He’s not inclusive or ever takes a consensus view.
That's...like, his whole deal. Or at least, he's trying very hard to juggle a LOT of conflicting interests and beliefs under the Labour umbrella. Who'd do a better job?
Chippy would
The question is who would do a worse job. Can't sort himself or his party out. How the hell could he ever hope to lead his country?
Meanwhile on the other side of the house - it's all rainbows and unicorns...
BTW, *insert Blue Labour 'centrist' here* will NOT unite the country. He'll unite London-based liberal types like some of us on this thread, but he will lose millions more north and west of Watford
London is a lot more left leaning than the rest of the country. Corbyn is a privately educated north London mp, he’s the definition of a metropolitan elite.
That would hold some relevance if it was beyond a minor prep school. Hardly Eton, Harrow and Oxbridge was it.
To swerve away from the current sub-plot for a moment. There was a somewhat strange looking bloke being interviewed on BBC Breakfast this morning who was, apparently the Prisons Minister, promising what seemed like a paltry amount of new money to 10 problem gaols.
He said we could judge him on results and that if things hadn't improved in 12 months he would resign.
Now, that's a refreshing change, we could do with some more of that.
He’s not inclusive or ever takes a consensus view.
That's...like, his whole deal. Or at least, he's trying very hard to juggle a LOT of conflicting interests and beliefs under the Labour umbrella. Who'd do a better job?
Chippy would
The question is who would do a worse job. Can't sort himself or his party out. How the hell could he ever hope to lead his country?
Meanwhile on the other side of the house - it's all rainbows and unicorns...
Well, exactly. Any half decent opposition would be streets ahead in the polls and putting real pressure on the government. Not abstaining and voting with the government on brexit bills.
BTW, *insert Blue Labour 'centrist' here* will NOT unite the country. He'll unite London-based liberal types like some of us on this thread, but he will lose millions more north and west of Watford
London is a lot more left leaning than the rest of the country. Corbyn is a privately educated north London mp, he’s the definition of a metropolitan elite.
That would hold some relevance if it was beyond a minor prep school. Hardly Eton, Harrow and Oxbridge was it.
He’s not inclusive or ever takes a consensus view.
That's...like, his whole deal. Or at least, he's trying very hard to juggle a LOT of conflicting interests and beliefs under the Labour umbrella. Who'd do a better job?
Chippy would
The question is who would do a worse job. Can't sort himself or his party out. How the hell could he ever hope to lead his country?
Meanwhile on the other side of the house - it's all rainbows and unicorns...
Well, exactly. Any half decent opposition would be streets ahead in the polls and putting real pressure on the government. Not abstaining and voting with the government on brexit bills.
But if Labour are so shit why aren't the Lib Dems flying in the polls?
exactly! As I've said before. In years to come, when social historians view this period of Tory/Labour cluster duck, the question will be raised. And the only lame response will be about student fees, a promise broken because the true disasterous state of the British economy was deliberately hidden by Brown.
BTW, *insert Blue Labour 'centrist' here* will NOT unite the country. He'll unite London-based liberal types like some of us on this thread, but he will lose millions more north and west of Watford
London is a lot more left leaning than the rest of the country. Corbyn is a privately educated north London mp, he’s the definition of a metropolitan elite.
That would hold some relevance if it was beyond a minor prep school. Hardly Eton, Harrow and Oxbridge was it.
Heaven forbid our leaders are well educated
You just keep moving those goalposts.
Eh? I just thought it’s ridiculous to imply the leaders of both major parties shouldn’t have gone to two of the finest universities in the world.
He’s not inclusive or ever takes a consensus view.
That's...like, his whole deal. Or at least, he's trying very hard to juggle a LOT of conflicting interests and beliefs under the Labour umbrella. Who'd do a better job?
Chippy would
The question is who would do a worse job. Can't sort himself or his party out. How the hell could he ever hope to lead his country?
Meanwhile on the other side of the house - it's all rainbows and unicorns...
Well, exactly. Any half decent opposition would be streets ahead in the polls and putting real pressure on the government. Not abstaining and voting with the government on brexit bills.
But if Labour are so shit why aren't the Lib Dems flying in the polls?
You’re implying the Lib Dem’s aren’t themselves pretty limp at the moment and will be for a decade or so.
He’s not inclusive or ever takes a consensus view.
That's...like, his whole deal. Or at least, he's trying very hard to juggle a LOT of conflicting interests and beliefs under the Labour umbrella. Who'd do a better job?
Chippy would
The question is who would do a worse job. Can't sort himself or his party out. How the hell could he ever hope to lead his country?
Meanwhile on the other side of the house - it's all rainbows and unicorns...
Well, exactly. Any half decent opposition would be streets ahead in the polls and putting real pressure on the government. Not abstaining and voting with the government on brexit bills.
But if Labour are so shit why aren't the Lib Dems flying in the polls?
Because when it comes to opposition (whether red or blue are at the helm) the lib dens are as much use as a chocolate teapot!
When it comes to the crunch of voting more people trust the Tories than anyone else which in itself is somewhat incredible but shows the dire level of all the political parties right now.
He’s not inclusive or ever takes a consensus view.
That's...like, his whole deal. Or at least, he's trying very hard to juggle a LOT of conflicting interests and beliefs under the Labour umbrella. Who'd do a better job?
Chippy would
The question is who would do a worse job. Can't sort himself or his party out. How the hell could he ever hope to lead his country?
Meanwhile on the other side of the house - it's all rainbows and unicorns...
Well, exactly. Any half decent opposition would be streets ahead in the polls and putting real pressure on the government. Not abstaining and voting with the government on brexit bills.
But if Labour are so shit why aren't the Lib Dems flying in the polls?
Ooh, ooh, hold on I know the answer to this one....
It's because Tim Fallon is an anagram of Minor Fart isn't it?
No, no, that's not it, is it because Vince Cable has been in hibernation since the General Election?
exactly! As I've said before. In years to come, when social historians view this period of Tory/Labour cluster duck, the question will be raised. And the only lame response will be about student fees, a promise broken because the true disasterous state of the British economy was deliberately hidden by Brown.
Nevertheless a promise broken and that kind of thing has repercussions. If you are right about the hidden state of the economy in 2010 then students were not the only ones to pay for it. There has been years of public sector pay freezes and general austerity due to the financial crisis that wasn't only in the UK. The student loan situation continues to be a scandal due to the 6.8% interest, and having to stump up was difficult to avoid it you were in the first £9000 a year group because at the time you were already embarked on your A Levels and had a University based plan. Not that lame if you are in the grip of it. The Liberals should not have gone back on their word, or if they think it was a reasonable thing to do ought not to be surprised if they are not trusted.
An increase in exploitation for a captive audience. You seem to be suggesting education is a marketplace the price goes up, the students go down?I Student numbers sustain because unlike the Liberals they probably see value in education that isn't all about money, but they are trapped in the monetary system that takes advantage of theirs, and indeed society's expectation of an educated population.
An increase in exploitation for a captive audience. You seem to be suggesting education is a marketplace the price goes up, the students go down?I Student numbers sustain because unlike the Liberals they probably see value in education that isn't all about money, but they are trapped in the monetary system that takes advantage of theirs, and indeed society's expectation of an educated population.
I have no idea what you are arguing about. I agree the Labour Policy of introducing student fees was wrong. It was predicted that numbers would plummet each time fee rose. They haven't.
As for "Unlike the Liberals". You are getting silly again.
It was predicted? Really? I am going on about the Liberals breaking their word? 'Unlike the Liberals' is about the Liberal justification for a fee tripling by pointing at graduate earnings. Turning education into a money based enterprise.
I am not getting silly by the way. And what do you mean by 'again'? It is unfortunate you try to personalize the discussion, but possibly it is because you have run out of any decent arguments and personalization is your refuge.
He’s not inclusive or ever takes a consensus view.
That's...like, his whole deal. Or at least, he's trying very hard to juggle a LOT of conflicting interests and beliefs under the Labour umbrella. Who'd do a better job?
Chippy would
The question is who would do a worse job. Can't sort himself or his party out. How the hell could he ever hope to lead his country?
Meanwhile on the other side of the house - it's all rainbows and unicorns...
Well, exactly. Any half decent opposition would be streets ahead in the polls and putting real pressure on the government. Not abstaining and voting with the government on brexit bills.
But if Labour are so shit why aren't the Lib Dems flying in the polls?
Apart from odd moments where they have a minor resurgence, the Lib Dem’s are not serious contenders to the two party system. Still seen by many as a wasted or protest vote.
In my constituency (Eltham) it’s Labour or Conservative. Those that want to keep the Tories out vote Labour and vica versa. A protest vote to the Lib Dem’s or Greens could just see the party you don’t want to win, win.
It’s like that all over the country and as long as we have the first past the post system I’m afraid it won’t change.
He’s not inclusive or ever takes a consensus view.
That's...like, his whole deal. Or at least, he's trying very hard to juggle a LOT of conflicting interests and beliefs under the Labour umbrella. Who'd do a better job?
Chippy would
The question is who would do a worse job. Can't sort himself or his party out. How the hell could he ever hope to lead his country?
Meanwhile on the other side of the house - it's all rainbows and unicorns...
Well, exactly. Any half decent opposition would be streets ahead in the polls and putting real pressure on the government. Not abstaining and voting with the government on brexit bills.
But if Labour are so shit why aren't the Lib Dems flying in the polls?
Apart from odd moments where they have a minor resurgence, the Lib Dem’s are not serious contenders to the two party system. Still seen by many as a wasted or protest vote.
In my constituency (Eltham) it’s Labour or Conservative. Those that want to keep the Tories out vote Labour and vica versa. A protest vote to the Lib Dem’s or Greens could just see the party you don’t want to win, win.
It’s like that all over the country and as long as we have the first past the post system I’m afraid it won’t change.
Ironically the Lib Dem’s “sold out” the tuition fees promise to get a referendum on switching to a new voting system
I have said that the Liberals have measured the value of education in monetary terms. Not that they don't value it at all. I have not even suggested there should be no fees at all, though I wouldn't mind seeing that. It is about the Liberals misleading, and also about the rate of fees and the system they ushered in. You are right about University education being an option, although I would say that many students already set on a University option before the tripping of fees were wrong footed by the increase, and also the repayment rules were changed after they started rather than what they were told when they started. This conversation has largely on my part been about the Liberal attitude to education, and if they are to be believed.
He’s not inclusive or ever takes a consensus view.
That's...like, his whole deal. Or at least, he's trying very hard to juggle a LOT of conflicting interests and beliefs under the Labour umbrella. Who'd do a better job?
Chippy would
The question is who would do a worse job. Can't sort himself or his party out. How the hell could he ever hope to lead his country?
Meanwhile on the other side of the house - it's all rainbows and unicorns...
Well, exactly. Any half decent opposition would be streets ahead in the polls and putting real pressure on the government. Not abstaining and voting with the government on brexit bills.
Don't disagree with that, but even without the labour party the Tories would still be self serving c**ts fighting among themselves, and as the party of government, that's a lot more serious than the opposition doing it.
Anyway - back to the thread in hand. Apologies if this has been posted before, but a direct response to the original question: They need to entirely rethink their financial strategy.
Everyone, please disperse. Corbyn is the real racist. End of discussion.
No, Corbyn is just one of many racists but his fanboys will excuse any of his actions supporting terrorists, reject any evidence of him supporting racist, homophobic, misogynist terrorists and believe every ever more incredible excuses "I was there but didn't take part" being the latest.
None so blind as those who refuse to see.
Cue the usual "Whataboutery", " he needs to speak to these terrorists to bring peace", "it's all a smear", etc etc etc
Who the fuck is he? And who'd have thought we'd ever see the words Corbyn and passionate in the same sentence? So, Corbyn has a higher anti-racism passion status than, say, Jessie Jackson and Rosa Parks - I don't think so.
The attitude people have to Corbyn is one thing but this thread title is about the Tories.
In my view anybody with a functioning brain should be able to see the Tory 'leadership' group of main players are either morons, self serving morons, betrayers of friends, betrayers of peop!e, money driven and money grabbing, manipulators of latent racism, overtly racist themselves, heartless without any capacity to empathise, out and out liars, and nurturers of contempt and distain for others, and people who would happily see others exploited for their own gain.
In my view people who vote Tory are enthusiastic allies of many of the attitudes I have listed above. In my view they are driven by selfish destructive greed and hatred and In the Tories they have a monster to admire.
In terms of measurement and proportion, the wrongs of Corbyn are a flea bite compared to the savaging of the nation by the Tories in my opinion.
Still....Diane Abbot hey?
Fair post Seth. But I think more misguided in many cases.
And the nice red background makes it doubly true. Or not, possibly. In any event there are 3.6mn households in the UK that qualify for millionaire status (after deduction of any o/s mortgages) out of a total 26mn households. That's a fairly hefty 14% and as voters (and voters that actually vote) I suspect the Tories think they need looking after a bit.
So you choose to shoot the messenger and ignore the message. Well played @cafcfan
That's because the message is bogus. It's just as false/biased a view about Corbyn as all the stuff at the other end of the spectrum. Somewhere in the middle is the truth - that he's just a second-rate politician who has achieved very little in however many decades he's been stealing a living.
Here's an extract from Hansard dated 2nd May 1985 (my emphasis).
Mr. Jeremy Corbyn (Islington, North) Has the right hon. Gentleman seen early-day motion 645, [That this House profoundly regrets the proposed visit of President Reagan to the German Military Cemetery at Bitburg, containing the remains of Nazi SS stormtroopers; regards the visit as an offence to the memories of Jews and so many others persecuted and murdered by the Nazis, and as insensitive and ill-advised; and calls on the President, in the name of good relations between our countries and between all the allies in the war against Nazism, to cancel that visit.]
which has been signed by a large number of Members, and early-day motion 658,
[That this House believes that there can never be any reconciliation with fascism; therefore condemns the British Broadcasting Corporation Newsnight programme of 30th April for its lengthy and uncritical coverage of the collection of Nazi memorabilia by wealthy people; in the United States of America and Britain; believes that such programmes can only serve to make Nazism respectable; and further believes that the memory of the Jewish people, gypsies, Communists, trade unionists and gay people who were murdered by the Nazis and the millions of Soviet, British, American and other peoples on every continent who died to defeat fascism should not be defiled by any attempted rehabilitation into respectability of fascism.]
both of which concern the memory of the people who died fighting Fascism and the disgraceful intention of President Reagan to visit Bitburg cemetery? Will the Leader of the House take this opportunity to give the Government's view of the President's intention to visit that cemetery of SS memory?
Will the right hon. Gentleman also arrange for a special debate next week to consider the rise of Fascism and 419 racism now occurring in many European countries and the need to condemn utterly all that went on in Nazi Germany and ensure that such tyrany can never arise again, and the need to ensure that proper memory is accorded to all who died fighting Nazism, whether they were Russian, British, French or from any other country in the world?
Mr. Biffen My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has already commented on President Reagan's proposed visit to Bitburg cemetery, and I have nothing to add on that. On the wider issue, no provisions have been made for the debate requested by the hon. Gentleman, but those who view totalitarianism with such great hostility would be more convincing if their attitude stretched across the whole spectrum
So, on the one hand Mr C sees visiting a war cemetery (which happens to contain bodies of dead SS troops) as insensitive and ill-advised. Yet on the other he does not see his personal visit to a graveyard that contains bodies of dead terrorists as also ill-advised and insensitive? How does that work? I reckon John Biffin had him down to a tee.
You do know there was no dead Mossad terrorists at the cemetery he was photographed at it dont you, and in any case he wasn't laying a wreath to honour them, he was laying a wreath to honour ALL victims of terrorism. It now transpires that Tory Peer Lord Sheikh was also at the same event, I assume he is now a Terrorist sympathiser. It was more false propaganda by the right wing press. Also did you see the video of him explaining that dialogue brings peace. Sometime you have to talk to people you find unpalatable to bring peace. Its the same tac the Right wing used when accusing him of being an IRA terrorist sympathiser, after he was pictured with McGinnis and Adams, dialogue, part of the reason the process which ended up with the Good Friday agreement. If you believe this you must then believe former Defence secretary Fallon met Assad to celebrate his victory, you can't have it both ways. I will add my attachment again. Thorn berry calls 'Bollocks' on Fallon. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2017/may/14/emily-thornberry-ambushes-michael-fallon-assad-meeting-video
Some reasonable points here but it is a constant, yet misleading, line to state that Corbyn will always support dialogue to promote peace.
Not true if it goes against his beliefs ... he has never once met with the Israeli government and even declined to meet Netanyahu when he was in the UK.
Double standards exist with all our politicians on all sides. Disappointingly he is no different.
To swerve away from the current sub-plot for a moment. There was a somewhat strange looking bloke being interviewed on BBC Breakfast this morning who was, apparently the Prisons Minister, promising what seemed like a paltry amount of new money to 10 problem gaols.
He said we could judge him on results and that if things hadn't improved in 12 months he would resign.
Now, that's a refreshing change, we could do with some more of that.
Well he’ll be off in twelve months then because there’s no chance of the reduction in violence and drug misuse that he’s looking for with the paltry amount of money being put in.
What makes me a bit sad, is that as soon as he said this, I didn't think oh good a politician with some conviction. I thought, I bet they've found a new way to measure the stats.
I hope it's the former, but I'll take what @AddickUpNorth as gospel to be honest. Let's see what excuses he makes for not resigning in 12 months.
Comments
He said we could judge him on results and that if things hadn't improved in 12 months he would resign.
Now, that's a refreshing change, we could do with some more of that.
As I've said before.
In years to come, when social historians view this period of Tory/Labour cluster duck, the question will be raised.
And the only lame response will be about student fees, a promise broken because the true disasterous state of the British economy was deliberately hidden by Brown.
When it comes to the crunch of voting more people trust the Tories than anyone else which in itself is somewhat incredible but shows the dire level of all the political parties right now.
It's because Tim Fallon is an anagram of Minor Fart isn't it?
No, no, that's not it, is it because Vince Cable has been in hibernation since the General Election?
If you are right about the hidden state of the economy in 2010 then students were not the only ones to pay for it. There has been years of public sector pay freezes and general austerity due to the financial crisis that wasn't only in the UK.
The student loan situation continues to be a scandal due to the 6.8% interest, and having to stump up was difficult to avoid it you were in the first £9000 a year group because at the time you were already embarked on your A Levels and had a University based plan. Not that lame if you are in the grip of it.
The Liberals should not have gone back on their word, or if they think it was a reasonable thing to do ought not to be surprised if they are not trusted.
Anyway, one promise unfulfilled (due to Browns lies) is hardly a reason for the anti Brexit, electoral reform party to be ignored by the press, is it?
PS... If I'm right? I await another re writing of history....
You seem to be suggesting education is a marketplace the price goes up, the students go down?I
Student numbers sustain because unlike the Liberals they probably see value in education that isn't all about money, but they are trapped in the monetary system that takes advantage of theirs, and indeed society's expectation of an educated population.
Bank of England base rate is what?
Student loan interest rates are 6.8%.
How is that justified?
I agree the Labour Policy of introducing student fees was wrong.
It was predicted that numbers would plummet each time fee rose. They haven't.
As for "Unlike the Liberals". You are getting silly again.
Really?
I am going on about the Liberals breaking their word?
'Unlike the Liberals' is about the Liberal justification for a fee tripling by pointing at graduate earnings. Turning education into a money based enterprise.
To make universities viable fees rose, as they inevitably would.
Applicants fell then rose.
Suggesting Lib Dems don't see value in education is silly.
Studies show another result was that more low income applicants are now at uni, reducing inequality.
https://www.theguardian.com/education/blog/2012/aug/09/university-fee-rise-impact-what
Uni is an option. If it wasn't worth it guess what? People wouldn't attend. But they do.
Economist.
Why fees have not held poor students back
https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2015/11/16/why-tuition-fees-havent-held-back-poor-students
In my constituency (Eltham) it’s Labour or Conservative. Those that want to keep the Tories out vote Labour and vica versa. A protest vote to the Lib Dem’s or Greens could just see the party you don’t want to win, win.
It’s like that all over the country and as long as we have the first past the post system I’m afraid it won’t change.
I have not even suggested there should be no fees at all, though I wouldn't mind seeing that. It is about the Liberals misleading, and also about the rate of fees and the system they ushered in.
You are right about University education being an option, although I would say that many students already set on a University option before the tripping of fees were wrong footed by the increase, and also the repayment rules were changed after they started rather than what they were told when they started.
This conversation has largely on my part been about the Liberal attitude to education, and if they are to be believed.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/topstories/as-austerity-helps-bankrupt-an-english-county-even-conservatives-mutiny/ar-BBM30Vi?ocid=spartanntp
Not true if it goes against his beliefs ... he has never once met with the Israeli government and even declined to meet Netanyahu when he was in the UK.
Double standards exist with all our politicians on all sides. Disappointingly he is no different.
Well he’ll be off in twelve months then because there’s no chance of the reduction in violence and drug misuse that he’s looking for with the paltry amount of money being put in.
I hope it's the former, but I'll take what @AddickUpNorth as gospel to be honest. Let's see what excuses he makes for not resigning in 12 months.