Lol. One way ticket to a world record election defeat, that.
Lol. One way ticket to a world record election defeat, that.
If we're talking about entryists, then the Tories who took over the Labour party surely qualify, and should be shown the door.
Do you want the Tories to win?Originally Posted by Henry
What qualifies one as a 'Tory'? A lifetime of Labour membership and activism seems not to.
You know I don't agree with your analysis, so loading your question in this way is unhelpful.
Prior to the Oldham victory for Corbyn's Labour:
The Daily Heil: "A Waterloo moment."...“Tonight will deliver the first proper electoral verdict on Mr. Corbyn’s leadership of the Labour Party...it is also a timely reassessment of Nigel Farage’s aspirations to make UKIP a credible alternative to Labour in the urban North of England....No doubt that Labours majority will be slashed"
The Sun: Corbyn's supporters are a “moronic Marxist mob” who called Hilary Benn a “warmonger instead of feting him as a hero.....Voters are repulsed...By the time you read this, we will know what those in Oldham think of it.”
Anti-Terror Police take 12 year old out of class and threaten him for organising a protest to save his Youth Club on Facebook.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...arebar_twitter
Only Big Society left is Big Brother, mate.
That can't be true or at least can't be exactly like what was written there.
The collective MELTDOWN over the Stop the War wallies comparing the 'internationalism and solidarity' of jihadists with the International Brigades is quite funny. It seems quite accurate in terms of what words actually mean, although they might have a point in that the Muslamics haven't killed as many innocent people yet.
MP tries to get in on the 'They're being mean to me on the internet!' action.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...t-s-email.html
Issue being she added the death threat to the email herself
Spiked out-did themselves with this the other day. In short, lol at voting to bomb a country and then whining about mean tweets.
The gist of the article is right concerning MPs voting to bomb things, but this is bullshit and undermines it:
Let’s get a few things straight. First of all, if you’re over 16 – let alone a prominent politician – you’ve got no right to claim you’re being bullied. Bullying is what happens in the playground.
Hadn't heard anything about that. What meltdown?
It might just have been the sort of people I follow on the Twitter, but he's been getting shit today for refusing to distance himself from Stop the War.
He should turn up at PMQs in that hat.
Something for anyone on the geekier end of politics as YouGov have published a report into how and why they got their general election polling wrong: https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/12/07...ling-and-what/
This paragraph is the key part:
I hope for his sake that someone in Jezza's team has pinned up a huge motivational poster on his office wall reading 'The thing with non-voters is that they don't fucking vote'.The younger age range within the samples over-represent those who are more engaged in politics and are therefore more likely to vote. As younger people, they disproportionately supported Labour, so having too many young voters in our likely voter sample skewed the overall result towards Labour. We believe we had the party voting proportions for this age group correct but that fewer of them actually voted than our sample suggested. This can be corrected in the future in two ways: a) interviewing the correct proportion of people who are less interested in politics, and b) weighting the sample to the expected turnout for different demographic groups. The problem with both of these is that, unlike in the US where detailed exit poll data is publicly available, in the UK no detailed information is available by which we can know the correct target proportions for each age group. However, we can make better estimates of them.
I've read that non-voters tend to break the same way as voters anyway so targeting them makes fuck all difference.
I think I also read that even securing his target audience of young non-voters wouldn't be anything like enough for anything but electoral defeat.
Politics is the art of persuasion. If it couldn't be done, everyone would give up and go home.
So not enough young people, despite pissing and moaning about the EVIL Tories, couldn't be arsed to get out of bed before 10 and down to the polling station?
Or maybe they listened to Brand and didn't bother voting as a result? It'd be delightful if that monstrous twat's message had inadvertently secured the Tories a majority...
Is he dead yet? I haven't seen anything about him for ages.
I don't think he's any less active than he was when he was at peak levels, I'm guessing a lot of people realised that he was full of shit and more importantly the broadcasters realised he wasn't particularly newsworthy.
The only thing I've got any time for him with are his thoughts on drugs, which do make a lot of sense, but his political stuff was just embarrassing.
The young have never voted (I'm not sure where the Russell Brand bit comes from) Or in my case, didn't believe in that Labour party. When I was in the UK for the election that eneded up forming the coalition, I knew a few 'politically active' people who refused to register as the banks and student loan use it to find you. There are all types of cirmunstances when we're talking about a rather small slice of the vote. Old people will always outweigh young people (in pure numbers) and they're more likely to vote because it'll be the most exciting thing they've done since the last time they voted.
I like those articles moaning about how the government showers old people with money (which it does). Yeah. Because they vote. If you voted...
The leader of the Labour Party went to meet Russell Brand in a General Election campaign because he thought it might help him win. Fuck me.
Then again, he also posed in front of a large boulder with platitudes carved into it. And yet that era now seems like a frenzied orgy of competence in Labour's history.
Given that he also thought making his own gigantic gravestone was a good idea I'm not sure how much this tells us.
A moment to reflect on the policy obelisk please. RIP.
It was such a waste of a good obelisk putting those bland, meaningless policies on it as well.
Didn't he say he was goimg to plamt it in the Downing Street garden? How the fuck does something like that get past however many groups you have to approve such shit?
The spacing on that last one if atrocious.
It's so 'The Thick Of It' it's remarkable it's not been revealed to be an elaborate Joaquin Pheonix side project.
I thought that, but then realised there was more of number 5 out of shot. Still, it does look shit. Keep it pithy to get the typography nice.
Nah, just bring the scarf
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...r-under-corbyn
On foreign policy, he said: “Post 9/11, I became convinced that Islamist extremism was the security issue of our time. People can agree or disagree with the decisions which I took and the emphasis I put on the partnership with the USA, but I took them not in defiance of progressive politics but in furtherance of them.”
Iraq was full of Islamic extremism before it was invaded, of course.
In other words, it gave him an excuse to live up to that horrendous 'Chicago Speech' he made in 1999. Twat.
What a lovely man. He's like a kind old grandad. I'd love a kind old grandad running the country.
Remember when people said that about Roy Hodgson?
No, I don't.
Roy would do a job as PM.
I'm sure he's a Lizard in a suit or something.
He'd be a fucking disaster as Tory leader. He's been to the Gordon Brown School of Looking a Wanker in Public.
He also doesn't blink. Definitely an illuminati space lizard/robot.
He's been to the Gordon Brown School of everything.
When they all stood in the same weird fashion at Conference I was beginning to think Icke might have had a point.
Why does he always have that weird spaced out look like he doesn't know where he is or what the fuck is going on?
It's probably a symptom of being at the absolute extreme end of knowing absolutely every minute detail of where he is and what is going on, and what that means for his leadership chances.
I think he's a genius but his obsession with being leader is going to cost him and if not him, then the Tories. That said Theresa May would be far worse. Boris to the rescue.
How does the Leadership vote work for the Cons? Membership vote or is it MP selection?
The parliamentary party vote do they not?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
