in a house onin Bradford with another three boys. In March 2014 he had been given a six-month referral order for attempted robbery and common assault. When just 13 he and a friend had mugged two boys and threatened to kill them.

    The boy was originally charged with attempted murder, but the Crown Prosecution Service agreed to drop that charge when he pleaded guilty to grievous bodily harm with intent.
    He's plainly and clearly a wrong'un.

    Perhaps he can be reformed to be a valuable member of society, but 3 years behind bars (Which is what he'll most likely serve) is far far too short a sentence. Will he even show any contrition or remorse by the time he's let out ?!
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    edited August 2015
    http://news.sky.com/story/1533617/exclusive-is-bombers-in-uk-ready-to-attack
    "...Sally Jones, a former punk from Chatham, Kent, is also in Syria working alongside Hussain in Raqqa but dealing with female IS-supporting jihadists."
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Sky really did a number there. I wondered if the Fake Sheik was involved/is playing a part.

    How bad are the other three Labour candidates, that they have let it get to this?

    Just seen Mrs Balls on Sky - as we say in Lancashire, "she has got a face that would stand clogging."

    Rumour has it, Gordon Brown is waiting in the wings to intervene and Mrs Balls is taking "the gloves off." zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    Very impressive investigative journalism from Sky on the I.S. threat. Victoria Derbyshire show doing an item on "KNITTING" !!!!!

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 13,990

    Lennon said:

    I see that the Labour hierarchy have 'caught' something like 200 odd Green candidates who have registered to vote in the Labour leadership elections. Can anyone explain to me the logic of those who joined in this way? If they were joining to vote for Corbyn, then surely that is the quickest path to destruction for the Green party?

    Perhaps they were only in the Green Party due to the left wing policies, and see a better chance of government with a Labour Party aligned similarly?
    Beats me. I would hope that the Green Party will throw them out as it clearly breaks party rules.
  • DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626
    edited August 2015

    How bad are the other three Labour candidates, that they have let it get to this?

    Just seen Mrs Balls on Sky - as we say in Lancashire, "she has got a face that would stand clogging."

    Rumour has it, Gordon Brown is waiting in the wings to intervene and Mrs Balls is taking "the gloves off." zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    Very impressive investigative journalism from Sky on the I.S. threat. Victoria Derbyshire show doing an item on "KNITTING" !!!!!

    Oh goody! Brown: saviour of the worldBanks, The Union and now the Labour Party!

  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited August 2015
    IIRC @Neil of this parish was a Greenie for its leftish positioning, not for environmental issues.

    Be surprised if he's the only one.

    Lennon said:

    I see that the Labour hierarchy have 'caught' something like 200 odd Green candidates who have registered to vote in the Labour leadership elections. Can anyone explain to me the logic of those who joined in this way? If they were joining to vote for Corbyn, then surely that is the quickest path to destruction for the Green party?

    Perhaps they were only in the Green Party due to the left wing policies, and see a better chance of government with a Labour Party aligned similarly?
  • Lennon said:

    I see that the Labour hierarchy have 'caught' something like 200 odd Green candidates who have registered to vote in the Labour leadership elections. Can anyone explain to me the logic of those who joined in this way? If they were joining to vote for Corbyn, then surely that is the quickest path to destruction for the Green party?

    I think it is because Corbyn's brother is a noted opponent/denier of anthropogenic global warming and think Jezza is the same.
  • DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626
    Pulpstar said:

    Plato said:

    This perchance?

    Judge Durham Hall accepted that the attack was racially motivated and that the boy - from a Pakistani background - could not handle being disciplined by a black man.
    I'd have thought this bit was more pertinent than his race:
    The court heard that the boy was on bail for a burglary at the time of the attack. He had been arrested on 3 April in a house onin Bradford with another three boys. In March 2014 he had been given a six-month referral order for attempted robbery and common assault. When just 13 he and a friend had mugged two boys and threatened to kill them.

    The boy was originally charged with attempted murder, but the Crown Prosecution Service agreed to drop that charge when he pleaded guilty to grievous bodily harm with intent.
    He's plainly and clearly a wrong'un.

    Perhaps he can be reformed to be a valuable member of society, but 3 years behind bars (Which is what he'll most likely serve) is far far too short a sentence. Will he even show any contrition or remorse by the time he's let out ?!

    Given he was "yawning" as sentence was handed down, I fear not.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 43,024

    Pulpstar said:

    Plato said:

    This perchance?

    Judge Durham Hall accepted that the attack was racially motivated and that the boy - from a Pakistani background - could not handle being disciplined by a black man.
    I'd have thought this bit was more pertinent than his race:
    The court heard that the boy was on bail for a burglary at the time of the attack. He had been arrested on 3 April in a house onin Bradford with another three boys. In March 2014 he had been given a six-month referral order for attempted robbery and common assault. When just 13 he and a friend had mugged two boys and threatened to kill them.

    The boy was originally charged with attempted murder, but the Crown Prosecution Service agreed to drop that charge when he pleaded guilty to grievous bodily harm with intent.
    He's plainly and clearly a wrong'un.

    Perhaps he can be reformed to be a valuable member of society, but 3 years behind bars (Which is what he'll most likely serve) is far far too short a sentence. Will he even show any contrition or remorse by the time he's let out ?!

    Given he was "yawning" as sentence was handed down, I fear not.

    At the very least he should not be paroled after 3 years if he turns up to the parole board with the same attitude one would hope.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 21,547
    edited August 2015
    ydoethur said:
    Awesome
    Pulpstar said:

    Plato said:

    This perchance?

    Judge Durham Hall accepted that the attack was racially motivated and that the boy - from a Pakistani background - could not handle being disciplined by a black man.
    I'd have thought this bit was more pertinent than his race:
    The court heard that the boy was on bail for a burglary at the time of the attack. He had been arrested on 3 April in a house onin Bradford with another three boys. In March 2014 he had been given a six-month referral order for attempted robbery and common assault. When just 13 he and a friend had mugged two boys and threatened to kill them.

    The boy was originally charged with attempted murder, but the Crown Prosecution Service agreed to drop that charge when he pleaded guilty to grievous bodily harm with intent.
    He's plainly and clearly a wrong'un.

    Perhaps he can be reformed to be a valuable member of society, but 3 years behind bars (Which is what he'll most likely serve) is far far too short a sentence. Will he even show any contrition or remorse by the time he's let out ?!

    Can't we send him off to join ISIS?
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 13,655
    Lennon said:

    I see that the Labour hierarchy have 'caught' something like 200 odd Green candidates who have registered to vote in the Labour leadership elections. Can anyone explain to me the logic of those who joined in this way? If they were joining to vote for Corbyn, then surely that is the quickest path to destruction for the Green party?

    Greens and logic don't go well together but to the extent that they do, I'd have thought they're trying to realise their policies in a party that stands a chance of governing. Parties are simply means to an end, after all.
  • isamisam Posts: 24,352
    edited August 2015
    Blimey

    I have just been talking about this story with my Dad, who is a 68 year old teaching assistant in a quite rough school on the outskirts of East London, asking him to be careful as he likes a confrontation..

    We both agreed the kid had to be white as you don't hear of much Asian/Black racism...

    Turns out it was Muslim vs Christian - much more understandable

    Mind you, we read the story in the Daily Mirror
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 13,990
    Plato said:

    IIRC @Neil of this parish was a Greenie for its leftish positioning, not for environmental issues.

    Be surprised if he's the only one.

    Lennon said:

    I see that the Labour hierarchy have 'caught' something like 200 odd Green candidates who have registered to vote in the Labour leadership elections. Can anyone explain to me the logic of those who joined in this way? If they were joining to vote for Corbyn, then surely that is the quickest path to destruction for the Green party?

    Perhaps they were only in the Green Party due to the left wing policies, and see a better chance of government with a Labour Party aligned similarly?
    Seems likely that at least some of the Green Surge was left rather than environmental activists, indeed, many were ex-Labour members.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,124
    Wholly off-topic, but very encouragingly, one football club at least has decided to take action against the worst element of its fanbase:

    http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/deplorable-east-fife-slam-section-6230737

    Given, however, that "East Stirlingshire won 1-0 in front of 382 fans", could East Fife not have gone round to talk to the troublemakers individually?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 13,990

    Lennon said:

    I see that the Labour hierarchy have 'caught' something like 200 odd Green candidates who have registered to vote in the Labour leadership elections. Can anyone explain to me the logic of those who joined in this way? If they were joining to vote for Corbyn, then surely that is the quickest path to destruction for the Green party?

    Greens and logic don't go well together but to the extent that they do, I'd have thought they're trying to realise their policies in a party that stands a chance of governing. Parties are simply means to an end, after all.
    Fair enough, as long as they leave the Greens. They have renounced their membership presumably and thrown their lot in with another party.
  • LucyJonesLucyJones Posts: 614
    isam said:

    Blimey

    I have just been talking about this story with my Dad, who is a 68 year old teaching assistant in a quite rough school on the outskirts of East London, asking him to be careful as he likes a confrontation..

    We both agreed the kid had to be white as you don't hear of much Asian/Black racism...

    Turns out it was Muslim vs Christian - much more understandable

    Mind you, we read the story in the Daily Mirror
    The relatively low-key reporting of the story made me suspect it was not a white-on-black crime.

  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    OT @Morris_Dancer After watching dozens of Jeremy Kyle lie-detector tests, almost all of them are proven correct when someone fibs [they fess up either straight away or afterwards].

    I know you're not keen on them at all, do you know if techniques have improved?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 27,371
    edited August 2015
    isam said:



    We both agreed the kid had to be white as you don't hear of much Asian/Black racism...

    Turns out it was Muslim vs Christian - much more understandable

    Mind you, we read the story in the Daily Mirror

    The clue was the omission by the BBC and it being in Bradford. There is plenty about, remember the huge bust up in Birmingham a few years back over a fake report of a rape resulting in rioting, looting and murder. There has more recently been attacks in Muslim vs Sikh, Pakistani vs Indian in Brum.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    Plato said:


    Gordon Brown is understood to be preparing to intervene in the contest

    When Gordon Brown is due to make an intervention, you know that trouble is afoot.

    His record is... not good.

    Indyref - Intervention aka The Vow. That's worked out well...
    May2015 - Intervention to save SLAB. That worked even better...
    Now Labour Leader Contest.

    I do hope he intervenes in May 2016.
  • LennonLennon Posts: 1,362
    edited August 2015

    Lennon said:

    I see that the Labour hierarchy have 'caught' something like 200 odd Green candidates who have registered to vote in the Labour leadership elections. Can anyone explain to me the logic of those who joined in this way? If they were joining to vote for Corbyn, then surely that is the quickest path to destruction for the Green party?

    Greens and logic don't go well together but to the extent that they do, I'd have thought they're trying to realise their policies in a party that stands a chance of governing. Parties are simply means to an end, after all.
    Indeed. Thinking 2nd order effects though - Corbyn being elected could prove most problematic for the Greens if they are in any way 'representative' of the recent 'Green surge'. Could easily move them back down to the 1-2% of the vote mark presumably? Any betting opportunities?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 43,024
    Plato said:

    OT @Morris_Dancer After watching dozens of Jeremy Kyle lie-detector tests, almost all of them are proven correct when someone fibs [they fess up either straight away or afterwards].

    I know you're not keen on them at all, do you know if techniques have improved?

    A polygraph can only detect anxiety.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,439
    Dair said:

    Plato said:


    Gordon Brown is understood to be preparing to intervene in the contest

    When Gordon Brown is due to make an intervention, you know that trouble is afoot.

    His record is... not good.

    Indyref - Intervention aka The Vow. That's worked out well...
    May2015 - Intervention to save SLAB. That worked even better...
    Now Labour Leader Contest.

    I do hope he intervenes in May 2016.
    Yes. Liz Kendall now has a realistic chance of coming third.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    Speaking of upcoming elections, it seems that Glasgow Council are going all out to secure their core vote (which appears to be Loyalist bigots given their recent Orangefest "celebrations" in George Square).

    http://www.thenational.scot/news/glasgow-city-council-rejects-bid-to-have-hope-over-fear-independence-rally-in-george-square.6220?utm_medium=social&utm_source=Twitter&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_term=Autofeed#link_time=1439273297

    I hope there is a market on Labour ending up with zero councillors in Glasgow after 2017.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 27,371
    edited August 2015



    Very impressive investigative journalism from Sky on the I.S. threat. Victoria Derbyshire show doing an item on "KNITTING" !!!!!

    Interesting that Sky did all the leg work and passed the info onto the MET and despite all the Leveson / phone hacking / paying public officials scandals, it got leaked to the Mail on Sunday.

    Stuart Ramsay and Sam Kiley are very plugged in. Terrible I can't remember the name of the lady who reported from the front line in Libya for Sky, but she was also top notch at getting intel.
  • calumcalum Posts: 3,040

    Since 10pm on May 7th it has been a dream to be a Tory

    I feel the same about the SNP. We're a couple of sad buggers !!
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,974
    LucyJones said:

    isam said:

    Blimey

    I have just been talking about this story with my Dad, who is a 68 year old teaching assistant in a quite rough school on the outskirts of East London, asking him to be careful as he likes a confrontation..

    We both agreed the kid had to be white as you don't hear of much Asian/Black racism...

    Turns out it was Muslim vs Christian - much more understandable

    Mind you, we read the story in the Daily Mirror
    The relatively low-key reporting of the story made me suspect it was not a white-on-black crime.

    Ditto - same goes for the boy on a bicycle murder.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,439
    calum said:

    Since 10pm on May 7th it has been a dream to be a Tory

    I feel the same about the SNP. We're a couple of sad buggers !!
    Surely you are a couple of happy saddos :smiley:
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Alex Crawford. She was stonking and very brave. The BBC's were on the Tunisian border IIRC.



    Very impressive investigative journalism from Sky on the I.S. threat. Victoria Derbyshire show doing an item on "KNITTING" !!!!!

    Interesting that Sky did all the leg work and passed the info onto the MET and despite all the Leveson / phone hacking / paying public officials scandals, it got leaked to the Mail on Sunday.

    Stuart Ramsay and Sam Kiley are very plugged in. Terrible I can't remember the name of the lady who reported from the front line in Libya for Sky, but she was also top notch at getting intel.
  • isamisam Posts: 24,352
    edited August 2015

    isam said:



    We both agreed the kid had to be white as you don't hear of much Asian/Black racism...

    Turns out it was Muslim vs Christian - much more understandable

    Mind you, we read the story in the Daily Mirror

    The clue was the omission by the BBC and it being in Bradford. There is plenty about, remember the huge bust up in Birmingham a few years back over a fake report of a rape resulting in rioting, looting and murder. There has more recently been attacks in Muslim vs Sikh, Pakistani vs Indian in Brum.
    Enoch Powell's Birmingham Speech was motivated by his time in India during WW2 where he saw Muslim vs Sikh vs Hindu segregation and fighting, and each religious group thinking of themselves as such rather than as "Indians"... the point of the speech was to warn that without restrictions on immigration we would have the same problem here

    Well now we have

    "Powell had spent much of the 1940s in India, and had seen the communal violence which had swept the country around the date of its independence. The deep divisions between individual groups within the country had led to social discord, and eventually violence. In the year before India’s independence on August 15th, 1947, over half a million people lost their lives as a result of civil strife. It was this fear of communalism that spurred Powell into action.

    Powell’s contention, based upon his experience in India, was that a failure to integrate foreign communities into the social fabric of a nation would lead to them forming their own separate social groups, and that this being the case, in times particularly of economic strife, violence would emerge as the cleavages between the interests of the local community and that of the newcomers became increasingly apparent and caused inter-ethnic friction. Powell had previously cited an example of this in 1967 in Birmingham. There, Sikh bus conductors objected to being constrained to wear the bus company’s uniform, and threatened violence if their demands for an exception to the rule on the basis of religion were not met. Despite initially refusing, after the threat of violence emerged, the local authority eventually acquiesced and changed the rules. Powell saw in this a dangerous precedent and predicted that this could be the beginning of a wave of communal violence.12 "


    http://amsterdamlawforum.org/article/view/50/65
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 8,459
    edited August 2015
    Lennon said:

    Lennon said:

    I see that the Labour hierarchy have 'caught' something like 200 odd Green candidates who have registered to vote in the Labour leadership elections. Can anyone explain to me the logic of those who joined in this way? If they were joining to vote for Corbyn, then surely that is the quickest path to destruction for the Green party?

    Greens and logic don't go well together but to the extent that they do, I'd have thought they're trying to realise their policies in a party that stands a chance of governing. Parties are simply means to an end, after all.
    Indeed. Thinking 2nd order effects though - Corbyn being elected could prove most problematic for the Greens if they are in any way 'representative' of the recent 'Green surge'. Could easily move them back down to the 1-2% of the vote mark presumably? Any betting opportunities?
    With the LibDems buried in a hole that leaves a big electoral space open for them in the centre, if they can bring themselves to smarten themselves up a bit and do a small-c-conservative, nimby, nice-to-kittens, down-with-all-the-horrible-things kind of vibe.
  • LucyJonesLucyJones Posts: 614
    Don't know whether this has already been mentioned, but it seems that Kids Company may have been running unregulated schools. This would be a criminal offence, if true.

    "This means while Kids Company boss Camila Batmanghelidjh was trying to obtain a £3million emergency bailout from the Cabinet Office in July, there was no way of knowing if the charity was operating the school with authorisation and oversight, the lack of which could be illegal. "
    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/597373/Officials-probing-if-Kids-Company-school-was-UNREGULATED-when-ministers-paid-out-3m
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 13,655
    Lennon said:

    Lennon said:

    I see that the Labour hierarchy have 'caught' something like 200 odd Green candidates who have registered to vote in the Labour leadership elections. Can anyone explain to me the logic of those who joined in this way? If they were joining to vote for Corbyn, then surely that is the quickest path to destruction for the Green party?

    Greens and logic don't go well together but to the extent that they do, I'd have thought they're trying to realise their policies in a party that stands a chance of governing. Parties are simply means to an end, after all.
    Indeed. Thinking 2nd order effects though - Corbyn being elected could prove most problematic for the Greens if they are in any way 'representative' of the recent 'Green surge'. Could easily move them back down to the 1-2% of the vote mark presumably? Any betting opportunities?
    The Greens' next big test is the Scottish election next year, where they should do well for several reasons (technically, the Scottish Greens are an entirely different party from the E&W one but the dynamic is the same).

    That's on the same days as the English locals, Welsh Assembly, London mayoral and PCC elections, so it's a big round but I'd expect Scotland to lead the news.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 43,024

    Lennon said:

    Lennon said:

    I see that the Labour hierarchy have 'caught' something like 200 odd Green candidates who have registered to vote in the Labour leadership elections. Can anyone explain to me the logic of those who joined in this way? If they were joining to vote for Corbyn, then surely that is the quickest path to destruction for the Green party?

    Greens and logic don't go well together but to the extent that they do, I'd have thought they're trying to realise their policies in a party that stands a chance of governing. Parties are simply means to an end, after all.
    Indeed. Thinking 2nd order effects though - Corbyn being elected could prove most problematic for the Greens if they are in any way 'representative' of the recent 'Green surge'. Could easily move them back down to the 1-2% of the vote mark presumably? Any betting opportunities?
    With the LibDems buried in a hole that leaves a big electoral space open for them in the centre, if they can bring themselves to do smarten themselves up a bit and do a small-c-conservative, nimby, nice-to-kittens, down-with-all-the-horrible-things kind of vibe.
    Name me a single centrist Green candidate ?
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 3,308
    edited August 2015
    antifrank said:

    If Jeremy Corbyn doesn't win from here, I suggest that the opinion pollsters take a period of absence.

    You have to at least admire Kellner for "getting back on the horse" after falling off big time on May 7th, especially as the Labour leadership must be a polling nightmare given we have a totally unexpected (well from the perspective of a few weeks ago) apparent leader, and an electorate that is fiendishly difficult to model, that has doubled in size in three months, with at least some within that expressly there to do mischief. So props to YouGov for the effort - though I suspect Kellner will be looking at the result through his fingers from behind the sofa.

    Why on earth did Ed not limit the election to those who were members on May 7th or before or those who had at least a year under their belts? Doesn't take Einstein to work out that "anyone can vote for three quid" was open to abuse. He really was deeply crap.


    On a further note I think you suggested earler that Labour electing Corbyn was like Arsenal having Gunnersaurus as manager. What has the cheerful sauropod done to deserve such a slur I ask?
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 8,459
    Pulpstar said:

    Lennon said:

    Lennon said:

    I see that the Labour hierarchy have 'caught' something like 200 odd Green candidates who have registered to vote in the Labour leadership elections. Can anyone explain to me the logic of those who joined in this way? If they were joining to vote for Corbyn, then surely that is the quickest path to destruction for the Green party?

    Greens and logic don't go well together but to the extent that they do, I'd have thought they're trying to realise their policies in a party that stands a chance of governing. Parties are simply means to an end, after all.
    Indeed. Thinking 2nd order effects though - Corbyn being elected could prove most problematic for the Greens if they are in any way 'representative' of the recent 'Green surge'. Could easily move them back down to the 1-2% of the vote mark presumably? Any betting opportunities?
    With the LibDems buried in a hole that leaves a big electoral space open for them in the centre, if they can bring themselves to do smarten themselves up a bit and do a small-c-conservative, nimby, nice-to-kittens, down-with-all-the-horrible-things kind of vibe.
    Name me a single centrist Green candidate ?
    How many voters can name their Green candidate?

    Their brand is fine for targeting this market, they just need the right kind of tone on leaflets and party political broadcasts.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 10,211
    ydoethur said:

    Interesting to see Guardian readers overwhelmingly back Corbyn, Mirror voters are split. You would have expected it to be the other way around, especially given the way the Guardian has been getting after Corbyn.

    Are we seeing the power of the press in reverse: 'You said he was rubbish, so he must be OK.'

    The Guardian has been to the right of its readership ever since they endorsed the LibDems in 2010. I'm not at all surprised that their readers are supporting Corbyn. What did surprise me was that ABC1 members overall are slightly less keen than C2DE members - i'd have epxected the reverse.
  • LennonLennon Posts: 1,362

    Lennon said:

    Lennon said:

    I see that the Labour hierarchy have 'caught' something like 200 odd Green candidates who have registered to vote in the Labour leadership elections. Can anyone explain to me the logic of those who joined in this way? If they were joining to vote for Corbyn, then surely that is the quickest path to destruction for the Green party?

    Greens and logic don't go well together but to the extent that they do, I'd have thought they're trying to realise their policies in a party that stands a chance of governing. Parties are simply means to an end, after all.
    Indeed. Thinking 2nd order effects though - Corbyn being elected could prove most problematic for the Greens if they are in any way 'representative' of the recent 'Green surge'. Could easily move them back down to the 1-2% of the vote mark presumably? Any betting opportunities?
    The Greens' next big test is the Scottish election next year, where they should do well for several reasons (technically, the Scottish Greens are an entirely different party from the E&W one but the dynamic is the same).

    That's on the same days as the English locals, Welsh Assembly, London mayoral and PCC elections, so it's a big round but I'd expect Scotland to lead the news.
    I was thinking the E&W Greens - appreciate that Scotland is a different party and has totally different dynamics. Normally I would have said that given the London-centric nature of the media that London Mayoral / Assembly would take the lead - but in the absence of Boris that's less likely I guess. If they are going on a 'look, told you Corbyn was rubbish' viewpoint then Scotland seems most likely to be the focus given that Lab will be (almost certainly, whatever happens) actively losing seats.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    LucyJones said:

    Don't know whether this has already been mentioned, but it seems that Kids Company may have been running unregulated schools. This would be a criminal offence, if true.

    "This means while Kids Company boss Camila Batmanghelidjh was trying to obtain a £3million emergency bailout from the Cabinet Office in July, there was no way of knowing if the charity was operating the school with authorisation and oversight, the lack of which could be illegal. "
    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/597373/Officials-probing-if-Kids-Company-school-was-UNREGULATED-when-ministers-paid-out-3m

    I though the allegation of the day regarding that so-called charity was that two of the trustees had children on the payroll to the tune of fifty grand. That is just so mind-bogglingly wrong that, if it were true, one would hope that said trustees would be dropped from any and all other posts they may have and be shunned from polite society. They will not be of course and the whole KC debacle will be brushed under the carpet - far too many of the "great and the good" and friends of the "great and the good" are involved.
  • isamisam Posts: 24,352
    BBC2 Yes Prime Minister: The Grand Design
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,053

    The Guardian has been to the right of its readership ever since they endorsed the LibDems in 2010. I'm not at all surprised that their readers are supporting Corbyn.

    A Labour Party electoral strategy which is based on appealing to people more left-wing than the Guardian is... how shall I put this?... not an electoral strategy in which one should place complete confidence.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 21,547

    LucyJones said:

    Don't know whether this has already been mentioned, but it seems that Kids Company may have been running unregulated schools. This would be a criminal offence, if true.

    "This means while Kids Company boss Camila Batmanghelidjh was trying to obtain a £3million emergency bailout from the Cabinet Office in July, there was no way of knowing if the charity was operating the school with authorisation and oversight, the lack of which could be illegal. "
    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/597373/Officials-probing-if-Kids-Company-school-was-UNREGULATED-when-ministers-paid-out-3m

    I though the allegation of the day regarding that so-called charity was that two of the trustees had children on the payroll to the tune of fifty grand. That is just so mind-bogglingly wrong that, if it were true, one would hope that said trustees would be dropped from any and all other posts they may have and be shunned from polite society. They will not be of course and the whole KC debacle will be brushed under the carpet - far too many of the "great and the good" and friends of the "great and the good" are involved.
    What's astonishing is that there are so many issues, and that none of them surfaced before the charity went tits up.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,439
    edited August 2015
    What Corbyn says about Venezuela, on his website (no byline, and it may not be written by him):
    The Bolivarian revolution led by Chavez is rapidly changing things. The poorest do get food, can see a doctor thanks to Cuban help, and are able to get good education. Chavez was elected, faced down a coup attempt, won a recall referendum, and then won Parliamentary elections. His electoral democratic credentials are beyond reproach [leaving aside the military coup he himself organised and various rigged elections - obviously Corbyn didn't write that]. In power, and faced with enormous opposition from a very hostile media, he has allowed them to continue, preferring instead to develop an alternative from of communication and thus inspire support. The very interesting BBC Radio 4 reports on Latin America have freely conceded the levels of support that the revolution inspires.
    What that notorious bastion of the far-right, Cable News Network, has to say about Venezuela today:
    The Venezuelan people have endured a catastrophic economic collapse that is sure to grow worse in the months ahead. If someone had set out to destroy the country they could hardly have done it more effectively than Chavez and his chosen heir, who has followed the same disastrous policies, driving the country into the abyss.
    Venezuela has the world's largest oil reserves, but the country is essentially bankrupt. Last November it started importing, of all things, oil. There are shortages of practically every conceivable consumer product, from toilet paper to beer, from milk to antibiotics.
    And to distract attention, Maduro is now threatening to invade and annex most of Guyana, a Commonwealth country.

    I think the facts speak for themselves. What's worrying is that the left of the Labour party is not listening.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 5,654

    Lennon said:

    I see that the Labour hierarchy have 'caught' something like 200 odd Green candidates who have registered to vote in the Labour leadership elections. Can anyone explain to me the logic of those who joined in this way? If they were joining to vote for Corbyn, then surely that is the quickest path to destruction for the Green party?

    I think it is because Corbyn's brother is a noted opponent/denier of anthropogenic global warming and think Jezza is the same.

    Lennon said:

    I see that the Labour hierarchy have 'caught' something like 200 odd Green candidates who have registered to vote in the Labour leadership elections. Can anyone explain to me the logic of those who joined in this way? If they were joining to vote for Corbyn, then surely that is the quickest path to destruction for the Green party?

    I think it is because Corbyn's brother is a noted opponent/denier of anthropogenic global warming and think Jezza is the same.
    So, are the Greens joining Labour to vote against Corbyn?
    Is this his brother:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piers_Corbyn
    "At the end of 2007, WeatherAction predicted that temperatures in January could plummet to −17 °C in the Midlands, and that the average temperature for January would be close to freezing. This prediction was dismissed by the Met Office in a Guardian article on 2 January.[21] After the January prediction proved false, Corbyn blamed the incorrect forecast on an undefined 'procedural error,"
    "In August 2014 Corbyn confidently predicted that August 2014 would be dominated by southerly winds bringing very warm air across the British Isles resulting in the warmest August for at least 300 years as measured by the CET.[24][25] In the event, August 2014 was dominated by northerly winds resulting in a rather cool month "
    "Corbyn is well known for his opposition to the idea of anthropogenic global warming. Corbyn has stated that the anthropogenic contribution to global warming is minimal with any increase in temperature due to increased solar activity"
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,053
    ydoethur said:

    "The Bolivarian revolution led by Chavez is rapidly changing things. "

    Can't argue with that!
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 5,483
    I keep looking at the papers and thinking Labour can't be that stupid.

    But now, it really seems that they might well be.

    Bloody Hell............
  • LennonLennon Posts: 1,362
    rcs1000 said:

    LucyJones said:

    Don't know whether this has already been mentioned, but it seems that Kids Company may have been running unregulated schools. This would be a criminal offence, if true.

    "This means while Kids Company boss Camila Batmanghelidjh was trying to obtain a £3million emergency bailout from the Cabinet Office in July, there was no way of knowing if the charity was operating the school with authorisation and oversight, the lack of which could be illegal. "
    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/597373/Officials-probing-if-Kids-Company-school-was-UNREGULATED-when-ministers-paid-out-3m

    I though the allegation of the day regarding that so-called charity was that two of the trustees had children on the payroll to the tune of fifty grand. That is just so mind-bogglingly wrong that, if it were true, one would hope that said trustees would be dropped from any and all other posts they may have and be shunned from polite society. They will not be of course and the whole KC debacle will be brushed under the carpet - far too many of the "great and the good" and friends of the "great and the good" are involved.
    What's astonishing is that there are so many issues, and that none of them surfaced before the charity went tits up.
    Partly it's just bad journalism / lack of focus. The 'news' that 2 trustees kids were on the payroll isn't news at all. It was fully disclosed in the 2013 Accounts. It's just that presumably nobody would have thought it a story previously.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    Pulpstar said:

    Lennon said:

    Lennon said:

    I see that the Labour hierarchy have 'caught' something like 200 odd Green candidates who have registered to vote in the Labour leadership elections. Can anyone explain to me the logic of those who joined in this way? If they were joining to vote for Corbyn, then surely that is the quickest path to destruction for the Green party?

    Greens and logic don't go well together but to the extent that they do, I'd have thought they're trying to realise their policies in a party that stands a chance of governing. Parties are simply means to an end, after all.
    Indeed. Thinking 2nd order effects though - Corbyn being elected could prove most problematic for the Greens if they are in any way 'representative' of the recent 'Green surge'. Could easily move them back down to the 1-2% of the vote mark presumably? Any betting opportunities?
    With the LibDems buried in a hole that leaves a big electoral space open for them in the centre, if they can bring themselves to do smarten themselves up a bit and do a small-c-conservative, nimby, nice-to-kittens, down-with-all-the-horrible-things kind of vibe.
    Name me a single centrist Green candidate ?
    Doesn't that depend on where one's personal definition of the Centre is? For some Caroline Lucas was/is very centrist, though Neil, who used to post on here, seemed to regard her as a right-wing traitor to the cause. Though, I have met a couple of Green supporters who would regard Neil's views (he only wanted to take society back to the forties) as being beyond the pale.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,439
    rcs1000 said:

    LucyJones said:

    Don't know whether this has already been mentioned, but it seems that Kids Company may have been running unregulated schools. This would be a criminal offence, if true.

    "This means while Kids Company boss Camila Batmanghelidjh was trying to obtain a £3million emergency bailout from the Cabinet Office in July, there was no way of knowing if the charity was operating the school with authorisation and oversight, the lack of which could be illegal. "
    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/597373/Officials-probing-if-Kids-Company-school-was-UNREGULATED-when-ministers-paid-out-3m

    I though the allegation of the day regarding that so-called charity was that two of the trustees had children on the payroll to the tune of fifty grand. That is just so mind-bogglingly wrong that, if it were true, one would hope that said trustees would be dropped from any and all other posts they may have and be shunned from polite society. They will not be of course and the whole KC debacle will be brushed under the carpet - far too many of the "great and the good" and friends of the "great and the good" are involved.
    What's astonishing is that there are so many issues, and that none of them surfaced before the charity went tits up.
    Hardly that surprising - one allegation is intimidation of the press and anyone else who asked awkward questions:
    Batmanghelidjh accused Joan of being mentally ill after Joan began asking too many awkward questions. This seemed an astonishingly cold way to treat a septuagenarian donor now living in a council bungalow who had given Kids Company so much money. Apart from anything else, Joan Woolard is not mentally unwell.

    This smear – masquerading as some kind of proper defence – was highly revealing of someone not prepared to answer straightforward questions. (Incidentally, I have more recently been accused of being a ‘fantasist’ by Batmanghelidjh for publishing stories about Kids Company, so I can see a pattern here.)
    Miles Goslett.
  • watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474
    edited August 2015
    Lennon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    LucyJones said:

    Don't know whether this has already been mentioned, but it seems that Kids Company may have been running unregulated schools. This would be a criminal offence, if true.

    "This means while Kids Company boss Camila Batmanghelidjh was trying to obtain a £3million emergency bailout from the Cabinet Office in July, there was no way of knowing if the charity was operating the school with authorisation and oversight, the lack of which could be illegal. "
    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/597373/Officials-probing-if-Kids-Company-school-was-UNREGULATED-when-ministers-paid-out-3m

    I though the allegation of the day regarding that so-called charity was that two of the trustees had children on the payroll to the tune of fifty grand. That is just so mind-bogglingly wrong that, if it were true, one would hope that said trustees would be dropped from any and all other posts they may have and be shunned from polite society. They will not be of course and the whole KC debacle will be brushed under the carpet - far too many of the "great and the good" and friends of the "great and the good" are involved.
    What's astonishing is that there are so many issues, and that none of them surfaced before the charity went tits up.
    Partly it's just bad journalism / lack of focus. The 'news' that 2 trustees kids were on the payroll isn't news at all. It was fully disclosed in the 2013 Accounts. It's just that presumably nobody would have thought it a story previously.
    But was it disclosed correctly - full names, rather than simply 'trustees children'?

    It will be interesting to see if the Vice Chair of KC and Chairman of Dauntsey's governors declared any conflict of interest when discussions about any bursary awarded to Batman's chauffeur's daughter took place.

  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    ''And to distract attention, Maduro is now threatening to invade and annex most of Guyana, a Commonwealth country.''

    Could we get dragged in there?
  • isamisam Posts: 24,352

    Pulpstar said:

    Lennon said:

    Lennon said:

    I see that the Labour hierarchy have 'caught' something like 200 odd Green candidates who have registered to vote in the Labour leadership elections. Can anyone explain to me the logic of those who joined in this way? If they were joining to vote for Corbyn, then surely that is the quickest path to destruction for the Green party?

    Greens and logic don't go well together but to the extent that they do, I'd have thought they're trying to realise their policies in a party that stands a chance of governing. Parties are simply means to an end, after all.
    Indeed. Thinking 2nd order effects though - Corbyn being elected could prove most problematic for the Greens if they are in any way 'representative' of the recent 'Green surge'. Could easily move them back down to the 1-2% of the vote mark presumably? Any betting opportunities?
    With the LibDems buried in a hole that leaves a big electoral space open for them in the centre, if they can bring themselves to do smarten themselves up a bit and do a small-c-conservative, nimby, nice-to-kittens, down-with-all-the-horrible-things kind of vibe.
    Name me a single centrist Green candidate ?
    Doesn't that depend on where one's personal definition of the Centre is? For some Caroline Lucas was/is very centrist, though Neil, who used to post on here, seemed to regard her as a right-wing traitor to the cause. Though, I have met a couple of Green supporters who would regard Neil's views (he only wanted to take society back to the forties) as being beyond the pale.
    His views on paying up for losing bets are quite radical too
  • LucyJonesLucyJones Posts: 614

    LucyJones said:

    Don't know whether this has already been mentioned, but it seems that Kids Company may have been running unregulated schools. This would be a criminal offence, if true.

    "This means while Kids Company boss Camila Batmanghelidjh was trying to obtain a £3million emergency bailout from the Cabinet Office in July, there was no way of knowing if the charity was operating the school with authorisation and oversight, the lack of which could be illegal. "
    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/597373/Officials-probing-if-Kids-Company-school-was-UNREGULATED-when-ministers-paid-out-3m

    I though the allegation of the day regarding that so-called charity was that two of the trustees had children on the payroll to the tune of fifty grand. That is just so mind-bogglingly wrong that, if it were true, one would hope that said trustees would be dropped from any and all other posts they may have and be shunned from polite society. They will not be of course and the whole KC debacle will be brushed under the carpet - far too many of the "great and the good" and friends of the "great and the good" are involved.
    I would imagine there is plenty more to come out about the "charity". I also share your suspicion that it will, to all intents and purposes, be swept under the carpet.
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    edited August 2015
    rcs1000 said:

    LucyJones said:

    Don't know whether this has already been mentioned, but it seems that Kids Company may have been running unregulated schools. This would be a criminal offence, if true.

    "This means while Kids Company boss Camila Batmanghelidjh was trying to obtain a £3million emergency bailout from the Cabinet Office in July, there was no way of knowing if the charity was operating the school with authorisation and oversight, the lack of which could be illegal. "
    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/597373/Officials-probing-if-Kids-Company-school-was-UNREGULATED-when-ministers-paid-out-3m

    I though the allegation of the day regarding that so-called charity was that two of the trustees had children on the payroll to the tune of fifty grand. That is just so mind-bogglingly wrong that, if it were true, one would hope that said trustees would be dropped from any and all other posts they may have and be shunned from polite society. They will not be of course and the whole KC debacle will be brushed under the carpet - far too many of the "great and the good" and friends of the "great and the good" are involved.
    What's astonishing is that there are so many issues, and that none of them surfaced before the charity went tits up.
    Unless you had firm proof, who was going to criticise someone that was (a) a woman, (b) ethnic minority, (c) helping children and (d) had friends in high places? The politically correct elitist culture we now have would have guaranteed horrendous abuse and career limitations for anyone that took it on. That's why it could only be a brave right wing outfit like the Spectator that could do it. People aren't prepared to speak out against politically connected gangs of ethnic minorities that were raping children on an industrial scale. One police officer that did got sent on a racial sensitivity course. Why would anyone worry about the mere matter of wasting public money?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,439
    edited August 2015
    taffys said:

    ''And to distract attention, Maduro is now threatening to invade and annex most of Guyana, a Commonwealth country.''

    Could we get dragged in there?

    That's one thought that did occur to me, although I doubt it. The Americans might, using the Monroe Doctrine as an excuse. More probably it would destabilise the whole Caribbean and large parts of central/South America and make oil prices go up.

    EDIT - also, of course, although this may sound a strange point to make, the prices of sugar and bananas. OK, we can live without bananas. But sugar's in a lot of things, many that people don't know about (bread, for instance) and that would have an impact on food prices.
  • Lennon said:

    I see that the Labour hierarchy have 'caught' something like 200 odd Green candidates who have registered to vote in the Labour leadership elections. Can anyone explain to me the logic of those who joined in this way? If they were joining to vote for Corbyn, then surely that is the quickest path to destruction for the Green party?

    I think it is because Corbyn's brother is a noted opponent/denier of anthropogenic global warming and think Jezza is the same.

    Lennon said:

    I see that the Labour hierarchy have 'caught' something like 200 odd Green candidates who have registered to vote in the Labour leadership elections. Can anyone explain to me the logic of those who joined in this way? If they were joining to vote for Corbyn, then surely that is the quickest path to destruction for the Green party?

    I think it is because Corbyn's brother is a noted opponent/denier of anthropogenic global warming and think Jezza is the same.
    So, are the Greens joining Labour to vote against Corbyn?
    Is this his brother:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piers_Corbyn
    "At the end of 2007, WeatherAction predicted that temperatures in January could plummet to −17 °C in the Midlands, and that the average temperature for January would be close to freezing. This prediction was dismissed by the Met Office in a Guardian article on 2 January.[21] After the January prediction proved false, Corbyn blamed the incorrect forecast on an undefined 'procedural error,"
    "In August 2014 Corbyn confidently predicted that August 2014 would be dominated by southerly winds bringing very warm air across the British Isles resulting in the warmest August for at least 300 years as measured by the CET.[24][25] In the event, August 2014 was dominated by northerly winds resulting in a rather cool month "
    "Corbyn is well known for his opposition to the idea of anthropogenic global warming. Corbyn has stated that the anthropogenic contribution to global warming is minimal with any increase in temperature due to increased solar activity"
    That's his brother.

    The Green logic is Labour is led by someone who doesn't believe in AGW Labour activists and voters will switch to the Greens
  • LennonLennon Posts: 1,362
    watford30 said:

    Lennon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    LucyJones said:

    Don't know whether this has already been mentioned, but it seems that Kids Company may have been running unregulated schools. This would be a criminal offence, if true.

    "This means while Kids Company boss Camila Batmanghelidjh was trying to obtain a £3million emergency bailout from the Cabinet Office in July, there was no way of knowing if the charity was operating the school with authorisation and oversight, the lack of which could be illegal. "
    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/597373/Officials-probing-if-Kids-Company-school-was-UNREGULATED-when-ministers-paid-out-3m

    I though the allegation of the day regarding that so-called charity was that two of the trustees had children on the payroll to the tune of fifty grand. That is just so mind-bogglingly wrong that, if it were true, one would hope that said trustees would be dropped from any and all other posts they may have and be shunned from polite society. They will not be of course and the whole KC debacle will be brushed under the carpet - far too many of the "great and the good" and friends of the "great and the good" are involved.
    What's astonishing is that there are so many issues, and that none of them surfaced before the charity went tits up.
    Partly it's just bad journalism / lack of focus. The 'news' that 2 trustees kids were on the payroll isn't news at all. It was fully disclosed in the 2013 Accounts. It's just that presumably nobody would have thought it a story previously.
    But was it disclosed correctly - full names, rather than simply 'trustees children'?

    Just 'Trustee's children' in the paragraph I read - but knowing who it is doesn't affect the newsworthiness or otherwise of the information surely?

    Equally, given that the Trustee's names are public and there are only about 12 of them it wouldn't exactly have taken a huge amount of investigative time or effort to find out who.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 5,769

    Pulpstar said:

    Lennon said:

    Lennon said:

    I see that the Labour hierarchy have 'caught' something like 200 odd Green candidates who have registered to vote in the Labour leadership elections. Can anyone explain to me the logic of those who joined in this way? If they were joining to vote for Corbyn, then surely that is the quickest path to destruction for the Green party?

    Greens and logic don't go well together but to the extent that they do, I'd have thought they're trying to realise their policies in a party that stands a chance of governing. Parties are simply means to an end, after all.
    Indeed. Thinking 2nd order effects though - Corbyn being elected could prove most problematic for the Greens if they are in any way 'representative' of the recent 'Green surge'. Could easily move them back down to the 1-2% of the vote mark presumably? Any betting opportunities?
    With the LibDems buried in a hole that leaves a big electoral space open for them in the centre, if they can bring themselves to do smarten themselves up a bit and do a small-c-conservative, nimby, nice-to-kittens, down-with-all-the-horrible-things kind of vibe.
    Name me a single centrist Green candidate ?
    How many voters can name their Green candidate?

    I should be able to manage if they persuade my other half to stand for the council!
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,692
    @Ydoethur
    'However, there are two important differences: (1) Lansbury was already a senior member of the Labour party, and had served in government and (2) he was elected unopposed because he was pretty much the only plausible leader to hold his seat (that the realistically canvassed alternative was Oswald Mosley is some indication of how desperate the party was). '

    Surely point 2 is mistaken. Mosley fought the 1931 election as leader of the New Party and lost his seat.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 5,483

    Since 10pm on May 7th it has been a dream to be a Tory

    You don't have to be a Tory to enjoy the car crash aka Labour.
  • watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474
    Lennon said:

    watford30 said:

    Lennon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    LucyJones said:

    Don't know whether this has already been mentioned, but it seems that Kids Company may have been running unregulated schools. This would be a criminal offence, if true.

    "This means while Kids Company boss Camila Batmanghelidjh was trying to obtain a £3million emergency bailout from the Cabinet Office in July, there was no way of knowing if the charity was operating the school with authorisation and oversight, the lack of which could be illegal. "
    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/597373/Officials-probing-if-Kids-Company-school-was-UNREGULATED-when-ministers-paid-out-3m

    I though the allegation of the day regarding that so-called charity was that two of the trustees had children on the payroll to the tune of fifty grand. That is just so mind-bogglingly wrong that, if it were true, one would hope that said trustees would be dropped from any and all other posts they may have and be shunned from polite society. They will not be of course and the whole KC debacle will be brushed under the carpet - far too many of the "great and the good" and friends of the "great and the good" are involved.
    What's astonishing is that there are so many issues, and that none of them surfaced before the charity went tits up.
    Partly it's just bad journalism / lack of focus. The 'news' that 2 trustees kids were on the payroll isn't news at all. It was fully disclosed in the 2013 Accounts. It's just that presumably nobody would have thought it a story previously.
    But was it disclosed correctly - full names, rather than simply 'trustees children'?

    Just 'Trustee's children' in the paragraph I read - but knowing who it is doesn't affect the newsworthiness or otherwise of the information surely?

    Equally, given that the Trustee's names are public and there are only about 12 of them it wouldn't exactly have taken a huge amount of investigative time or effort to find out who.
    I understand it should be full names. Complete disclosure, rather than leaving the curious reader to carry out a bit of investigation. Perhaps someone can correct me?
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    welshowl said:

    antifrank said:

    If Jeremy Corbyn doesn't win from here, I suggest that the opinion pollsters take a period of absence.

    You have to at least admire Kellner for "getting back on the horse" after falling off big time on May 7th, especially as the Labour leadership must be a polling nightmare given we have a totally unexpected (well from the perspective of a few weeks ago) apparent leader, and an electorate that is fiendishly difficult to model, that has doubled in size in three months, with at least some within that expressly there to do mischief. So props to YouGov for the effort - though I suspect Kellner will be looking at the result through his fingers from behind the sofa.

    Why on earth did Ed not limit the election to those who were members on May 7th or before or those who had at least a year under their belts? Doesn't take Einstein to work out that "anyone can vote for three quid" was open to abuse. He really was deeply crap.


    On a further note I think you suggested earler that Labour electing Corbyn was like Arsenal having Gunnersaurus as manager. What has the cheerful sauropod done to deserve such a slur I ask?
    Kelner is not getting back on the horse, he's charging people to conduct a poll, hardly altruistic or honourable.

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 13,990
    isam said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Lennon said:

    Lennon said:

    I see that the Labour hierarchy have 'caught' something like 200 odd Green candidates who have registered to vote in the Labour leadership elections. Can anyone explain to me the logic of those who joined in this way? If they were joining to vote for Corbyn, then surely that is the quickest path to destruction for the Green party?

    Greens and logic don't go well together but to the extent that they do, I'd have thought they're trying to realise their policies in a party that stands a chance of governing. Parties are simply means to an end, after all.
    Indeed. Thinking 2nd order effects though - Corbyn being elected could prove most problematic for the Greens if they are in any way 'representative' of the recent 'Green surge'. Could easily move them back down to the 1-2% of the vote mark presumably? Any betting opportunities?
    With the LibDems buried in a hole that leaves a big electoral space open for them in the centre, if they can bring themselves to do smarten themselves up a bit and do a small-c-conservative, nimby, nice-to-kittens, down-with-all-the-horrible-things kind of vibe.
    Name me a single centrist Green candidate ?
    Doesn't that depend on where one's personal definition of the Centre is? For some Caroline Lucas was/is very centrist, though Neil, who used to post on here, seemed to regard her as a right-wing traitor to the cause. Though, I have met a couple of Green supporters who would regard Neil's views (he only wanted to take society back to the forties) as being beyond the pale.
    His views on paying up for losing bets are quite radical too
    Green mantra used to be that it was 'beyond left and right', looking to future.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,124
    welshowl said:

    antifrank said:

    If Jeremy Corbyn doesn't win from here, I suggest that the opinion pollsters take a period of absence.

    You have to at least admire Kellner for "getting back on the horse" after falling off big time on May 7th, especially as the Labour leadership must be a polling nightmare given we have a totally unexpected (well from the perspective of a few weeks ago) apparent leader, and an electorate that is fiendishly difficult to model, that has doubled in size in three months, with at least some within that expressly there to do mischief. So props to YouGov for the effort - though I suspect Kellner will be looking at the result through his fingers from behind the sofa.

    Why on earth did Ed not limit the election to those who were members on May 7th or before or those who had at least a year under their belts? Doesn't take Einstein to work out that "anyone can vote for three quid" was open to abuse. He really was deeply crap.


    On a further note I think you suggested earler that Labour electing Corbyn was like Arsenal having Gunnersaurus as manager. What has the cheerful sauropod done to deserve such a slur I ask?
    Not my line, but Janan Ganesh's, I think intended to sum up how someone who has previously been seen as a harmless mascot is being pushed forward for the top job.

    There are worse jobs than being Gunnersaurus. I watched him on Sunday before the match finding all the most attractive women in the front row and giving them a hug. They all seemed pretty happy about this too.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,439
    @justin124

    You are part right - in the sense that he was no longer a party member. However, it was suggested that they offer him the leadership partly to get him back, because they thought he would be more effective than anyone else. At that time, there was no requirement that the party leader be an MP (there was a separate role, Chairman of the Party, although these had been combined since 1924). So he could have been leader and parachuted into a safe seat when one came up.

    Meanwhile it was seriously proposed - and again, I am not making this up - that David Lloyd George, who had effectively left the Liberals and was sitting as an independent, be invited to act as Leader of the Opposition and Chairman of the Labour Party until Mosley came back. In fact, Lloyd George had several conversations with Henderson on that very basis.

    Neither of them happened, of course. Henderson in fact remained the leader until the following year, with Lansbury as party chairman, and then when he resigned Lansbury took over more or less by default as nobody else had been found. But it is tantalising to speculate what might have happened had either gone ahead. Tantalising - and rather frightening.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 5,654

    Lennon said:

    I see that the Labour hierarchy have 'caught' something like 200 odd Green candidates who have registered to vote in the Labour leadership elections. Can anyone explain to me the logic of those who joined in this way? If they were joining to vote for Corbyn, then surely that is the quickest path to destruction for the Green party?

    I think it is because Corbyn's brother is a noted opponent/denier of anthropogenic global warming and think Jezza is the same.

    Lennon said:

    I see that the Labour hierarchy have 'caught' something like 200 odd Green candidates who have registered to vote in the Labour leadership elections. Can anyone explain to me the logic of those who joined in this way? If they were joining to vote for Corbyn, then surely that is the quickest path to destruction for the Green party?

    I think it is because Corbyn's brother is a noted opponent/denier of anthropogenic global warming and think Jezza is the same.
    So, are the Greens joining Labour to vote against Corbyn?
    Is this his brother:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piers_Corbyn
    "At the end of 2007, WeatherAction predicted that temperatures in January could plummet to −17 °C in the Midlands, and that the average temperature for January would be close to freezing. This prediction was dismissed by the Met Office in a Guardian article on 2 January.[21] After the January prediction proved false, Corbyn blamed the incorrect forecast on an undefined 'procedural error,"
    "In August 2014 Corbyn confidently predicted that August 2014 would be dominated by southerly winds bringing very warm air across the British Isles resulting in the warmest August for at least 300 years as measured by the CET.[24][25] In the event, August 2014 was dominated by northerly winds resulting in a rather cool month "
    "Corbyn is well known for his opposition to the idea of anthropogenic global warming. Corbyn has stated that the anthropogenic contribution to global warming is minimal with any increase in temperature due to increased solar activity"
    That's his brother.

    The Green logic is Labour is led by someone who doesn't believe in AGW Labour activists and voters will switch to the Greens
    Hard to believe that they could be that deluded. Having a leader of a major party espousing those views, with the possibility of his becoming PM - at least a much higher likelihood than a Green PM - should scare them. It shouldn't be something that they are positively promoting.
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 3,308
    antifrank said:

    welshowl said:

    antifrank said:

    If Jeremy Corbyn doesn't win from here, I suggest that the opinion pollsters take a period of absence.

    You have to at least admire Kellner for "getting back on the horse" after falling off big time on May 7th, especially as the Labour leadership must be a polling nightmare given we have a totally unexpected (well from the perspective of a few weeks ago) apparent leader, and an electorate that is fiendishly difficult to model, that has doubled in size in three months, with at least some within that expressly there to do mischief. So props to YouGov for the effort - though I suspect Kellner will be looking at the result through his fingers from behind the sofa.

    Why on earth did Ed not limit the election to those who were members on May 7th or before or those who had at least a year under their belts? Doesn't take Einstein to work out that "anyone can vote for three quid" was open to abuse. He really was deeply crap.


    On a further note I think you suggested earler that Labour electing Corbyn was like Arsenal having Gunnersaurus as manager. What has the cheerful sauropod done to deserve such a slur I ask?
    Not my line, but Janan Ganesh's, I think intended to sum up how someone who has previously been seen as a harmless mascot is being pushed forward for the top job.

    There are worse jobs than being Gunnersaurus. I watched him on Sunday before the match finding all the most attractive women in the front row and giving them a hug. They all seemed pretty happy about this too.
    You assume the sauropod I referred to was Gunnersaurus........though from your report it seems the Arsenal mascot one is a he or a lesbian, which had caused me to wonder at times on my occasional visits to the Emirates, as I too had noticed the penchant for the hugging of the ladies.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    edited August 2015
    Lennon said:


    Just 'Trustee's children' in the paragraph I read - but knowing who it is doesn't affect the newsworthiness or otherwise of the information surely?

    Equally, given that the Trustee's names are public and there are only about 12 of them it wouldn't exactly have taken a huge amount of investigative time or effort to find out who.

    I take your point about the lack of journalistic focus in this information not being picked up and made widely available but surely the Charity Commission have a duty to actually scrutinise what goes on within a charity. Maybe the relevant government office which was giving away millions of pounds earned by the taxpayer might have shown a proper interest in where the money was going? FFS, if nobody was picking up on the fact that the Trustees families were benefiting financially, and we are not talking about a tenner for a child to feed to donkeys on a Sunday morning here but tens of thousands of pounds, then something was horribly wrong.

    There are two focal points of blame, the trustees who behaved improperly even corruptly, and the organisations that have a duty to monitor. That the press didn't pick up on the story is regrettable but not culpable.
  • How does one become a football club mascot, do you need any special qualifications?

    #AskingForAFriend
  • Carolus_RexCarolus_Rex Posts: 1,189
    I'm new to this, so may I ask what may be a very silly question? Can someone explain to me in simple terms how Corbyn got on the ballot? Assuming they weren't actually "morons", why did so many MPs who weren't going to support him agree to nominate him?
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 3,308

    How does one become a football club mascot, do you need any special qualifications?

    #AskingForAFriend

    I think you have to be elected mayor of Hartlepool first .... oh hang on.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,264

    How does one become a football club mascot, do you need any special qualifications?

    #AskingForAFriend

    You have to be shameless, prepared to dress in ludicrous attire, and prance around... Oh, wait, never mind.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,264

    Assuming they weren't actually "morons"

    Ah, i think I see your problem...
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 3,308
    edited August 2015
    Scott_P said:

    How does one become a football club mascot, do you need any special qualifications?

    #AskingForAFriend

    You have to be shameless, prepared to dress in ludicrous attire, and prance around... Oh, wait, never mind.
    That's the Lords you're getting confused with.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 8,828
    Eagle

    "Since 10pm on May 7th it has been a dream to be a Tory"

    That's like saying after the Express imploded it's a dream being a Mail reader.

    Well no it isn't. A Mail reader is still what a Mail reader's always been....
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,439
    edited August 2015

    I'm new to this, so may I ask what may be a very silly question? Can someone explain to me in simple terms how Corbyn got on the ballot? Assuming they weren't actually "morons", why did so many MPs who weren't going to support him agree to nominate him?

    Some genuinely believed he was a good candidate

    Some thought the left should be represented as a point of principle.

    Some thought the left should be allowed to stand so they could suffer abject humiliation and never rise again (we all make mistakes).

    Some were ordered to nominate him by Burnham, because Burnham thought it would...well, who knows?

    Some were bullied into it by huge pressure on social media.

    They added up to the required number and here we are.
Sign In or Register to comment.