Jeremy Corbyn

Oh.. wait.. is this a cynical ploy to steal the centre ground Jam? 🙂

Agreeing with Jamba.

Of course, stopping welfare going to private landlords would be good extra move. Build/keep council houses and housing association housing to enable this. Scary how much benefit money is paying the mortgages of property speculators.

I'd like to hear what Corbyn has to say about the Monarchy. I have a feeling he's a staunch republican who'd like to see them all dispensed with and their wealth distributed for the common good. Wouldn't that be good!?

Wouldn't that be good!?

I know, that's it exactly. I think that's probably why we're not hearing about it. I think his feelings are clear when he chose not to sing the national anthem. I'm surprised his rivals aren't using it to bash him.

Plenty of time for that I'm afraid. Although I think this comprehensive manifesto has been the best move they could ever make.
I wouldn't be surprised if the tories have rushed in a lot of policies to make theirs look at least not mickey mouse in comparison.

ramifications of Brexit are being felt around the UK and enough Leavers have changed their minds.

Pmsl!

I'm going to make a statement that I never though I would:
I'm warming to Corbyn. There, I said it.

I think the biggest difference is the total contrast in style between him and the Maybot when 'in public'.

The difference is that May is clearly terrified of encountering anyone not pre-approved by central office, hence the ludicrously stage managed photo-ops, with Tory staffers. And we all know that young people in suits waving placards about patriotism just looks weird, and creepy. And when one of the great unwashed does make it through, she's like a rabbit in the headlights. Lost without her prepared answers.

Whereas we've only ever previously seen Corbyn at PMQs etc, where he looks really uncomfortable and like a cantankerous old goat. But the news now shows him relaxed and in his natural environment. Out amongst people waving placardsI Now a big chunk of them are Momentum members, or at least Labour. But they look like normal people, and he's happy to chat to them. He looks like a human being. In comparison, May looks like an android, with all the personal charm of the terminator.

It does look like in the last week or so he's actually realised that isn't a dream, and he really is the leader of the labour party

Get those red flags waving kiddies! He's on his feet 😀

I wish they'd have finished the intro with a business exec/ceo that supported investment, innovation, etc.
Would have been easy to do and would have done a lot imo.

I think the biggest difference is the total contrast in style between him and the Maybot when 'in public'.

I wonder if traditional politicians and the media have adapted to each other. They expect meaningless soundbites, so the politicians strive to create the right kind of meaningless soundbites, and if you don't create soundbites then you don't work.

Corbyn's Labour seem to have created a proper raft of actual policies that would make a real difference to people's lives - and might've forced the Tories to try and do the same at least partly - and the media now have to actually talk about policy.

Now a big chunk of them are Momentum members, or at least Labour. But they look like normal people, and he's happy to chat to them. He looks like a human being.

I very much doubt that many of the thousands who turned up in hebden bridge and Leeds yesterday have been anywhere near a momentum meeting. Besides that though, those of us who don't buy into the media claptrap about him have been saying for months that there is more to him than his media image. I'm quietly hopeful that this election won't be the disaster everyone assumes. I don't think he'll win, but he may just do well enough to prove his critics in the PLP wrong. Question is if he does, will they then finally support him and his policies, or continue doing the tories job for them?

The "let's debate" line is a good one.
Makes Corbyn seem confident May secretive.

It would be pretty amazing if he did win though eh?

I don't think much is being made of Brexit so far because both major parties have said it will happen; it's now down to what sort of Brexit deal is available and that's where i have concerns - May's antagonistic approach thus far seems to me to have driven a counterpoint position from the EU.

And the rhetoric from the Tories on that has focused not on the deal, but on whether you want a 'strong and stable' leader that will make herself 'bloody difficult' to deal with vs 'a mutton headed old mugwump'.

Which makes me think of two things.

1/ It's to me clearly a strategy designed to appeal to the person that just wants out of Europe and if that means punching them repeatedly on the nose, even if that means getting punched a bit ourselves, well that's a price worth paying.

2/ Does anyone really trust either of them to actually be doing the negotiating? Because i wouldn't - but I'm more inclined to be persuaded that JC will employ someone who does know what they're doing and can take a balanced position that doesn't set the whole house ablaze; May's surrounded herself with the political equivalents of Alf Garnett in a suit and they'll take us all down if they have to.

The difference is that May is clearly terrified of encountering anyone not pre-approved by central office

She certainly looked it yesterday when meeting a person on reduced benefits. It wasn't far off from her breaking down with her just endlessly repeating "Strong and Stable", "Will of the People", "Brexit" in a loop until someone took her away.

Funny that she isn't doing leaders debates because her approach is to go out and meet people instead (the very thing she is worst at)

If only all of the people could meet all of the leaders and question them, get a true sense of what they are about, what they would do for them etc,. I think we would se a very different result.

[quote=kimbers ]Im still not 100% convinced by Corbyn even if I like many of his policies, but hes better than I thought a while ago, but Im getting ever more convinced the Theresa May wont be good for the country

This x1000 - there's still something about Corbyn which makes me hesitant, but given a choice between him and the Maybot there's no contest (even from a competence and leadership POV before we get to the toxic policies). I write as somebody who has voted Tory in the past, and still struggling to understand why everybody else hasn't worked out what they're really about.

[quote=theotherjonv ]2/ Does anyone really trust either of them to actually be doing the negotiating? Because i wouldn't - but I'm more inclined to be persuaded that JC will employ someone who does know what they're doing and can take a balanced position that doesn't set the whole house ablaze; May's surrounded herself with the political equivalents of Alf Garnett in a suit and they'll take us all down if they have to.

Being a remainer I clearly don't have the majority view, but being "bloody difficult" appears a "bloody stupid" position to take in negotiations when you don't actually have a strong hand to play. Of course such a stance goes down well with the hardcore brexiteers who believe the EU's stance on negotiations is because they want to punish us 🙄

kerley - Member

She certainly looked it yesterday when meeting a person on reduced benefits.

Something I've seen a few people pick up on from that- it's not just the look of terror or the total inability to admit that her government has chosen to **** this person, that PIP is destroying lives as a policy choice... It's also the bit where she thinks learning difficulties are a mental health issue.

It reminds me of the whole "car crash interviews" thing the other week. When Diane Abbott has a car crash interview, it's because she said something wrong. But when Theresa May has a car crash interview it's because she said what she thinks. It's not the same thing at all- one is a mistake, and can be corrected or clarified. The other doesn't go away.

[quote=Northwind ]kerley - Member
She certainly looked it yesterday when meeting a person on reduced benefits.
Something I've seen a few people pick up on from that- it's not just the look of terror or the total inability to admit that her government has chosen to **** this person, that PIP is destroying lives as a policy choice... It's also the bit where she thinks learning difficulties are a mental health issue.
It reminds me of the whole "car crash interviews" thing the other week. When Diane Abbott has a car crash interview, it's because she said something wrong. But when Theresa May has a car crash interview it's because she said what she thinks. It's not the same thing at all- one is a mistake, and can be corrected or clarified. The other doesn't go away.

being "bloody difficult" appears a "bloody stupid" position to take in negotiations when you don't actually have a strong hand to play

spot on. I used to negotiate on a daily basis, and the position you take is dictated by circumstances, not what type of person you are. In some cases then a 'that's what's on offer, take it or leave it' stance is perfectly fine. But not in this case.

Also as a remainer, but one who has 'resigned myself' to the fact that we voted, we decided, and it's going to happen so let's get the best we can for all parties now - taking the stance of 'if I can't have exactly what i want then I'm prepared to **** it up completely' is what i have the issue with now.

Coupled to the fact that the election was called on this basis, that May could use Brexit to garner support from the pro-leave side to get another 5 years, and then use those 5 years to impose her toxic national policies as well EVEN THOUGH THE PEOPLE WHO SUFFER MOST WILL BE MANY OF THOSE THAT PUT HER IN THE PLACE TO DO IT - that's why we need as many seats to go to other parties as possible so she doesn't get the overwhelming majority that her strategists have told her would be the outcome.

Very interesting looking at all the different media outlets today about the labour manifesto.
Just the way they frame it is very telling.

Can't believe my inlaws and parents read the telegraph/mail respectively 🙁

On another note, I've discovered many Grime artists over the last hour or so 🙂
#grime4corbyn

[img] [/img]

On the crowds to watch Corbyn being all labour party / momentum members, I am not so sure.

I went with a friend and neither of us has been to a political speech in our lives.

I'm not really a party politics person - I was a labour member briefly in the 90s but stopped. Any campaigning I've done has been for human rights and the environment. Yes, there were plenty of people who were more politically active than me there but I wouldn't be surprised if there were a lot more people like me around.

I came away convinced that there's something really odd about the media and quite wrong. And also that I would do what I could to counter it. I also read about the way in which the Trump campaign cut out the media in the US. I am not sure that anyone working on the labour party campaign has adopted a similar strategy deliberately or indeed has the access to data and analytics but it was really interesting to see that it is possible to reach people without mainstream media support. There's a tiny bit of me that wonders whether the media is a bit scared, and whether this fear is what has provoked the vilification.

To be honest, the last day has been a bit odd, because I've worked in communications and PR for a lot of my life, and whilst you know that the media is a frame for the news, I've never seen such a massive discrepancy. I keep thinking about it and it's like having an attack of professional vertigo.

@kimbers as I have said before it see it as very occasionally me being right as I agree with you 🙂

Apologies not had time to read the thread today will catch up later

Excellent words from The Spectator on The Labour Manifesto. Real NHS uplift is half the cost of aboloshing tuition fees. That plus tax rises change behaviour and always raise less than estimated.

Today Labour launched its manifesto. Thanks to last week's draft manifesto leak, the focus has not been on the contents (which range from nationalising the railways, Royal Mail and National Grid to scrapping tuition fees), but how Labour will actually pay for the £48.6bn worth of pledges.

Before Jeremy Corbyn could get on stage at the launch in Bradford to explain that costly policies will be funded from extra tax revenue, John McDonnell dropped a clanger on the Today programme. Despite saying the document was 'fully costed', the shadow chancellor was forced to admit that Labour won’t include figures for its nationalisation plans – even though nationalising water alone is expected to cost tens of billions. Matters weren't helped when McDonnell guessed the UK deficit wrongly.

As for the plans to raise an extra revenue by increasing income tax bands for top earners, raising corporation tax, introducing an excessive pay levy and a new tax avoidance programme, the party doesn’t seem to understand that taxes change behaviour. On Coffee House, Matthew Lynn says you can argue about the rights and wrongs of the Laffer Curve, which holds that at a certain point the revenue from raising taxes go down, all day long. What you can’t argue with is that people will respond to each tax rise usually by trying to reduce their tax bill. The result? The amount you raise will always be very different from what you forecast.

But disregarding these problems, does Labour’s manifesto really look like one to cheer the hearts of old socialists? This is a document which would deeply disappoint Robin Hood, says Ross Clark, because while there are new tax measures aimed at the rich, many of the spending commitments would also disproportionately benefit the wealthy. The single most expensive measure in Labour’s spending plans is abolishing university tuition fees – at a cost of £11.2bn a year, more than twice the sum that Labour is planning to put into the NHS. The end of tuition fees would help some poor students, but it would help middle-class families more for the simple reason that their children are more likely to go to university.

But there is another more favourable way to look at the document. If it's viewed as a pre-emptive Labour leadership manifesto for Corbyn then it makes more sense. It could prove invaluable for him in the aftermath of a disastrous election result.

Let's not forget, Jamba, that fiscal prudence is not exactly important to the Tory party any longer. Brexit is the biggest potential threat to Britain's economy since it got involved in two world wars. Corbyn borrowing a few extra billion fades into complete insignificance in that context if things don't pan out in the way Brexiteers are hoping.

Real NHS uplift is half the cost of aboloshing tuition fees.

Free tuition is massively important for the country as a whole. And TBH we're mostly already paying for it anyway.

Free tuition... And TBH we're mostly already paying for it anyway.

Yep I didn't hear this said today.

Also trains are going to be took back franchise by franchise as they become available and the last one was profitable so arguably no extra cost.

Water: A business bought at market worth seems not such a massive problem to me?

Energy: Isn't the plan just to create a state run competitor not nationalise the whole thing?

EDIT: Wouldn't it have been great if Milliband came up with something like this manifesto?

Yep, three measured policies I can get behind, without scary cost implications in the long term. All good investments.

Yep, it really needs to be repeated over and over on tuition fees- you have to take into account the current cost. The student loan company is entirely funded with government borrowing, and a huge proportion of the debt will never be repaid. So the abolishment of tuition fees would be cost neutral today (well, there'd presumably be efficiency savings). It would make the national financial state look a little worse but only because of dodgy accounting, not because of any real cost.

And then the long-term cost would be some fraction of the perceived cost- basically the repayment amount not the loaned amount. In 2016 the IFS predicted that 70% of students won't fully repay their loan, and that'll have been worsened now. It's not quite that simple because some of the loan book will be sold off (cheaply) and some of that 70% will pay off a large amount of their loan, just not all. But it's reasonable to assume a return of well under 50%. Plus, again, efficiency savings

Unfortunately it's easy for people to mislead on this point. Frankly it's hard to convince people of just how low the repayment rate is so it's no wonder people assume that the cost of cancelling a £9250 loan and paying the fees instead will be £9250 rather than... £3500? And equally because of the way it's discussed, most people don't realise that it's already public borrowing anyway.

Basically the truth is hard to believe and the lie seems more likely.

[quote=Clover ]On the crowds to watch Corbyn being all labour party / momentum members, I am not so sure.
I went with a friend and neither of us has been to a political speech in our lives.

I'm disappointed I found out too late that he was coming here - I'd have gone to hear him. Not only have I never been a member of any political party (let alone Labour), I'm not even a natural Labour voter (I've still only voted Labour once, and won't be this time, but it would be a wasted vote here - I should probably point out that Corbyn was visiting the next door constituency which has always been a Labour/Tory marginal).

Isn't it interesting how Momentum have taken on such mythic proportions? There's 22000 of them, which makes them 4% of the entire Labour membership. But people see them everywhere- everyone Corbyn meets is a Momentum member, every rally is nothing but Momentum fanboys. 7000 people apparently turned up to see him in Liverpool, my dad and Binners and many others reckon they're all Momentum members- that's 1/3d of all of them in one room, amazing!

It's almost as though it's not true eh.

[img] [/img]

An American perspective, but does any of this sound familiar considering how the Tory Party have cosied up to US corporate money since Thatcher

Police work was integrated with the system of poor relief, as constables worked on registration of the poor and their placement in workhouses. That’s even before the police were professionalized—the constables were sorting out the “deserving poor” from the “undeserving poor.” If people were unemployed and unable to work, constables would direct them toward charity from churches or the city itself. But if folks were able to work, they were judged to be “idlers” and sent off to the horrors of the workhouse.

The system for poor relief made a crucial contribution to the creation of the market for wage labor. The key function of the relief system was to make unemployment so unpleasant and humiliating that people were willing to take ordinary jobs at very low wages just to avoid unemployment. By punishing the poorest people, capitalism creates a low baseline for the wage scale and pulls the whole scale downward.

https://libcom.org/history/origins-police-david-whitehouse

Philip Hammond says that the manifesto spending plan is unbalanced and doesn't add up, and therefore is no good.

However, he was also unable to answer when his manifesto will even be published ("soon"...."How soon?" ...... "soon") taking politicians avoiding simple questions to a new level. If I could have torn the radio out of the car dashboard it would now be in bits on the A31.

Philip Hammond says that the manifesto spending plan is unbalanced and doesn't add up, and therefore is no good.

Well he's right - the magic fully costed manifesto turned out to have a rather large gaping hole in it that would require some hefty borrowing.

However, he was also unable to answer when his manifesto will even be published

I can see me not voting for the first time ever as all the options seem rubbish.

Isn't it interesting how Momentum have taken on such mythic proportions? There's 22000 of them, which makes them 4% of the entire Labour membership. But people see them everywhere- everyone Corbyn meets is a Momentum member, every rally is nothing but Momentum fanboys. 7000 people apparently turned up to see him in Liverpool, my dad and Binners and many others reckon they're all Momentum members- that's 1/3d of all of them in one room, amazing!

It's almost as though it's not true eh.

You've never heard the term "fellow travellers"?

That's because they don't have one, the strategy is stay quiet, let JC shoot himself in the foot, gain increased majority, but without significant manifesto pledges to tie you down you can do whatever you like for 5 years.

If that's what they're doing it's them shooting their own feet. Corbyn is still a long, long way off winning but now he's getting airtime and people are listening to labour and their ideas it seems many like what they hear. The thumping great majority may not be quite as thumping if things keep going as they are.

Everyone expected the child catcher to be competent and steady. She's proving to be anything but.

Corbyn was meant to be a bonkers head banger. He's actually coming across as a compassionate bloke who has decent intentions.

Corbyn was meant to be a bonkers head banger. He's actually coming across as a compassionate bloke who has decent intentions.

sadly not to the sun/daily mail/telegraph readers

hamonds interview this morning sound like stability isnt a factor in his relationship with Maybot

either we will see some major u-turnms in tory policy in their manifesto when it eventually surfaces or he'll b4 the autumn statement (do we still have those)

people are listening to labour and their ideas it seems many like what they hear.

Are they though? The polls show only a little movement (2-3%) in Labours direction. However, more importantly that seems to be coming from UKIP, with the Tory share staying level.

I can see me not voting for the first time ever as all the options seem rubbish.

I heard the choice put brilliantly the other day

"You can vote for the right thing, done badly, or the wrong thing, done well"

Indeed.

The Tory housing minister has just been on Five Live saying that the absolutely huge increase in homelessness over the last 5 years (which is an absolute disgrace in such a rich country!) has nothing whatsoever to do with changes to the benefits system

[img] [/img]

hamonds interview this morning sound like stability isnt a factor in his relationship with Maybot

Being reported that she's just refused to deny she will sack him in the near future......

Comply or die! Comply or die!

I can see me not voting for the first time ever as all the options seem rubbish.

That's really not a reason not to vote. You need to

- Decide the order of rubbishness of candidates/parties in your constituency.
- Use your vote, tactically if necessary, to secure the least rubbish outcome.

- Decide the order of rubbishness of candidates/parties in your constituency.
- Use your vote, tactically if necessary, to secure the least rubbish outcome.

Very much this. In my (ultra-marginal) constituancy the Greens and Lib Dems have stood aside to give the Labour candidate a clear run. Our present sitting Tory MP is an utter and complete **** of the highest order, with a majority of only 300

In this election, we're basically being asked if we'd like our huge shit sandwich on brown or white bread?

Now sit down and eat your butty!!! Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm 😉

[url= https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/16/in-stoke-may-marches-on-with-familiar-neuron-crushing-dullness?CMP=twt_gu ]Brilliant from Marina Hyde this morning.[/url]

And so to Screwfix’s Trentham distribution centre, the latest blacksite where May’s election is being held. Each day the prime minister is rendered to a sealed regional facility, where she tortures a captive audience with looped repetitions of the phrase “strong and stable”. After a sustained period of it, people are unsure whether to applaud or confess to a ****stani embassy bombing they had nothing to with just to make it stop.

🙂

Life insurers now insist that you declare if you have been exposed to a Theresa May response, with failure to disclose the fact liable to render your policy void. Outside the Screwfix gates, even the Mirror chicken looked like it wanted to turn itself in to the nearest Nando’s.

😀

Thus far on the campaign, Conservative party branding on the huge THERESA MAY posters has been incredibly small, giving it the flavour of those speedily garbled disclaimers at the end of US TV drug adverts: “May cause mood swings, palpitations, hives, hair loss, suicidal thoughts, anal leakage, a savagely underfunded NHS and the continuing elevation of Liam Fox.”

😆

"You can vote for the right thing, done badly, or the wrong thing, done well"

Having just seen the front cover of the LibDem manifesto, I cant help but think the quality of political slogans is pisspoor this time around:

Change Britain's Future
For the many, not the few
Strong & Stable

Where are the new classics?
Labour isn't working
Britain deserves better
New Labour, New danger
Never had it so good
Labour's tax bombshell

And not forgetting the all-time-great:
Are you thinking what we're thinking?