I'm not sure they should or need to attack. Just act as if they are the natural government imo.
I'm not sure they are 'about' winning elections. This was never about winning in 2020 (or 2017 as it turned out) this was always about changing PLP to be in line with the Labour membership. JC/JM/DA were as suprised as anyone else they got within 50 seats of the Torys.
They're playing the long game. Being in a position to deselect the moderate Labour MPs and change the Labour party leadership rules is what matters to them, not immediate power.
Digression: Anyone know if the constituency boundary changes will happen in 2018 as planned?
I reckon Gove and BoJo's egos would make them believe they are perfectly capable of single-handedly turning the current situation around.
I reckon David Davis vainglorious detachment from reality when it comes to appraising his own (very limited) abilities, would see him unable to chuck his name in too
I'm putting a tenner on it being Phil. Remember that the vast majority of Tory MPs were remainers, and I think there's a desire to stop this ludicrously self-destructive Hard Brexit stance, put the grown ups back in charge, and put the hysterical right wingers back in their box
Digression: Anyone know if the constituency boundary changes will happen in 2018 as planned?
In yet more delicious irony, thats been kicked into touch by the DUP, as the boundary changes would favour Sinn Fein
The reality is that Labour's manifesto is moderately left of centre - the sort of thing which is commonplace in most of Europe.
Nationalizing multiple large industries in 5 years at the same time as leaving the EU is commonplace in most of Europe? Care to name a single country that's done that in the modern era?
Nationalizing multiple large industries in 5 years at the same time as leaving the EU is commonplace in most of Europe? Care to name a single country that's done that in the modern era?
I'm pretty sure you can't blame Labour for Brexit, given that most of its supporters voted to remain. No, see the Tories for that one.
Turning to nationalization, no, that's not what they're proposing. I suppose you might believe that if your thinking is outsourced to the Daily Mail.
In yet more delicious irony, thats been kicked into touch by the DUP, as the boundary changes would favour Sinn Fein
I didn't know that - do you have a link?
I'm pretty sure you can't blame Labour for Brexit, given that most of its supporters voted to remain. No, see the Tories for that one.
I'm not blaming them for putting leaving the EU in their manifesto. I'm saying it isn't commonplace in Europe. You're saying the stuff in their manifesto *is* commonplace in Europe. You're wrong.
Turning to nationalization, no, that's not what they're proposing.
In yet more delicious irony, thats been kicked into touch by the DUP, as the boundary changes would favour Sinn Fein
Linky?
Are all the parties going to be able to fund another campaign if it happens in the next few months, especially the Conservatives? Many potential wealthy donors may not want to back the Conservatives if they look likely to lose, and also they may not donate if they expect to be harmed by Brexit.
IIRC tories spent £12m on their campaign, labour £4m
Maybot was out schmoozing big money donors the other night at a fundraiser, so the tories are preparing
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/theresa-may-savoy_uk_59493a8ce4b07499199ed1a6
[url= http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/818302/Conservatives-DUP-Theresa-May-Arlene-Foster-Election-2017 ]Why boundry changes weren't in the Queens Speech[/url]
You really couldn't make it up. The true scale of Mays **** up snowballs by the day 😆
I didn't know that - do you have a link?
It was discussed on here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08wr7ss
I'm not blaming them for putting leaving the EU in their manifesto. I'm saying it isn't commonplace in Europe. You're saying the stuff in their manifesto *is* commonplace in Europe. You're wrong.
Give over. You were doing your usual shtick about Labour being hard left. There is nothing in their manifesto to support your claim, as you know perfectly well.
Turning to nationalization, no, that's not what they're proposing.
Yep, Labour are not proposing what you claim. Next!
really theyll kill the boundry changes? that wouldve gained them, what 20-30 seats
all to hang on to 10 DUP votes
thats hilarious the DUP arent just retoxifying the tories they are hobbling them too!
Why boundry changes weren't in the Queens Speech
I'm starting to like the devils' pact!
There is nothing in their manifesto to support your claim, as you know perfectly well.
I claimed Momentum have taken over the Labour party and that the PLP will now be 'adjusted' to be more like the Labour Membership.
You didn't even address that claim. You argued that the manifesto commitments were commonplace in Europe which is irrelevant to whether the Labour Party has been taken over or not.
However I chose to respond to that non-sequitur and I've given you two examples of significant things in the manifesto that are not commonplace in Europe.
Blimey outofbreath - you're sounding a lot like jamba.
The position they are trying to get back to is very similar to many countries in Europe.
You said "Nationalizing multiple large industries" and then only point to rail, which is a franchise model anyway leased anyway, so not a large cost to take back when franchises come to an end.
When the east coast line was run by a public franchise Directly Operated Railways made a billion pounds for the treasury.
Corbyn himself seems very receptive to moderate MPs as long as they aren't constantly trying to undermine his leadership. For the moment they have common ground in that they all support the manifesto and are seeking to get JC as PM. I don't see why the knives would be out.
Why boundry changes weren't in the Queens Speech
Ta. Staggering.
I claimed Momentum have taken over the Labour party and that the PLP will now be 'adjusted' to be more like the Labour Membership.You didn't even address that claim. You argued that the manifesto commitments were commonplace in Europe which is irrelevant to whether the Labour Party has been taken over or not.
You know how burden of proof works, right?
It's an odd day when you feel grateful that a bunch of flag-waving bigots like the DUP are in a position of influence, if it's true they've put the brakes on Tory plans to gerrymander the entire election system.
Exactly. There comes a point where lies are so obvious that we just assume that everyone else reading except jamby/ninfan/chewwy and yourself can see right through it and we know from past experience that it's pointless expecting any acceptance of rebuttals from the aforementioned.You know how burden of proof works, right?
[quote=martinhutch ]It's an odd day when you feel grateful that a bunch of flag-waving bigots like the DUP are in a position of influence, if it's true they've put the brakes on Tory plans to gerrymander the entire election system.
Gerrymandering opposed by NI Unionists, who'd have thunk it?
I don't see why the knives would be out.
Because as it is the PLP would never allow another momentum friendly candidate onto the leadership ballot.
Momentum *have* to change the rules ASAP or when Corbyn goes (for whatever reason - he's no spring chicken) Momentum's control ends.
There comes a point where lies are so obvious
I think that point is where a couple of posts after I link to two nationalizations in the Labour manifesto you claim I only linked to one!
You know how burden of proof works, right?
Yes, that's why I linked to two nationalizations to support my claim.
I claimed Momentum have taken over the Labour party and that the PLP will now be 'adjusted' to be more like the Labour Membership.
You know how burden of proof works, right?
Yes, that's why I linked to two nationalizations to support my claim.
How convincing!
How convincing!
Facts usually are!
I claimed Momentum have taken over the Labour party and that the PLP will now be 'adjusted' to be more like the Labour Membership.
You didn't dispute that.
You ignored it and instead argued that the Labour manifesto was commonplace in European countries. That's what we disagreed about that that's what I provided facts to back up.
You'll have to be explicit - I still can't find it.I think that point is where a couple of posts after I link to two nationalizations in the Labour manifesto you claim I only linked to one!
Facts usually are!
Feel free to present some in support of your claim.
You'll have to be explicit - I still can't find it.
From the link above:
Corbyn will lay out plans to take parts of Britain’s energy industry back into public ownership alongside the railways and the Royal Mail
Mail is in the headline too.
Feel free to present some in support of your claim.
LOL, you didn't dispute it when I wrote it, however:
Just out of interest do you disagree with my opinion? Do you think that the PLP are in step with Momentum and if Jeremy Corbyn went under a bus tomorrow the PLP would put a Momentum friendly candidate forward? Or would they put people like Chukka forward?
Given that do you think the Labour Leadership rules and the PLP will need to be changed ASAP to allow future momentum friendly candidates to be put to the membership, or not?
Corbyn will lay out plans to take parts of Britain’s energy industry back into public ownership
The proposal is to have a publicly-owned offer in each region. That is not nationalization.
Now, about your claim that Momentum has taken over the party. Evidence, please!
plenty of European countries have nationalised rail, utilities etc or at least state owned franchises
plenty of those state run companies also run subsidy hoovering providers here too, dutch, german, french, + chinese, japanese etc
The proposal is to have a publicly-owned offer in each region. That is not nationalization.
I didn't say it was. I said there were multiple Nationalizations in the Labour manifesto. You even quoted it.
plenty of European countries have nationalised rail, utilities etc or at least state owned franchises
Cool, so name some that have both left the EU and nationalized multiple industries within 5 years. Apparently it's commonplace.
I didn't say it was. I said there were multiple Nationalizations in the Labour manifesto. You even quoted it.
You offered energy as an example of nationalization. It isn't.
Now, about your claim that Momentum has taken over the party. Evidence, please!
You offered energy as an example of nationalization. It isn't.
I offered an article that mentioned two nationalizations. Rail & Mail. I did that to support my claim that Labour's Manifesto incluided multiple nationalizations. Yes the article mentioned many other things that were not Nationalizations.
Now, about your claim that Momentum has taken over the party. Evidence, please!
See post above with link.
I offered an article that mentioned two nationalizations. Rail & Mail. I did that to support my claim that Labour's Manifesto incluided multiple nationalizations. Yes the article mentioned many other things that were not Nationalizations
Err no. You offered energy as an example, when it isn't. You were wrong.
See post above with link.
Yep, that doesn't support your claim. Next!
Oh man - you've won! We can't do it! You've simply outplayed us in every regard. I'm going to go and weep gently into my own pile of Militant back-issues.Cool, so name some that have both left the EU and nationalized multiple industries within 5 years. Apparently it's commonplace.
Err no. You offered energy as an example, when it isn't. You were wrong.
I directly quoted the article in quotes as requested.
Yep, that doesn't support your claim. Next!
In which case, do you disagree with my opinion? Do you think that the PLP are in step with Momentum and if Jeremy Corbyn went under a bus tomorrow the PLP would put a Momentum friendly candidate forward? Or would they put people like Chukka forward?
Given that, do you think the Labour Leadership rules and the PLP will need to be changed ASAP to allow future momentum friendly candidates to be put to the membership, or not?
Oh man - you've won!
To be fair, google won.
If we'd be having this debate 30 years ago you could have spun it out for weeks.
Re: PLP I'm honestly not sure. Difficult to gauge how many of the 47 new Labour MPs would feel differently towards Corbyn. 35 needed for a nomination.
I directly quoted the article in quotes as requested.
The article you quoted doesn't support your claim.
In which case, do you disagree with my opinion? Do you think that the PLP are in step with Momentum and if Jeremy Corbyn went under a bus tomorrow the PLP would put a Momentum friendly candidate forward? Or would they put people like Chukka forward?Given that, do you think the Labour Leadership rules and the PLP will need to be changed ASAP to allow future momentum friendly candidates to be put to the membership, or not?
I'm not interested in your opinion. I want you to substantiate your claim:
Now, about your claim that Momentum has taken over the party. Evidence, please!
On the radio (R4) news a few mins ago, when an EU minister was asked about Britain Remaining in the EU he was quoted "the EU was born of believers, I'm a believer"
Quite what that means I don't really know, but I do wonder if they'll let May sweat a great deal more until she scuttles off into Grey Shoe Land.
Re: PLP I'm honestly not sure. Difficult to gauge how many of the 47 new Labour MPs would feel differently towards Corbyn. 35 needed for a nomination.
I still think that even if a large number of the 47 new candidates are momentum friendly JC will still want to change the rules to allow momentum friendly candidates to be put to the membership in perpetuity. It's quite reasonable for him to want to do so given how clear it is that the PLP have been dramatically out of step with the grass roots for 30 years, at least. (Some say 100 years.)
Is the change that corbyn wants to make not more just a change to the automatic re-selection rules?
[url= https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/styles/story_large/public/thumbnails/image/2017/06/22/08/foster-may.jp g" target="_blank">https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/styles/story_large/public/thumbnails/image/2017/06/22/08/foster-may.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
Must stop eating those wasps.
