Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If as is likely the Tories can’t win in Oldham then the bes

SystemSystem Posts: 5,841
edited November 2015 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If as is likely the Tories can’t win in Oldham then the best outcome for the blues is a LAB hold

A week today I’ll be at a wedding of a friend who’s been associated and helped PB for years so probably won’t be that much focused on the outcome, due overnight, of the Oldham West and Royton by-election.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,299
    edited November 2015
    Thirst?

    Edit: three in two days. Not bad going. :)

    Agree a narrow Labour win is best for the blues. A win by a few percent would send chills through many Labour MPs, yet the delusional Corbynistas would claim it validates his leadership.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 43,033
    Second.

    Like Labour.
  • I see your point. But the internal Labour warfare isn't going to be brought to a head by a by-election defeat so early - the Corbynites would blame disloyalty by MPs for any catastrophe in Oldham West & Royton and many members would agree.

    The point about UKIP is much stronger. But even that might not work out that badly for them. If UKIP sense more weakness in the Labour heartlands, they may well tack left economically. That would suit the Conservatives fairly well, allowing them to strengthen their position with economically dry-as-dust Eurosceptics.

    So if I were a Conservative, I don't think I'd care too much who wins on Thursday. The opposition are going to be closed for refurbishment for the foreseeable future either way.
  • tysontyson Posts: 4,345
    I really despair of looking at politics only from how it impacts on your team. It is fine with sport- Morihno's implosion is truly delicious. But, politics. Labour's chaos is not good, end of. We need to bring it to a close, or create another oppositional party worthy of taking on the Tories because quite frankly the LD's do not cut it.
  • Pressure is on UKIP.

    If they can't win a seat like Oldham in these circumstances when exactly can they expect to win it?

    As with Heywood and Middleton, close but no cigar isn't the prelude of anything.
  • The best thing for Tories would be for Corbyn to be defenestrated and Labour to choose something even worse.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 4,524
    Hold on a moment - when I questioned it on here within the last hour I was told there was 2/3 support!

    There isn't!

    As posted an hour ago - plenty of scope for Corbyn to get a boost from this.

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,149
    tyson said:

    I really despair of looking at politics only from how it impacts on your team. It is fine with sport- Morihno's implosion is truly delicious. But, politics. Labour's chaos is not good, end of. We need to bring it to a close, or create another oppositional party worthy of taking on the Tories because quite frankly the LD's do not cut it.

    Labour's chaos is good. I think the company over the last decade became devoid of any original thought or interesting propositions on how to run the company.

    I don't think the structure and the set up of the party is conducive to being a realistic alternative to the Conservatives.

    So this process - and it may take 5 years - could be the process of Labour being replaced by a much better opposition (I think the LibDems could have done in 2010 but didn't manage to carve out a true position for themselves and are now a busted flush).

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,269

    Pressure is on UKIP.

    If they can't win a seat like Oldham in these circumstances when exactly can they expect to win it?

    As with Heywood and Middleton, close but no cigar isn't the prelude of anything.

    Pressures on the Tories why can't they win more than one seat in Scotland.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 39,645

    Pressure is on UKIP.

    If they can't win a seat like Oldham in these circumstances when exactly can they expect to win it?

    As with Heywood and Middleton, close but no cigar isn't the prelude of anything.

    Given Labour had a majority of over 3000 even in 1983 in Oldham if UKIP slashed that majority to a few hundred it would still be a good result and suggest any Labour seat is vulnerable to them, especially in by-elections
  • felixfelix Posts: 7,219
    MikeL said:

    Hold on a moment - when I questioned it on here within the last hour I was told there was 2/3 support!

    There isn't!

    As posted an hour ago - plenty of scope for Corbyn to get a boost from this.

    The headline really doesn't match the poll - much more misleading than the sun on Muslims!
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Wow http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3336676/German-packs-punch-50-years-Watch-incredible-explosion-Navy-detonates-massive-WW2-Solent.html
    German mine still packs a punch 50 years on: Incredible footage shows ENORMOUS explosion as Navy detonates massive WWII mine in the Solent

    Bomb disposal team destroyed German mine found in strait separating Isle of Wight from English mainland
    The 680kg mine was found by a crane barge 1.5km off Southsea and described as being in 'good condition'
    Onlookers heard a dull groan and then saw a huge plume of seawater surge more than 900ft into the air
  • I see your point. But the internal Labour warfare isn't going to be brought to a head by a by-election defeat so early - the Corbynites would blame disloyalty by MPs for any catastrophe in Oldham West & Royton and many members would agree.

    The point about UKIP is much stronger. But even that might not work out that badly for them. If UKIP sense more weakness in the Labour heartlands, they may well tack left economically. That would suit the Conservatives fairly well, allowing them to strengthen their position with economically dry-as-dust Eurosceptics.

    So if I were a Conservative, I don't think I'd care too much who wins on Thursday. The opposition are going to be closed for refurbishment for the foreseeable future either way.

    tack left?
    UKIP are cut adrift economically.
    And Farage is as usual playing politics himself with security. He says he would do nothing about ISIS, certainly not bomb them.
  • If Corbyn did go early, who would the Corbynites
    First nominate from the PLP?
    Secondly vote for in the membership?

    McDonnell carries the same (or worse) level of baggage as Corbyn.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 64,263
    edited November 2015

    Pressure is on UKIP.

    If they can't win a seat like Oldham in these circumstances when exactly can they expect to win it?

    As with Heywood and Middleton, close but no cigar isn't the prelude of anything.

    Pressures on the Tories why can't they win more than one seat in Scotland.
    I blame Thatcher. We're still recovering from her legacy :lol:

    Personally Dave's done a brilliant job in Scotland, when he became leader the Tories had forty fewer seats in Scotland than Labour, now the Tories have as many Scottish seats as Labour, a tribute to his leadership

    Right I'm off, I going to watch Bridge of Spies.
  • jayfdeejayfdee Posts: 503
    Best result would be Labour , with a very narrow win, then they can all keep on fighting, something for everyone. Corbyn stays, and his MPs get even more worried about their majority.
  • tyson said:

    I really despair of looking at politics only from how it impacts on your team. It is fine with sport- Morihno's implosion is truly delicious. But, politics. Labour's chaos is not good, end of. We need to bring it to a close, or create another oppositional party worthy of taking on the Tories because quite frankly the LD's do not cut it.

    I agree with that. If I were in Oldham, I'd vote Blue as usual. I dislike tactical voting anyway but particularly dislike it for game-playing purposes.

    Fact is that Labour will dump Corbyn when they are ready to accept that he's not the answer. A by-election loss is unlikely to persuade many undecideds on that score (because there aren't many), and unlikely to switch many from the pro- to anti-Corbyn. It will reconfirm what the antis believe but for now, what is that worth.

    There is, as an aside, a counter-case to be made that a UKIP breakthrough in seats like Oldham would be ideal for the Tories: it would concentrate both Labour and UKIP fire on each other while giving a clearer ride for the Blues, as well as splitting the anti-Tory WWC vote. It's not a case I'd push too far but nor is it one I'd dismiss out of hand.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Trickett

    If Corbyn did go early, who would the Corbynites
    First nominate from the PLP?
    Secondly vote for in the membership?

    McDonnell carries the same (or worse) level of baggage as Corbyn.

  • Pressure is on UKIP.

    If they can't win a seat like Oldham in these circumstances when exactly can they expect to win it?

    As with Heywood and Middleton, close but no cigar isn't the prelude of anything.

    Where does Oldham W come on the list of UKIP targets?
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    edited November 2015
    MikeL said:

    Hold on a moment - when I questioned it on here within the last hour I was told there was 2/3 support!

    There isn't!

    As posted an hour ago - plenty of scope for Corbyn to get a boost from this.

    It is close to two thirds among those able to make a decision.

    Some people are born ditherers or more concerned with the fate of Lady C on I'm A Celebrity :smile:
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 64,263
    edited November 2015

    Pressure is on UKIP.

    If they can't win a seat like Oldham in these circumstances when exactly can they expect to win it?

    As with Heywood and Middleton, close but no cigar isn't the prelude of anything.

    Where does Oldham W come on the list of UKIP targets?
    Not even in the top 150.

    http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/united_kingdom/targets/ukip
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    tyson said:

    I really despair of looking at politics only from how it impacts on your team. It is fine with sport- Morihno's implosion is truly delicious. But, politics. Labour's chaos is not good, end of. We need to bring it to a close, or create another oppositional party worthy of taking on the Tories because quite frankly the LD's do not cut it.

    I agree with that. If I were in Oldham, I'd vote Blue as usual. I dislike tactical voting anyway but particularly dislike it for game-playing purposes.

    Fact is that Labour will dump Corbyn when they are ready to accept that he's not the answer. A by-election loss is unlikely to persuade many undecideds on that score (because there aren't many), and unlikely to switch many from the pro- to anti-Corbyn. It will reconfirm what the antis believe but for now, what is that worth.

    There is, as an aside, a counter-case to be made that a UKIP breakthrough in seats like Oldham would be ideal for the Tories: it would concentrate both Labour and UKIP fire on each other while giving a clearer ride for the Blues, as well as splitting the anti-Tory WWC vote. It's not a case I'd push too far but nor is it one I'd dismiss out of hand.
    Tories are famously adverse to tactical voting. I think most new kipper votes here will be ex labour.
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited November 2015
    I'm confident that Labour will easily win Oldham, the question is whether they will get more than 50% of the vote or not.

    As to the Survation poll here are some of the details:

    "The UK should join forces with the US, French or any other forces and begin airstrikes against ISIS in Syria now":

    Agree 48%
    Disagree 30%
    D/K 22%

    Agree/Disagree, by 2015 party vote:
    CON 68/15
    UKIP 51/35
    LD 46/32
    LAB 44/35

    That is very different from yougov a couple of days ago, as I said Corbyn shifted the numbers more to his favour yesterday.

  • Dang, missed the thread change, again.
    Flightpath, FPT re driving times etc to Oldham.
    At that point the driver will be getting very close to needing to take the rest of his break.
    8.15 is an insane time to be leaving central London.
    To make this trip worthwhile they really should be on their way by not long after 6
  • chestnut said:

    MikeL said:

    Hold on a moment - when I questioned it on here within the last hour I was told there was 2/3 support!

    There isn't!

    As posted an hour ago - plenty of scope for Corbyn to get a boost from this.

    It is close to two thirds among those able to make a decision.

    Some people are born ditherers or more concerned with the fate of Lady C on I'm A Celebrity :smile:
    Or asking for a special security briefing...!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 39,645
    edited November 2015
    Speedy said:

    I'm confident that Labour will easily win Oldham, the question is whether they will get more than 50% of the vote or not.

    As to the Survation poll here are some of the details:

    "The UK should join forces with the US, French or any other forces and begin airstrikes against ISIS in Syria now":

    Agree 48%
    Disagree 30%
    D/K 22%

    Agree/Disagree, by 2015 party vote:
    CON 68/15
    UKIP 51/35
    LD 46/32
    LAB 44/35

    That is very different from yougov a couple of days ago, as I said Corbyn shifted the numbers more to his favour yesterday.

    Labour voters still in favour even if by the smallest margin
  • Pressure is on UKIP.

    If they can't win a seat like Oldham in these circumstances when exactly can they expect to win it?

    As with Heywood and Middleton, close but no cigar isn't the prelude of anything.

    Where does Oldham W come on the list of UKIP targets?
    Not even in the top 150.

    http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/united_kingdom/targets/ukip
    So not really a must-win then!

    Going by the Election Polling list, I make that over 80 Labour seats with smaller swings required. Were UKIP to pull it off, we'd have to take seriously the risk that Labour could finish third or even fourth in seats in 2020. It'd still be an outside shot at this stage but no longer laughable.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 21,371
    edited November 2015
    Guess what — Ken is live on Channel 4 News talking about the 7/7 bombers.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    Dang, missed the thread change, again.
    Flightpath, FPT re driving times etc to Oldham.
    At that point the driver will be getting very close to needing to take the rest of his break.
    8.15 is an insane time to be leaving central London.
    To make this trip worthwhile they really should be on their way by not long after 6

    Nah. Once past the Watford Gap services you are officially in the North, so Oldham cannot be much further.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    Survation for the Daily Mirror were among the most spectacularly wrong pollsters in May.
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    HYUFD said:

    Speedy said:

    I'm confident that Labour will easily win Oldham, the question is whether they will get more than 50% of the vote or not.

    As to the Survation poll here are some of the details:

    "The UK should join forces with the US, French or any other forces and begin airstrikes against ISIS in Syria now":

    Agree 48%
    Disagree 30%
    D/K 22%

    Agree/Disagree, by 2015 party vote:
    CON 68/15
    UKIP 51/35
    LD 46/32
    LAB 44/35

    That is very different from yougov a couple of days ago, as I said Corbyn shifted the numbers more to his favour yesterday.

    Labour voters still in favour even if by the smallest margin
    A few days ago yougov had that 2-1 in favour with Labour voters, as I said Corbyn shifted the numbers more to his favour with yesterday's debate.
  • HaroldOHaroldO Posts: 996

    Dang, missed the thread change, again.
    Flightpath, FPT re driving times etc to Oldham.
    At that point the driver will be getting very close to needing to take the rest of his break.
    8.15 is an insane time to be leaving central London.
    To make this trip worthwhile they really should be on their way by not long after 6

    But Starbucks isnt open then, how will they get their vegan frappacinos....
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    <45% in Oldham means Corbyn is sub-Foot and sub-Brown and consistent with Labour on 27-28% nationally.
  • Pressure is on UKIP.

    If they can't win a seat like Oldham in these circumstances when exactly can they expect to win it?

    As with Heywood and Middleton, close but no cigar isn't the prelude of anything.

    Where does Oldham W come on the list of UKIP targets?
    Not even in the top 150.

    http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/united_kingdom/targets/ukip
    So not really a must-win then!

    Going by the Election Polling list, I make that over 80 Labour seats with smaller swings required. Were UKIP to pull it off, we'd have to take seriously the risk that Labour could finish third or even fourth in seats in 2020. It'd still be an outside shot at this stage but no longer laughable.
    Irony doesn't travel well on the interweb.

    Stephen Bush said earlier on this week only 50 odd Lab MPs with larger majorities than Oldham West and Royton so it would be a sensational result if they got within 2,000 votes of Labour
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Judging by the timings/distance et al - they're going to spend more time eating curry and chatting than canvassing.

    At best, from my calculations we're looking at 3.5hrs - that's with a fair wind, a short pee/sandwich buying break en route, no fannying about once they arrive and door knocking until a few mins before curry time.

    It's could be described as virtue-canvassing - barely enough time to get wet, but they'll have bragging rights for the cause

    Dang, missed the thread change, again.
    Flightpath, FPT re driving times etc to Oldham.
    At that point the driver will be getting very close to needing to take the rest of his break.
    8.15 is an insane time to be leaving central London.
    To make this trip worthwhile they really should be on their way by not long after 6

    Nah. Once past the Watford Gap services you are officially in the North, so Oldham cannot be much further.
  • H/T ? - "They won't have left by 12.30, they'll still be arguing about the gender imbalance on the back seat..." :lol:

    Judging by the timings/distance et al - they're going to spend more time eating curry and chatting than canvassing.

    At best, from my calculations we're looking at 3.5hrs - that's with a fair wind, a short pee/sandwich buying break en route, no fannying about once they arrive and door knocking until a few mins before curry time.

    It's could be described as virtue-canvassing - barely enough time to get wet, but they'll have bragging rights for the cause

    Dang, missed the thread change, again.
    Flightpath, FPT re driving times etc to Oldham.
    At that point the driver will be getting very close to needing to take the rest of his break.
    8.15 is an insane time to be leaving central London.
    To make this trip worthwhile they really should be on their way by not long after 6

    Nah. Once past the Watford Gap services you are officially in the North, so Oldham cannot be much further.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053

    Pressure is on UKIP.

    If they can't win a seat like Oldham in these circumstances when exactly can they expect to win it?

    As with Heywood and Middleton, close but no cigar isn't the prelude of anything.

    Thats just rubbish, TSE. Oldham will be a tough nut to crack for any party, with Labour holding the seat for eons. So no real pressure unless self induced.
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited November 2015

    Pressure is on UKIP.

    If they can't win a seat like Oldham in these circumstances when exactly can they expect to win it?

    As with Heywood and Middleton, close but no cigar isn't the prelude of anything.

    Where does Oldham W come on the list of UKIP targets?
    Not even in the top 150.

    http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/united_kingdom/targets/ukip
    So not really a must-win then!

    Going by the Election Polling list, I make that over 80 Labour seats with smaller swings required. Were UKIP to pull it off, we'd have to take seriously the risk that Labour could finish third or even fourth in seats in 2020. It'd still be an outside shot at this stage but no longer laughable.
    Irony doesn't travel well on the interweb.

    Stephen Bush said earlier on this week only 50 odd Lab MPs with larger majorities than Oldham West and Royton so it would be a sensational result if they got within 2,000 votes of Labour
    If turnout is 20% (on the low end of my expectations) then 2000 votes is 22.5%, which means UKIP at around 30%, Labour at around 50%, which is about what I predicted many weeks ago.

    2000 votes doesn't sound impressive in a low turnout election.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 13,658
    edited November 2015

    Pressure is on UKIP.

    If they can't win a seat like Oldham in these circumstances when exactly can they expect to win it?

    As with Heywood and Middleton, close but no cigar isn't the prelude of anything.

    Where does Oldham W come on the list of UKIP targets?
    Not even in the top 150.

    http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/united_kingdom/targets/ukip
    So not really a must-win then!

    Going by the Election Polling list, I make that over 80 Labour seats with smaller swings required. Were UKIP to pull it off, we'd have to take seriously the risk that Labour could finish third or even fourth in seats in 2020. It'd still be an outside shot at this stage but no longer laughable.
    Irony doesn't travel well on the interweb.

    Stephen Bush said earlier on this week only 50 odd Lab MPs with larger majorities than Oldham West and Royton so it would be a sensational result if they got within 2,000 votes of Labour
    I do apologise dear sir. I only had half an eye on the thread as I was writing my Saturday piece at the same time (as well as having the theme from Brideshead Revisited running through my head for some reason).

    p.s. I'll be amazed if UKIP *don't* come within 2000 votes of winning - turnout will help there.
  • perdixperdix Posts: 1,806
    Is Corbyn a lentil-eating surrender monkey?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,300
    @stvharry: Survation poll on UK Syria bombing -48% yes. 30% no. 21% DK. 59% say it will increase risk of terror attack here
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 4,264

    Wow http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3336676/German-packs-punch-50-years-Watch-incredible-explosion-Navy-detonates-massive-WW2-Solent.html

    German mine still packs a punch 50 years on: Incredible footage shows ENORMOUS explosion as Navy detonates massive WWII mine in the Solent

    Bomb disposal team destroyed German mine found in strait separating Isle of Wight from English mainland
    The 680kg mine was found by a crane barge 1.5km off Southsea and described as being in 'good condition'
    Onlookers heard a dull groan and then saw a huge plume of seawater surge more than 900ft into the air
    900ft in the air my arse. 90ft, maybe. The Eiffel Tower is about 900ft, for reference.
  • Pakistan need six off three...
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    Scott_P said:

    @stvharry: Survation poll on UK Syria bombing -48% yes. 30% no. 21% DK. 59% say it will increase risk of terror attack here

    That is a point that I disagree, bombing or no bombing it won't affect the threat level since ISIS is already just a few miles from Dover, bombing Syria would do nothing to catch the ISIS bad guys in France and Belgium.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 8,836
    edited November 2015
    For those unfamiliar with Jaques Brel. A more familiar track than 'Quand on a que l'amour' sang at the ceremony today. 'Ne me quitte pas'

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 39,645
    Speedy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Speedy said:

    I'm confident that Labour will easily win Oldham, the question is whether they will get more than 50% of the vote or not.

    As to the Survation poll here are some of the details:

    "The UK should join forces with the US, French or any other forces and begin airstrikes against ISIS in Syria now":

    Agree 48%
    Disagree 30%
    D/K 22%

    Agree/Disagree, by 2015 party vote:
    CON 68/15
    UKIP 51/35
    LD 46/32
    LAB 44/35

    That is very different from yougov a couple of days ago, as I said Corbyn shifted the numbers more to his favour yesterday.

    Labour voters still in favour even if by the smallest margin
    A few days ago yougov had that 2-1 in favour with Labour voters, as I said Corbyn shifted the numbers more to his favour with yesterday's debate.
    Yougov had 49% of Labour voters in favour while Survation has 44% so little difference, in both cases Labour voters oppose Corbyn's position, Labour members may back it but many of those were £3 Trots who may not even have voted Labour in May but TUSC or Green
  • Five off two...
  • alex.alex. Posts: 2,802
    Scott_P said:

    @stvharry: Survation poll on UK Syria bombing -48% yes. 30% no. 21% DK. 59% say it will increase risk of terror attack here

    That's the key - the British public clearly recognise the difference between bombing Syria being a cause for "retaliatory" attacks and the "excuse" for retaliatory attacks.
  • Four off one...
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Anorak said:

    Wow http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3336676/German-packs-punch-50-years-Watch-incredible-explosion-Navy-detonates-massive-WW2-Solent.html

    German mine still packs a punch 50 years on: Incredible footage shows ENORMOUS explosion as Navy detonates massive WWII mine in the Solent

    Bomb disposal team destroyed German mine found in strait separating Isle of Wight from English mainland
    The 680kg mine was found by a crane barge 1.5km off Southsea and described as being in 'good condition'
    Onlookers heard a dull groan and then saw a huge plume of seawater surge more than 900ft into the air
    900ft in the air my arse. 90ft, maybe. The Eiffel Tower is about 900ft, for reference.

    Sounds like a magnetic mine to me, They were fearsome bastards.

    And for you @Plato, my new avatar is like the old: The delightfully saucy, Maisie Williams.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,357
    What a bloody good cricket match!!
  • stodgestodge Posts: 3,746
    Evening all :)

    Just heard Peter Hitchens opine on the Syrian airstrikes issue. Not a man with whom I usually agree but his viewpoint is very close to Simon Jenkins who I do rate as a columnist and thinker.

    Yet they are both saying no more than Corbyn did in his infamous letter yesterday. We are still left with a lot of difficult questions which Cameron cannot or will not answer. The two tenets of the Hitchens/Jenkins line seem to be:

    1) Attacking IS is pointless. We are no more or less a target for them than we were before the Paris attack. The French, Russians and Americans have flown thousands of sorties without (it seems) making much difference to the capability of IS to wage war. The only thing which seems to be slowing IS is the advance of Iranian and Hezbollah forces from the Assad heartland eastward.

    History shows us air power on its own cannot achieve the desired outcome. It will ultimately require the liberation of the ground currently occupied by IS and whether that's done by British, French, American, Russian or Iranian troops is less important. Without the option of ground troops, the defeat of IS becomes problematic at best. Ground troops mean casualties and casualties will cause Cameron and his Government political problems.

    2) Where is the comprehensive post-IS political settlement in both Syria and Iraq? What's the point of destroying IS in order to let anarchy take its place - yes, that anarchy may not be directed at us but it will still leave an important part of the world in turmoil. Whether we opt for Assad (and we seem comfortable with Sisi in Egypt who is pretty authoritarian) or not, the Syrian people deserve the chance for peace and stability (as do the Iraqi and Libyan people).

    I would add we are fighting an undeclared war on two fronts and arguably losing both. At home, whether we like it or not, a not wholly insignificant minority of Muslims support IS. That will take time to reduce and eradicate and the will, if not the means, to spread terror will exist for some time to come. That cultural war is much harder and much less telegenic but no less important.

  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,300
    edited November 2015
    @SamCoatesTimes: So growing signs we are now expecting Jeremy Corbyn to offer a free vote on Monday. Not totally clear, but looks increasingly likely

    EDIT: Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition has no considered view on the use of British Forces in combat against our enemies...
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,299
    Speedy said:

    Scott_P said:

    @stvharry: Survation poll on UK Syria bombing -48% yes. 30% no. 21% DK. 59% say it will increase risk of terror attack here

    That is a point that I disagree, bombing or no bombing it won't affect the threat level since ISIS is already just a few miles from Dover, bombing Syria would do nothing to catch the ISIS bad guys in France and Belgium.
    IMO ISIS is already here, and may have been for some years. More may be coming over, but that doesn't mean we're not under threat.

    (Getting weapons and materials over is a different matter)
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited November 2015
    HYUFD said:

    Speedy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Speedy said:

    I'm confident that Labour will easily win Oldham, the question is whether they will get more than 50% of the vote or not.

    As to the Survation poll here are some of the details:

    "The UK should join forces with the US, French or any other forces and begin airstrikes against ISIS in Syria now":

    Agree 48%
    Disagree 30%
    D/K 22%

    Agree/Disagree, by 2015 party vote:
    CON 68/15
    UKIP 51/35
    LD 46/32
    LAB 44/35

    That is very different from yougov a couple of days ago, as I said Corbyn shifted the numbers more to his favour yesterday.

    Labour voters still in favour even if by the smallest margin
    A few days ago yougov had that 2-1 in favour with Labour voters, as I said Corbyn shifted the numbers more to his favour with yesterday's debate.
    Yougov had 49% of Labour voters in favour while Survation has 44% so little difference, in both cases Labour voters oppose Corbyn's position, Labour members may back it but many of those were £3 Trots who may not even have voted Labour in May but TUSC or Green

    If you want to use the yougov poll then use it in full or not at all:
    "while among Labour voters generally, support for air strikes runs at almost two-to-one."

    https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/11/24/analysis-corbynistas-stay-loyal-few-others-share-h/
    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/h15sm4vwaa/TimesResults_151123_LabourMembers.pdf

    All (Survation in parenthesis)
    Approve 58 (49)
    Disapprove 22 (30)


    2015 LAB
    Approve 49 (44)
    Disapprove 29 (35)

    LAB members
    Approve 28
    Disapprove 58

    So the numbers have sifted to Corbyn since that poll, among Labour voters and especially the wider public (Survation didn't poll Labour members so nothing to compare there).

  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,300
    @ShippersUnbound: Brilliant, hilarious, angry, sad, knowing piece by @MarinaHyde on Ken Livingstone. Best piece you'll read all week: https://t.co/sGFbXRWM47
  • MikeK said:
    100 Rifles, now there was a good film.
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited November 2015

    Speedy said:

    Scott_P said:

    @stvharry: Survation poll on UK Syria bombing -48% yes. 30% no. 21% DK. 59% say it will increase risk of terror attack here

    That is a point that I disagree, bombing or no bombing it won't affect the threat level since ISIS is already just a few miles from Dover, bombing Syria would do nothing to catch the ISIS bad guys in France and Belgium.
    IMO ISIS is already here, and may have been for some years. More may be coming over, but that doesn't mean we're not under threat.

    (Getting weapons and materials over is a different matter)
    How does bombing Syria fix our broken borders system?
    You need to prioritize things by levels of effectiveness on the ISIS threat to Britain.

    Bombing Syria: effectiveness 0
    Ground invasion by the west: effectiveness limited
    Proper Border controls: effectiveness substantial
    Ground invasion by Kurds, Syrians, Iraqis, Iranians: effectiveness very severe
  • Wow http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3336676/German-packs-punch-50-years-Watch-incredible-explosion-Navy-detonates-massive-WW2-Solent.html

    German mine still packs a punch 50 years on: Incredible footage shows ENORMOUS explosion as Navy detonates massive WWII mine in the Solent

    Bomb disposal team destroyed German mine found in strait separating Isle of Wight from English mainland
    The 680kg mine was found by a crane barge 1.5km off Southsea and described as being in 'good condition'
    Onlookers heard a dull groan and then saw a huge plume of seawater surge more than 900ft into the air
    If you dig down into the English pages of Der Spiegel, there are quite a few articles about the amount of decaying munitions that Germany has to deal with.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 9,695
    On topic, this may be the best result for the Tories. It is not the best result for the country. The sooner the fascistic left in Labour are turfed out and we get a decent Labour party back and a decent opposition, not the craven disingenuous and malicious one we have now, the better.
  • AndyJS said:

    Guess what — Ken is live on Channel 4 News talking about the 7/7 bombers.

    Is he saying we should put a monument up to them?
  • Roger said:

    For those unfamiliar with Jaques Brel. A more familiar track than 'Quand on a que l'amour' sang at the ceremony today. 'Ne me quitte pas'

    What do you think of the Scott Walker versions of Brel?
  • KenKen Posts: 22
    In the 1983 general election I was the party member who drove Michael Meacher around his new constituency. It was new in the sense that Openshaw had been abolished and some of its wards, including mine had ended up in Oldham West. Charles Morris had been the Openshaw MP and there was quite a bit of ill feeling in his part of the constituency that he had not been selected to fight the new Oldham West.

    In that general election Labour was fighting another one of its internal feuds between right and left, but the party had an army of new activists who had joined to fight Thatcher and we slogged our guts out to get Michael elected.

    He was returned with 46% of the vote, which the old guard told us was a disaster, that was all due to out failure to select Charlie Morris!

    32 years later, Labour has a candidate who is not only local to the area, but is well respected in it. People know that he is the local lad who left school at 16, was a father in his early twenties and worked two jobs to put the corn on the table for his family. The fact that Labour is once again engaged in a bout of internal blood-letting is neither here nor there.

    So what's the best bet on an outcome? Well, turnout will be low as this is a by-election, and Oldham is cold, wet and miserable enough to encourage people to stay at home, nice and warm. Let's be honest, Labour people have a habit of being disengaged from politics, anyway, especially at by-elections. It takes a general election to get enough of them out to vote, since it needs that background noise to remind them to vote. UKIP's voters will turn out since minor party people tend to be more engaged than others. So the Labour majority will be cut on the back of a very low turnout, which will probably be under 50%.

    Labour is still odds-on to win.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 39,645
    edited November 2015
    Speedy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Speedy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Speedy said:

    I'm confident that Labour will easily win Oldham, the question is whether they will get more than 50% of the vote or not.

    As to the Survation poll here are some of the details:

    "The UK should join forces with the US, French or any other forces and begin airstrikes against ISIS in Syria now":

    Agree 48%
    Disagree 30%
    D/K 22%

    Agree/Disagree, by 2015 party vote:
    CON 68/15
    UKIP 51/350p

    LD 46/32
    LAB 44/35

    That is very different from yougov a couple of days ago, as I said Corbyn shifted the numbers more to his favour yesterday.

    Labour voters still in favour even if by the smallest margin
    A few days ago yougov had that 2-1 in favour with Labour voters, as I said Corbyn shifted the numbers more to his favour with yesterday's debate.
    Yougov had 49% of Labour voters in favour while Survation has 44% so little difference, in both cases Labour voters oppose Corbyn's position, Labour members may back it but many of those were £3 Trots who may not even have voted Labour in May but TUSC or Green

    If you want to use the yougov poll then use it in full or not at all:
    "while among Labour voters generally, support for air strikes runs at almost two-to-one."

    https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/11/24/analysis-corbynistas-stay-loyal-few-others-share-h/
    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/h15sm4vwaa/TimesResults_151123_LabourMembers.pdf

    All (Survation in parenthesis)
    Approve 58 (49)
    Disapprove 22 (30)


    2015 LAB
    Approve 49 (44)
    Disapprove 29 (35)

    LAB members
    Approve 28
    Disapprove 58

    So the numbers have sifted to Corbyn since that poll, among Labour voters and especially the wider public (Survation didn't poll Labour members so nothing to compare there).

    49 29 is not 2 to 1 that would be 58 29 and there is little difference between 49 29 and 44 35 that cannot be accounted for by their being different pollsters in both cases Corbyn is going against public opinion and that of Labour voters
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 8,899
    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick 3m3 minutes ago
    Saturday's Independent front page
    Labour MPs break cover and call for Corbyn to go
  • Scott_P said:

    @ShippersUnbound: Brilliant, hilarious, angry, sad, knowing piece by @MarinaHyde on Ken Livingstone. Best piece you'll read all week: https://t.co/sGFbXRWM47

    he once leered at a female journalist: “You should come home with me – I’m like a broom handle in the morning”
  • Trickett

    If Corbyn did go early, who would the Corbynites
    First nominate from the PLP?
    Secondly vote for in the membership?

    McDonnell carries the same (or worse) level of baggage as Corbyn.

    That was the conclusion I came to.
  • Dang, missed the thread change, again.
    Flightpath, FPT re driving times etc to Oldham.
    At that point the driver will be getting very close to needing to take the rest of his break.
    8.15 is an insane time to be leaving central London.
    To make this trip worthwhile they really should be on their way by not long after 6

    Nah. Once past the Watford Gap services you are officially in the North, so Oldham cannot be much further.
    Thelwall Viaduct, although frankly I would suggest the East Lancs Road.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,300

    I’m like a broom handle in the morning

    Routinely handled by janitors???
  • Judging by the timings/distance et al - they're going to spend more time eating curry and chatting than canvassing.

    At best, from my calculations we're looking at 3.5hrs - that's with a fair wind, a short pee/sandwich buying break en route, no fannying about once they arrive and door knocking until a few mins before curry time.

    It's could be described as virtue-canvassing - barely enough time to get wet, but they'll have bragging rights for the cause

    Dang, missed the thread change, again.
    Flightpath, FPT re driving times etc to Oldham.
    At that point the driver will be getting very close to needing to take the rest of his break.
    8.15 is an insane time to be leaving central London.
    To make this trip worthwhile they really should be on their way by not long after 6

    Nah. Once past the Watford Gap services you are officially in the North, so Oldham cannot be much further.
    Plato, add in an hour for lunch?
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 8,899

    Scott_P said:

    @ShippersUnbound: Brilliant, hilarious, angry, sad, knowing piece by @MarinaHyde on Ken Livingstone. Best piece you'll read all week: https://t.co/sGFbXRWM47

    he once leered at a female journalist: “You should come home with me – I’m like a broom handle in the morning”
    Bill Tidy Cartoon.

    http://www.the-saleroom.com/en-gb/auction-catalogues/burstow-and-hewett/catalogue-id-srburs10079/lot-b7406ba8-eb72-435c-96ff-a53200ec143b
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 21,371
    Pedant alert: it was 44% not 46%. Thanks for the interesting post.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oldham_West_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_1980s
    Ken said:

    In the 1983 general election I was the party member who drove Michael Meacher around his new constituency. It was new in the sense that Openshaw had been abolished and some of its wards, including mine had ended up in Oldham West. Charles Morris had been the Openshaw MP and there was quite a bit of ill feeling in his part of the constituency that he had not been selected to fight the new Oldham West.

    In that general election Labour was fighting another one of its internal feuds between right and left, but the party had an army of new activists who had joined to fight Thatcher and we slogged our guts out to get Michael elected.

    He was returned with 46% of the vote, which the old guard told us was a disaster, that was all due to out failure to select Charlie Morris!

    32 years later, Labour has a candidate who is not only local to the area, but is well respected in it. People know that he is the local lad who left school at 16, was a father in his early twenties and worked two jobs to put the corn on the table for his family. The fact that Labour is once again engaged in a bout of internal blood-letting is neither here nor there.

    So what's the best bet on an outcome? Well, turnout will be low as this is a by-election, and Oldham is cold, wet and miserable enough to encourage people to stay at home, nice and warm. Let's be honest, Labour people have a habit of being disengaged from politics, anyway, especially at by-elections. It takes a general election to get enough of them out to vote, since it needs that background noise to remind them to vote. UKIP's voters will turn out since minor party people tend to be more engaged than others. So the Labour majority will be cut on the back of a very low turnout, which will probably be under 50%.

    Labour is still odds-on to win.

  • RogerRoger Posts: 8,836
    TCP.

    I never heard Scott Walker's version of Brel. I had a PA who played him all the time A bit sentimental but a perfect choice for Paris today.

    ScottP.

    Marina Hyde is far and away the funniest female journalist I've read. The only black mark is that she had an extended relationship with Piers Morgan
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 21,570
    My perfect result is:

    * a UKIP win
    * on low turnout
    with
    * the LibDems holding their deposit

    My biggest bets are on turnout. I'm confident the Momentum bus trip to OW&R will help suppress the natural Labour vote.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 21,570

    Speedy said:

    Scott_P said:

    @stvharry: Survation poll on UK Syria bombing -48% yes. 30% no. 21% DK. 59% say it will increase risk of terror attack here

    That is a point that I disagree, bombing or no bombing it won't affect the threat level since ISIS is already just a few miles from Dover, bombing Syria would do nothing to catch the ISIS bad guys in France and Belgium.
    IMO ISIS is already here, and may have been for some years. More may be coming over, but that doesn't mean we're not under threat.

    (Getting weapons and materials over is a different matter)
    I'd assumed he meant Hastings.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 39,645
    edited November 2015
    A few interesting titbits from Labour members on who they think should succeed Corbyn (amongst those who think Corbyn should step down now or before the next election).


    Amongst Labour voters in 2015 it is Burnham 21%, Cooper 14%, Umunna 9%, Jarvis 9%, Benn 4%, David Miliband 4%, Alan Johnson 3%, Keir Starmer 3%, Liz Kendall 3%, Tom Watson 3%, Stella Creasey 2%, Angela Eagle 1%.

    Amongst full party members it is Burnham 21%, Cooper 15%, Jarvis 10%, Umunna 8%, Benn 5%, Alan Johnson 4%, David Miliband 3%, Keith Starmer 3%, Liz Kendall 3%, Tom Watson 2%, Stella Creasey 2%, Angela Eagle 1%. (Amongst those who voted for Corbyn Jarvis is preferred followed by Benn; among those who voted for Cooper it is Yvette again followed by Jarvis; amonst those who voted for Burnham it is Andy again followed by Chuka Umunna; amongst those who voted for Liz Kendall Chuka Umunna is now their preferred choice followed by Dan Jarvis with Liz only third)
    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/h15sm4vwaa/TimesResults_151123_LabourMembers.pdf (p7)
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 43,033
    rcs1000 said:

    My perfect result is:

    * a UKIP win
    * on low turnout
    with
    * the LibDems holding their deposit

    My biggest bets are on turnout. I'm confident the Momentum bus trip to OW&R will help suppress the natural Labour vote.

    Dream result for me is

    *UKIP win
    Lib Dems get slaughtered.
    Poor turnout.

    Labour decides to stumble on with Corbyn to 2020, whreupon they ditch Corbyn just before the election for Hilary Benn :D
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 8,899
    Times Front Page - Secret bid to oust Corbyn.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 2,125
    dr_spyn said:

    Times Front Page - Secret bid to oust Corbyn.

    Where would it have been placed if they'd wanted it to become public knowledge?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,300
    dr_spyn said:

    Times Front Page - Secret bid to oust Corbyn.

    Not very secret then...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 29,626
    dr_spyn said:

    Times Front Page - Secret bid to oust Corbyn.

    We've heard nothing but wishes to oust him since he got the job, how secret is that?!
  • stodgestodge Posts: 3,746
    Scott_P said:

    @SamCoatesTimes: So growing signs we are now expecting Jeremy Corbyn to offer a free vote on Monday. Not totally clear, but looks increasingly likely

    EDIT: Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition has no considered view on the use of British Forces in combat against our enemies...

    Yet if Cameron had all the Conservatives on side, he would have had the vote and won it as there are more Conservative MPs than all the others put together.

    It's strange no one on here wants to talk about the Conservatives who won't back our leader and are obsessing about the Labour MPs who won't back theirs.

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 29,626
    stodge said:

    Scott_P said:

    @SamCoatesTimes: So growing signs we are now expecting Jeremy Corbyn to offer a free vote on Monday. Not totally clear, but looks increasingly likely

    EDIT: Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition has no considered view on the use of British Forces in combat against our enemies...

    Yet if Cameron had all the Conservatives on side, he would have had the vote and won it as there are more Conservative MPs than all the others put together.

    It's strange no one on here wants to talk about the Conservatives who won't back our leader and are obsessing about the Labour MPs who won't back theirs.

    Well, they aren't quite as numerous or, currently on most issues, as vocal, so not as obviously noteworthy, but it does show his inherent weakness.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 8,899
    edited November 2015
  • notmenotme Posts: 2,371
    HYUFD said:

    A few interesting titbits from Labour members on who they think should succeed Corbyn (amongst those who think Corbyn should step down now or before the next election).


    Amongst Labour voters in 2015 it is Burnham 21%, Cooper 14%, Umunna 9%, Jarvis 9%, Benn 4%, David Miliband 4%, Alan Johnson 3%, Keir Starmer 3%, Liz Kendall 3%, Tom Watson 3%, Stella Creasey 2%, Angela Eagle 1%.

    Amongst full party members it is Burnham 21%, Cooper 15%, Jarvis 10%, Umunna 8%, Benn 5%, Alan Johnson 4%, David Miliband 3%, Keith Starmer 3%, Liz Kendall 3%, Tom Watson 2%, Stella Creasey 2%, Angela Eagle 1%. (Amongst those who voted for Corbyn Jarvis is preferred followed by Benn; among those who voted for Cooper it is Yvette again followed by Jarvis; amonst those who voted for Burnham it is Andy again followed by Chuka Umunna; amongst those who voted for Liz Kendall Chuka Umunna is now their preferred choice followed by Dan Jarvis with Liz only third)
    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/h15sm4vwaa/TimesResults_151123_LabourMembers.pdf (p7)

    Burnham's campaign for leadership was so utterly woeful, i think Labour members might be in for a disappointment, if they think he is the great saviour.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 39,645
    dr_spyn said:
    Labour lawyers GRM Law state that Corbyn would need to get 35 MPs nominations if a leadership ballot was triggered by a challenger getting sufficient nominations, they cite the 1988 Labour leadership contest where both Kinnock and Tony Benn needed nominations to go forward to the ballot paper exactly as I have said before
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    dr_spyn said:
    Secret?!!?

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 39,645
    notme said:

    HYUFD said:

    A few interesting titbits from Labour members on who they think should succeed Corbyn (amongst those who think Corbyn should step down now or before the next election).


    Amongst Labour voters in 2015 it is Burnham 21%, Cooper 14%, Umunna 9%, Jarvis 9%, Benn 4%, David Miliband 4%, Alan Johnson 3%, Keir Starmer 3%, Liz Kendall 3%, Tom Watson 3%, Stella Creasey 2%, Angela Eagle 1%.

    Amongst full party members it is Burnham 21%, Cooper 15%, Jarvis 10%, Umunna 8%, Benn 5%, Alan Johnson 4%, David Miliband 3%, Keith Starmer 3%, Liz Kendall 3%, Tom Watson 2%, Stella Creasey 2%, Angela Eagle 1%. (Amongst those who voted for Corbyn Jarvis is preferred followed by Benn; among those who voted for Cooper it is Yvette again followed by Jarvis; amonst those who voted for Burnham it is Andy again followed by Chuka Umunna; amongst those who voted for Liz Kendall Chuka Umunna is now their preferred choice followed by Dan Jarvis with Liz only third)
    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/h15sm4vwaa/TimesResults_151123_LabourMembers.pdf (p7)

    Burnham's campaign for leadership was so utterly woeful, i think Labour members might be in for a disappointment, if they think he is the great saviour.
    This was of those who thought Corbyn should vote down, the few Corbyn voters who thought he should step down backed Jarvis then Benn, that is the most interesting
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,138
    edited November 2015
    For an opposite legal view, see here:

    http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/elections/2015/11/could-labours-rule-book-be-used-keep-jeremy-corbyn-leadership-ballot

    Labour MPs would be nuts if they wanted to get a coup caught up in a legal fight, regardless of who is actually right.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    edited November 2015
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34945224

    President Hollande asks for our help..

    Labour sticking to the old adage....A friend in need is a friend who is a pain in the a**e.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 39,645
    edited November 2015

    For an opposite legal view, see here:

    http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/elections/2015/11/could-labours-rule-book-be-used-keep-jeremy-corbyn-leadership-ballot

    Labour MPs would've nuts if they wanted to get a coup caught up in a legal fight, regardless of who is actually right.

    That was written by a tax lawyer I will take the view of Labour's in-house constitutional lawyers. If Labour lose a by-election to UKIP in a formerly safe Labour seat a coup is certainly better than suicide!
  • HYUFD said:

    For an opposite legal view, see here:

    http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/elections/2015/11/could-labours-rule-book-be-used-keep-jeremy-corbyn-leadership-ballot

    Labour MPs would've nuts if they wanted to get a coup caught up in a legal fight, regardless of who is actually right.

    Is that written by lawyers, no, I will take the lawyers view. If Labour lose a by-election to UKIP in a formerly safe Labour seat a coup is certainly better than suicide!
    The author of that article is a QC.
  • tysontyson Posts: 4,345
    I've just had my email as a Labour member asking for my views on Syria. Clearly Corbynites are hoping to appeal to the membership to counter the MP's through this stunt.

    FWIW- and despite all my lefty, liberal misgivings which I have shared on this site- and there are many- my inclination is to bomb the Jihadi, Isis dickwads and lets suffer the consequences. I don't think it'll help, but bombing those Islamist nobheads somehow makes me feel better.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 39,645

    HYUFD said:

    For an opposite legal view, see here:

    http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/elections/2015/11/could-labours-rule-book-be-used-keep-jeremy-corbyn-leadership-ballot

    Labour MPs would've nuts if they wanted to get a coup caught up in a legal fight, regardless of who is actually right.

    Is that written by lawyers, no, I will take the lawyers view. If Labour lose a by-election to UKIP in a formerly safe Labour seat a coup is certainly better than suicide!
    The author of that article is a QC.
    A tax lawyer not a constitutional lawyer!
  • tyson said:

    I've just had my email as a Labour member asking for my views on Syria. Clearly Corbynites are hoping to appeal to the membership to counter the MP's through this stunt.

    FWIW- and despite all my lefty, liberal misgivings which I have shared on this site- and there are many- my inclination is to bomb the Jihadi, Isis dickwads and lets suffer the consequences. I don't think it'll help, but bombing those Islamist nobheads somehow makes me feel better.

    Never a terribly good reason to go to war.
This discussion has been closed.