|
So apparently Michael Foster, the Labour donor suspended last year for comparing Corbyn supporters to Nazi stormtroopers, is going to stand against Corbyn in Islington if he doesn't step down. What is it with wealthy donors recently and thinking they can actually stand for election and win, especially as in independent? Does the money just go to their head and they figure they clearly will be made MP if they just throw some cash at the situation?
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 01:08
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 11:41 |
|
|
Skinty McEdger posted:Wealthy donors without fail think themselves bigger than the party, and see any success of the party as being related directly to them. They normally don't stand once the amount of work involved in running, the level of press scrutiny they would receive and how expensive it ends up being becomes clear to them. They always give themselves an out when they make their declarations. The UKP guy said he would only stand against the UKIP traitor, Foster says only if the locals are a "disaster" without establishing what would qualify as such for him. Plus of course they have no interest in being an MP, and seem to equate the election to some kind of beauty contest where you get given a trophy at the end rather than a full time job.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 01:38
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:He's on of those old fashioned politicians who thinks that being able to form a government is important. Erm, what? He's specifically said that he would prefer to lose an election than win on a platform he didn't agree with. In that regard he's exactly what you accuse Corbyn supporters of being.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 12:19
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:I want a centre left labour government. That's not out of kilter with the ideology of the Labour Party. Would you rather have Corbyn's Labour or the Tories?
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 12:51
|
|
|
Polls like this are quite clearly an attempt to influence public opinion, not measure it. It asks basically the same question as popularity, but tweaks the wording to match other parties attack's on Corbyn. That isn't to say Corbyn isn't unpopular, just that there's no reason to suddenly change the question being asked (which means you can't compare it to any previous polls) unless you are trying to influence the result. Pissflaps posted:The Tories are shite. May is hopeless. Their campaign is garbage. Their Brexit position unravelling. Alternatively Labour is on course to do basically the same as the last two elections except the Tories have been gifted with large numbers of UKIP voters thanks to Brexit. jabby fucked around with this message at 20:38 on May 1, 2017 |
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
TinTower posted:As far as I know, the out trans candidates running this time are Helen Belcher (Lib Dem, Chippenham), Aimee Challenor (Green, Coventry South), Sophie Cook (Labour, West Worthing), and Zoe O'Connell (Lib Dem, Maldon). Of those, only Helen has a reasonable chance of winning; Chippenham was a Lib Dem seat during the coalition. Reasonable might be overstating it, the Tories won with a majority of over ten thousand thanks to the Lib Dems loving themselves and their voters over.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 21:56
|
|
|
Corbyn's latest pledge is 10,000 more police officers funded by scrapping the cut to capital gains tax. Anyone else noticed that the Tory word of the week seems to be 'nonsensical'? Everything Labour proposes is nonsensical now. Funding public services with taxation? Nonsensical. Saving money by scrapping planned tax breaks? Nonsensical. It's no surprise they are keen to avoid any form of debate/interview/talking to real people. Their empty style of campaigning and rebuttal is purely suited to newspapers/TV where the media simply publish a press release verbatim. In any situation where a follow up question could be asked, such as 'why is that nonsensical?' it would totally fall apart.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 02:09
|
|
|
To be fair it sounds like Abbott initially misread the headline cost as £300,000 (instead of £300 million), got flustered and stumbled over several other figures before finding the bit of her notes with the cost breakdown and reading it out. Awkward and embarrassing and will obviously be pushed by other parties, but the fact that she got it right in the end and that Corbyn instantly had the correct answer to hand will be a bit of damage limitation.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 10:49
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Problem is the story has already become 'Corbyn defends Abbott over gaffe' rather than 'labour pledges new police officers'. In the last weeks presumably they won't get a chance, as Labour have promised a fully costed manifesto. Honestly it's very annoying when terrible interviews like this happen, but every time I'm reminded that the reason we have the shadow bench we do is that virtually everyone else in the PLP refused to work with Corbyn in the hope he would fail. They could have given Labour a decent chance in this election but instead they chose infighting. Whatever the result a lot of people will hopefully remember that.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 11:03
|
|
|
Cerv posted:i suspect that Abbot would still have a prominent shadow cabinet position even if every single member of the party was jumping at the chance to get in. her and Corbyn go way back Most likely, but she wasn't shadow home until the coup attempt.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 11:11
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:Curse those dastardly blairites and their wickedness in refusing to lend Corbyn their esoteric skills such as "basic numeracy" and "working memory". Abbott doesn't interview well. Neither apparently does Dawn Butler. But on one level you can't complain about the lack of competent politicians on the front bench and also applaud the people you think should be there for refusing to take those jobs. LemonyTang posted:Worst day for Labour so far. No wonder May hasn't bothered campaigning. What is the point of this guy giving this interview? Woodcock doesn't want to quit, he wants to be sacked with as much personal publicity as possible.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 13:14
|
|
|
Osborne used his first editorial to say the Tory campaign amounts to 'no more than a slogan'. Might take the heat off Abbott slightly. Pissflaps posted:Not sure why not. Corbyn as leader is untenable. This is what happens when a party leader stays in post without the backing of his MPs. This is indeed what happens when the majority of MPs fail to back their leader. The difference between you and me is whether you blame the leader or the MPs. jabby fucked around with this message at 13:25 on May 2, 2017 |
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 13:22
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Sorry, I don't think anyone is buying this. The other MPs could have been more supportive of the leadership, but it's not their place or their responsibility to take on the role of sock puppets for a leadership that isn't competent. I presume 'could have been more supportive' is code for launching a public coup, briefing the hostile press and working constantly behind the scenes to undermine the leadership, something Jeremy Corbyn certainly never did from the back benches. You certainly have a talent for understatement. If the majority of the PLP want to come out and explain on which matters of policy they strongly disagree with Corbyn they are welcome to, and I would accept those as reasons not to join his shadow cabinet. Not believing he'll win an election is decidedly not a reason I agree with though, especially if they are then going to go after as much publicity as possible and essentially try to act as shadow ministers in every way apart from doing anything helpful.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 13:49
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:What makes you think he could do this even if he wanted to? For one, interviews with him and John McDonnell where they both refused to say anything negative about the then leadership, despite being heavily baited by the interviewer. Corbyn may have been a serial rebel but he never tried to undermine his party.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 13:53
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Do we not count that time in 1988 he announced he was organising a leadership challenge? No, because a leadership challenge is nothing like an attempt to force a leader to resign by withdrawing co-operation and I really shouldn't need to point that out. Paracaidas posted:Blaming PLP for Abbott loving up an interview is not the hill to die on here. Nobody's dying on a hill, it's just ironic that some of the same people who despair of Abbott being given such a high-profile job also applaud the people they do like for refusing to take that same job.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 14:17
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Yeah lets not go crazy and suggest Dianne Abbot should stand down. She's extremely important. Standing down over an ballsed-up interview would be a big PR mistake even if you hate Diane Abbott. It would only make the story more memorable. In non-Abbott related news the NEC will tomorrow table a motion to deselect John Woodcock as a Labour candidate. It will be truly ridiculous if it doesn't happen.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 14:41
|
|
|
The latest ICM poll aptly demonstrates why subsample questions should be taken with several tonnes of salt. More people say the last two weeks have made them less likely to vote Labour than more likely. The opposite is true for voting Tory. However the Tories lost a point in voting intention and Labour gained. With the possible exception of headline voting intention it's all bullshit because people will choose the answer that reflects best on their chosen party.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 17:30
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:Mate, I dunno how you keep not getting the memo but there is no hope, the Tories will win the election so just stop. That does look very likely, although I'm not sure what it has to do with me thinking partisanship inherently ruins the utility of certain polling questions. Also despite the near certainty of a Tory majority the whole hope is a lie thing is played out as gently caress, and the closeness of the race will have impacts after the election. I guess if you're not interested in discussing the election you can do something else?
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 17:39
|
|
|
Theresa May failing to look like a human being and managing to be repetitive in a three minute video: https://twitter.com/theresa_may/status/859452229350195201
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 18:05
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Which is perhaps why twice as many people gave the answer favouring the Tories than labour? Yes, that is literally my point.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 19:17
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:So saying twice as many people favour the Tories than labour isn't exactly much of a mitigation for this poll? That's because I'm not the strawman you invented of all Corbyn supporters.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:It was more about how you try to excuse every gently caress up that the Labour front bench makes, like clockwork. Well, a) I quite like most of the Labour front bench and it annoys me to see the decent politicians get attacked for poo poo that Doesn't Actually Matter, and b) in the post you quoted I was making a general comment about political polls that wasn't specific to Labour or the front bench. And yes you do seem pretty down. Remember that 'hope is a lie' is just a meme, not an actual healthy philosophy.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 20:59
|
|
|
The Guardian posted:Theresa May was greeted by dozens of protesters shouting “Tory scum” as she visited a social club on a housing estate in Brislington, in Bristol. She gave a speech to Conservative activists in the club with the curtains shut and police guarding the entrance, while curious local residents gathered outside - some with makeshift anti-Tory signs.  I bet most reports don't mention the protestors, the police guard, or the fact that the audience were just activists.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 21:21
|
|
|
Laura K continuing her unbiased reporting of the campaign. https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/859485924635406336 E: Meanwhile the NEC is considering harsher punishment against John Woodcock than I thought. 
jabby fucked around with this message at 22:34 on May 2, 2017 |
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 22:31
|
|
|
The Express has revealed some details of the Tories first campaign poster:The Express posted:A stark campaign poster to be unveiled by Mr Davis will depict Mr Corbyn next to an image of an explosive device beneath the slogan: "Corbyn: No bombs for our Army. One big bombshell for your family." Not sure about it myself. The 'tax bombshell' bit is standard, but from what I recall most people don't want our army bombing people overseas anymore. Also from the same article the Tories are planning a 'dossier' on Labour's spending commitments and revenue raisers to demonstrate that they aren't fully costed. A couple of weeks prior to the manifesto coming out with costings. At least it will be easy for Labour to stay on message in refuting it I guess. EDIT: Here it is in all it's glory. 
jabby fucked around with this message at 00:24 on May 3, 2017 |
|
#
¿
May 3, 2017 00:20
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:Here is a man who is very upset with Tim Farron and Labour: A visual representation of what happens when people reach the age of 65. EDIT: Good to see McDonnell outright call Tory attacks 'absolute lies' today. Usually politicians are far too hesitant to use that word.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2017 12:01
|
|
|
Tory election poster launch continues to offer the best photographs.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2017 12:05
|
|
|
LemonyTang posted:"Polls tied" Bear in mind this would translate to Labour being about 7 points behind in today's polls.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2017 15:10
|
|
|
ITV have provisionally scheduled a leaders debate for 18th May. No word from them on what they will do if May and Corbyn don't take part, but it's been suggested they would go ahead with just Farron et. al. Hopefully at least a date being set will encourage Labour to keep repeating the 'May is afraid of debating Corbyn' lines.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2017 15:34
|
|
|
John Woodcock has been reselected by the NEC to represent Labour. A man who has said in the event of a Labour majority of one he would withdraw his support from the party and prevent them forming a government because he doesn't want Corbyn to be Prime Minister. If you ever doubted whether there are significant elements within the party who are happy to tank Labours election chances just to prevent Corbyn being in charge, the fact that the NEC just backed him should be all the proof you need.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2017 17:42
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:I'm not sure about that, it might have just been that due to the circumstances no good candidates submitted applications. There have been plenty of decent left-wing candidates nominated in seats where crusty blairites could have been put up. He's publicity seeking and does more damage to the party than any number of attacks from Tory MPs. To paraphrase Malcolm Tucker, this is a situation where my left bollock with a smiley face drawn on it would be a better Labour candidate.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2017 17:53
|
|
|
Guardian has more on John Woodcock.The Guardian posted:“There was a motion not to endorse him, but almost everyone else voted against,” one source close to the committee said. “It had no support. Other MPs have run anti-Gordon Brown campaigns in the past, it’s what happens sometimes. The difference between this and the past is probably that MPs running 'anti Gordon Brown' campaigns haven't been on the national news and in every newspaper repeatedly throughout the election campaign. No surprise Watson and Dugdale made a special effort to keep him though. You can already tell they care nothing about this election and everything about taking back control of the party afterwards. jabby fucked around with this message at 18:49 on May 3, 2017 |
|
#
¿
May 3, 2017 18:46
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Sounds like the idea of Corbyn supporters being able to deselect MPs they don't like was as realistic as Corbyn becoming PM. All decisions at the moment are being taken by the NEC rather than by members, so no surprise there.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2017 19:20
|
|
|
Theresa May had a giant incongruous Union Jack in the background of her 'tribute to Prince Phillip' video message, just like she has in the last few videos she's been in. One step closer to American politics.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2017 13:08
|
|
|
Sapozhnik posted:Socially and economically progressive ideals are at least gaining some traction in the US after the latest result shocked a bunch of people out of complacency, and the Dems only lost very narrowly despite being a bunch of horribly corrupt pro-Wall Street fucks and generally doing absolutely everything wrong throughout the entire campaign. It's a miracle they lost as narrowly as they did. The only reason there seems to be decent opposition to stuff in the US is because they are at least 5-10 years further down the path of right-wing craziness than we are. People like Trump and Le Pen are the logical result of neoliberal policies being allowed to ruin society and constantly shift the blame to foreigners/gays/poor people. Trump got elected and the fact that his 'solutions' don't work might shock some people into action, but France meanwhile is going to double down on neoliberalism with Macron first and probably elect Le Pen next time. The UK by contrast has actually absorbed it's far-right party (UKIP) into the less-far-right Tories, and has a genuine centre-left opposition with a reasonable level of support. I agree that we are likely to continue the slide towards full blown fascism but we're actually behind the curve compare to America, not ahead of it.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2017 18:05
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:It can also collide two trains with a closing speed of over a thousand miles an hour if it loses vacuum, a failure mode even Southern can't replicate. Also if your capsule gets a hole in it it'll depressurise to vaccum, meaning oxygen masks would be useless.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2017 19:40
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:They worked on Concorde (except that time it hit a hotel) and that cruised at 72mbar outside pressure, a lot closer to the hyperloop's 1mbar than to sea level pressure. I hate to break it to you but the oxygen masks on Concord wouldn't have worked at anything like it's normal cruising altitude. The only thing you could do if it lost pressure was descend as fast as possible and hope you hit thick enough air before you died of hypoxia. In a hyperloop the problem would be even worse, although somewhat mitigated by the fact that you could re-pressurise the whole tube fairly quickly in an emergency. jBrereton posted:Plenty of them are fairweather ethnonationalists who would hold a different position if there was more than a joke opposition, imo. This is rubbish. People didn't suddenly start hating immigration and believing that we should look out for Britain first when Corbyn became leader. jabby fucked around with this message at 20:10 on May 4, 2017 |
|
#
¿
May 4, 2017 20:08
|
|
|
jBrereton posted:If you think of the "common sense" people as basically politically ambivalent, the reason they're trotting out the government's line, which is anti-immigrant and right wing, is because the opposition is unable to form and expound upon their own narrative without someone loving it up, cf. Abbott or the amount of rollbacks on policy as McDonnell or Corbyn says something in the morning about fuckin trains or tax or whatever and scuttles back on it by the end of the day. Then it depends what you mean by 'more than a joke opposition'. If you mean Corbyn and McDonnell might have a shot at convincing people of left-wing ideas if they were better at their jobs, sure. If you mean that bringing back Miliband and his racist mugs would get people to be less nationalist by pandering to their nationalism, you're off your rocker.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2017 20:20
|
|
|
jBrereton posted:I'm sure there is a solid core of dickheads in this country, right. But go back ten years and I think the mainstream opinions in this country were much more open and optimistic than now, because Labour and its message were properly out there. That's why you had Cameron hugging hoodies and talking about the Big Society and so on, instead of this race to the cynical, sharp-elbowed, nasty bottom you have now that Labour apparently doesn't know how to engage with and make a persuasive case against. Nobody changed, the Brexit referendum just happened. Politicians including Cameron were preaching globalisation and looking beyond our borders right up to the point we had the referendum and the ruling class realised at least 52% of the population hated multiculturalism and wanted to go back to the 1950s. So they started pandering to them.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2017 20:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 11:41 |
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:Except if Concorde lost pressure (and didn't just immediately disintegrate, which is by far the most likely scenario if anything caused a loss of cabin pressure at supersonic speeds) it could get down to non-deadly altitudes in less than a minute. A hyperloop train doesn't have that option. Well yeah, a hyperloop train can be back to normal pressure in less than a few seconds assuming you just blow some emergency hatches off the tube and open it to atmosphere. That would also be the solution to the 'train crashes/gets stuck' problem.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2017 21:38
|
|