Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

First topic message reminder :

The multitude of examples of disgraceful behaviour by Trade Unions over the past year have really started to show them up as the evil bully-boys they are.

Latest example being the vicious targeting of the wives and children of Ineos managers:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-24758166

Question is, will this start to hurt Labour's chances of election in 2015?

Clearly formerly 'Red' Ed is concerned as he's taken steps to distance himself from both their antics and the Unions themselves, surely all this negativity will have to bite at some point? This could be the last thing Labour's already dwindling opinion poll leads need - could 2014 be the year of the turning point re public opinion or the main two parties??

Lumbering_Jack wrote:I'm sporting a blue pants/brown shoes combo today. Got to say is didn't think it would work but I look great.

Brown in town? Deary me. Almost as bad as Tina wearing a green shirt, should be shot for that.

Grey suit, crisp white shirt (double cuffed, no pocket, steel removable collar stiffeners), navy tie, black brogues.

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

seanmichaels wrote:

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

Rowley wrote:Green shirt under a green jumper, where is the contrast tina.

Very subtle differences, Jeff.  The shirt is slightly darker than the jumper and combined with some lighter grey trousers and darker shoes, I have to say I look, and feel, fantastic.  

The girls in the office can barely stop looking at me.

Probably because they are wondering why the National Trust have sent someone to the office.

 

That actually is pretty funny.  That's twice in 2013 you've made me laugh.

Was the downies comment the other time??

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Lumbering_Jack wrote:I'm sporting a blue pants/brown shoes combo today. Got to say is didn't think it would work but I look great.

Brown in town? Deary me.  Almost as bad as Tina wearing a green shirt, should be shot for that.

Grey XXXXXL suit, crisp white shirt (double cuffed, no pocket, steel removable collar stiffeners), navy tie, black brogues.

Fixed.

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

seanmichaels wrote:

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

Rowley wrote:Green shirt under a green jumper, where is the contrast tina.

Very subtle differences, Jeff.  The shirt is slightly darker than the jumper and combined with some lighter grey trousers and darker shoes, I have to say I look, and feel, fantastic.  

The girls in the office can barely stop looking at me.

Probably because they are wondering why the National Trust have sent someone to the office.

 

That actually is pretty funny.  That's twice in 2013 you've made me laugh.

I seem to be doing things in 2's in 2013. Missus said I made her happy yesterday for the 2nd time this year. All I did was agree to go the dentist.

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Lumbering_Jack wrote:I'm sporting a blue pants/brown shoes combo today. Got to say is didn't think it would work but I look great.

Brown in town? Deary me.  Almost as bad as Tina wearing a green shirt, should be shot for that.

Grey XXXXXL suit, crisp white shirt (double cuffed, no pocket, steel removable collar stiffeners), navy tie, black brogues.

Fixed.

Jacamos?

So am I the only person on here who sits around at home all day in his underpants?

TopHat24/7 wrote:
Was the downies comment the other time??

Nah, he has used that before and it wasn't funny first time. It was on the Reykjavik thread but I can't remember what it was.

seanmichaels wrote:

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Lumbering_Jack wrote:I'm sporting a blue pants/brown shoes combo today. Got to say is didn't think it would work but I look great.

Brown in town? Deary me.  Almost as bad as Tina wearing a green shirt, should be shot for that.

Grey XXXXXL suit, crisp white shirt (double cuffed, no pocket, steel removable collar stiffeners), navy tie, black brogues.

Fixed.

Jacamos?

Both Charles Tyrwitt and TM Lewin go up to 20in collar shirts.....

I bet you still struggle with the top button.

6ft, 32 waist, 42 chest 15 inch collar and 12st6. Pretty much perfect me.

edit: I do have holes in my trouser pockets and in each shoe though.

Nope, am actually a 19in collar but hate things pressed against my neck so go up a size so there's loads of room.

seanmichaels wrote:6ft, 32 waist, 42 chest 15 inch collar and 12st6. Pretty much perfect me.

edit: I do have holes in my trouser pockets and in each shoe though.

If we can only do something about your personality now.

Rowley wrote:

seanmichaels wrote:6ft, 32 waist, 42 chest 15 inch collar and 12st6. Pretty much perfect me.

edit: I do have holes in my trouser pockets and in each shoe though.

If we can only do something about your personality now.

I'm aa affable chap Jeff. You know that really.

6ft..49 inch chest...17 1/2 inch arms.........

That is lower/middle age perfection.........

Bloody hell, nip to the canteen for some lunch and come back to find you lot all grooming each other.

What you got today?

I've got egg mayo sandwiches with brown bread, an apple and a pot of Bombay mix.

Lumbering_Jack wrote:What you got today?

I've got egg mayo sandwiches with brown bread, an apple and a pot of Bombay mix.

I've reviewed my lunch on the 'Reykjavik/what we had for lunch' thread.

17 1/2 inch arms.........

Length? Are you a dwarf?

I'd dwarf you........

Sounds a bit rapey.

Everyone needs a hobby.........

Can't see why the Tories don't try harder to lose Scotland..........

If they lost that they'd be in power forever........

Because they're trying to do what's best for the country, not just themselves....

 

Must admit, even I struggled to type that with a straight face......

The argument put forward by tophat that the recession is over etc etc because pubs in central london are busy is just laughable. 18 pubs a week are closing in the uk due to lack of business.

Even if the pubs were not closing at an alarming rate it is still laughable that he bases the Uk's economic growth or the people's disposable income on how busy the pubs are in CENTRAL london.

He also thinks Europe is a big deal..............

8 out of 10 CBI members want to stay in........apparently.

Champagne_Socialist wrote:The argument put forward by tophat that the recession is over etc etc because pubs in central london are busy is just laughable. 18 pubs a week are closing in the uk due to lack of business.

Even if the pubs were not closing at an alarming rate it is still laughable that he bases the Uk's economic growth or the people's disposable income on how busy the pubs are in CENTRAL london.

He's not the only person to say it. And at the end of the day every business that does well is good for the economy and if all of them are in London then so be it.
 
Millionaires are made out of recessions and I think everybody in this country has an opportunity. Some just have to work that bit harder than others to start off with.
 
Must say i'm still a bit confused by the ordinary poster who sent his kids to private school. I went to on but it was only because my old man was a single parent and he taught at the school. He could never have afforded it otherwise.

Edit: And yes the recession is over. We not only have growth, but the fastest growth in Western Europe.

A guy can be left wing and want the best for his kids........

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:A guy can be left wing and want the best for his kids........

What's that got to do with it?

Sean's point was that someone that was chastising anyone of above average financial means as 'abnormal' and a freak occurrence, was also pertaining to be just a 'normal' average Joe despite having £20-30k pa spare cash lying around to send his kids to private school.

Champagne_Socialist wrote:The argument put forward by tophat that the recession is over etc etc because pubs in central london are busy is just laughable. 18 pubs a week are closing in the uk due to lack of business.

Even if the pubs were not closing at an alarming rate it is still laughable that he bases the Uk's economic growth or the people's disposable income on how busy the pubs are in CENTRAL london.

Reading not your strong suit, is it?

Comment only ever pertained to London, where nothing like 18 pubs a week are closing down, to continue the example. I can only think of 1 pub personally that's closed and not re-opened as another pub or similar - it's now Agent Provocateur on Grosvenor Street.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:The argument put forward by tophat that the recession is over etc etc because pubs in central london are busy is just laughable. 18 pubs a week are closing in the uk due to lack of business.

Even if the pubs were not closing at an alarming rate it is still laughable that he bases the Uk's economic growth or the people's disposable income on how busy the pubs are in CENTRAL london.

Reading not your strong suit, is it?

Comment only ever pertained to London, where nothing like 18 pubs a week are closing down, to continue the example.  I can only think of 1 pub personally that's closed and not re-opened as another pub or similar - it's now Agent Provocateur on Grosvenor Street.

 

I really do pity you.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:A guy can be left wing and want the best for his kids........

What's that got to do with it?

Sean's point was that someone that was chastising anyone of above average financial means as 'abnormal' and a freak occurrence, was also pertaining to be just a 'normal' average Joe despite having £20-30k pa spare cash lying around to send his kids to private school.

You really do like to splash out on the personal insults. Leave his personal life out of it. I am not going to talk about how you are fat and a burden on society because you take up too much space and should pay double the money on public services because your fat arse takes up twice the space.

Really? Think you should look in the mirror kiddo.

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:A guy can be left wing and want the best for his kids........

What's that got to do with it?

Sean's point was that someone that was chastising anyone of above average financial means as 'abnormal' and a freak occurrence, was also pertaining to be just a 'normal' average Joe despite having £20-30k pa spare cash lying around to send his kids to private school.

You really do like to splash out on the personal insults. Leave his personal life out of it. I am not going to talk about how you are fat and a burden on society because you take up too much space and should pay double the money on public services because your fat arse takes up twice the space.

Pahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahaha, officially lost it!!

TopHat24/7 wrote:Really? Think you should look in the mirror kiddo.  

Cant. He got snake eyes

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:A guy can be left wing and want the best for his kids........

What's that got to do with it?

Sean's point was that someone that was chastising anyone of above average financial means as 'abnormal' and a freak occurrence, was also pertaining to be just a 'normal' average Joe despite having £20-30k pa spare cash lying around to send his kids to private school.

You really do like to splash out on the personal insults. Leave his personal life out of it. I am not going to talk about how you are fat and a burden on society because you take up too much space and should pay double the money on public services because your fat arse takes up twice the space.

Pahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahaha, officially lost it!!

But it is true, you attack everyone's personal life but you admitted you are fat and that you need to lose a lot of weight.

Also you admitted you were bullied at school....

Your inability to read properly, let alone follow a debate thread, is hilarious. You've also picked up a wonderful hypocrisy bug from Truss.

You throw around personal insults also, but love criticising me for it.

You boast about how much you earn and how (supposedly) little I or others earn and then attack me for apparently getting personal.

The point you've just commented on, wasn't even a personal insult. That's what's so embarrassing and why I can't but laugh at you. You just get over-excitable, respond to what you think you've read rather than what was actually written and then make a wally of yourself.

Not cool CS, you can do better than this laughable tripe you are serving up.

Where's this economic recovery people say?

As I previously alluded to, private sector businesses are creating just over 1,000 jobs a day, around 100,000 per quarter. Economic growth is PROJECTED (key word), for 1.3% this quarter.

TopHat24/7 wrote:Your inability to read properly, let alone follow a debate thread, is hilarious.  You've also picked up a wonderful hypocrisy bug from Truss.

You throw around personal insults also, but love criticising me for it.

You boast about how much you earn and how (supposedly) little I or others earn and then attack me for apparently getting personal.

The point you've just commented on, wasn't even a personal insult.  That's what's so embarrassing and why I can't but laugh at you. You just get over-excitable, respond to what you think you've read rather than what was actually written and then make a wally of yourself.

The funny thing is this is your thread you created to debate whether the unions will cost Labour the election. truss proved you wrong so you decided to derail your own thread because you lost the original debate. Truss attempted to get the thread back on track but you kept on derailing your own thread because you know you lost the debate.

I never thought anyone could WUM their own thread but I guess looking at this thread and your posts it is possible

Do you want to get the thread back on track and debate whether the Unions will stop Labour winning the next election or are you satisfied that Truss proved the union situation will have close to no effect whatsoever?

Poll out on political betting.com about Falkirk......Labour and the Unions........

How closely are you following the row over  Falkirk ?

Following closely - 26%
Not very closely  - 27%
Not following      -  47%.........

Like Europe, Unions are generally only of interest to those with vested interests or for people with loads of money that  don't have other things to worry about.

Company Date Con Lab Lib Dem UKIP Others



YouGov 03/11/13 32 41 8 12 7

Another quarterly fall in unemployment. Another 48,000 people (net) found jobs in the last 3 months.

On zero hour contracts no doubt.........

No matter how good the economy is Women just don't seem to like the Tories...

Big problem...........Perception is everything........

labour share has gone up in the last two months and the economy has been getting better...

'no doubt' i.e. you're guessing.

Interesting question though.......Unemployment is coming down and the economy is improving......

Yet Labour's share is going up..........

Maybe Major is right......Too many posh people in the cabinet.......

Time for some normal Tories to be promoted........There are a lot of them..

Major is a funny one. Complained endlessly when former ministers (particularly Thatcher) aired their views when he was in power and now the Tories have their first man in power since his pitiful demise and he's piping up and making a nuisance of himself trying to undermine DC in exactly the same way Maggie did to him.

I think the problem the government has is that some perceive it to be out of touch.......

Dorries "Price of milk etc"........

Major is yesterday's man like Blair who tries to hurt Miliband.........

He should keep his gob shut.........But politicians are like actors they need to be on center stage..

Major has a point though....and he is Conservative a bit like Tony Blair.

Major always liked playing the 'brought up in a council house' card. Which, in fairness, is likely to be a more successful rhetoric than DC and Gideon's Bullingdon brotherhood.

The big test will be whether those people approached for their opinion by a pollster will be as certain to take the more proactive roll of taking a trip to their polling station come 2015. Labour helped tackle this issue a lot with the introduction of postal voting, a perfectly sensible policy anyway but it may now play usefully into their hands years later in opposition.

Gender preferences are interesting, but mainly because the Tories have never polled well with women, and yet have always had their turn in power. I'm not sure what turn-out rates are like between men and women, have never come across any higher levels of deference by either gender.

Tories are always likely to vote more....Like republicans in America...Why I can see them getting more votes......and a higher share......Whether it's the five/six points ahead they need to be the largest party.... it's doubtful......

Can see Labour getting enough disgruntled Liberals to make it gridlock again.......

The female vote kept cameron from a majority last time......and it shows no sign of turning.......

Still time though.........who knows...........Wouldn't be a complete shock for cameron to get a small majority.......Odds are against though.