Political round up.............

First topic message reminder :

Turn up for the books.............The hard left guy gets on the ballot for the Labour leadership !!....Managed to bag 35 nominations although some were chucked at him by Burnham who will no doubt pick up many of his second preferences...........

Corbyn has no chance....

However it means one of the other three is likely to get hurt in the first round..........Corbyn no doubt will hoover up the extreme nutty left of which there are no doubt plenty in the Labour party and will probably get enough to take him through the first round !!...

(Cruddas finished top in the 2007 Deputy leader race after the first round (He was the "left" candidate)...Of course Harman and Johnson did better as the rounds progresses with second prefs...)

That means one of the three favorites is likely to be eliminated first..................

Latest odds............

Burnham 10/11
Kendall 5/2
Cooper 3/1
Corbyn 66/1 .................

Latest round up..............

Trump extends lead from 25%................to 35% in New Hampshire..........

11% in second place is Kasich....Bird on 10%.......Bush 9%..

Burnham has gone out to 9/2 after "rude" sexist comment..

Corbyn narrows to 1/5.........

Cooper 10/1............

Looks like a done deal.....

The Tories are 14% up on the latest poll.............Best they've ever been since Cameron was up on Blair by 10 points..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Anything more ironic than criticising someone ELSE referring back to the 1980s??

Point is (which I'll spell out at a grade school level for you given you're not the brightest  [don't worry, we know it's not your fault the Yank education system is so poor]) .

Stopped reading there...Can't be bothered !!

Don't worry, expected you not to have the mental capacity to digest a passage of prose with more words than 'periods'....................................................................

Green = far liberal-left

Duty thatcher was education secretary when free milk was took from schools during the heath goverment so it was her doing

wheelchair1991 wrote:Duty thatcher was education secretary when free milk was took from schools during the heath goverment so it was her doing

She was education secretary at the time, yes, but the Prime Minister Edward Heath initially proposed getting rid of free school milk, amongst other things, as he was striving to make drastic cuts.

Thatcher said in response: "I think that the complete withdrawal of free milk for our school children would be too drastic a step and would arouse more widespread public antagonism than the saving justifies."

She eventually fought, successfully, for the policy not to apply to children under the age of seven.

Forget it mate.............You've been nailed.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Forget it mate.............You've been nailed.

I'm sorry?

just admit you're wrong..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:just admit you're wrong..

No, I'm not wrong.

TopHat24/7 wrote:Green = far liberal-left

I know, but Conservative isn't, so it shows I can swing more than a saggy old pair.

Top, Truss, you need to stop flirting so much on here. It makes some of us really jealous. And I'm much more subtle than you two, so Duty might never realise I'm coming onto him.

Duty i have just given you the facts and you still can't see your wrong.

Ever head of the phrase "Maggie Thatcher milk snatcher"

wheelchair1991 wrote:Duty i have just given you the facts and you still can't see your wrong.

Ever head of the phrase "Maggie Thatcher milk snatcher"

Read this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/uk/2000/uk_confidential/1095121.stm

And in August 1970, the new Secretary of State for Education responded to a Treasury demand for education cuts in four areas:

Further Education fees
Library book borrowing charges
School meal charges
Free school milk

So the treasury demanded that Thatcher should abolish free school milk. It wasn't her idea, or her doing. She was against the proposal.

She responded: "I think that the complete withdrawal of free milk for our school children would be too drastic a step and would arouse more widespread public antagonism than the saving justifies."

Thatcher eventually reached a compromise that the policy would not apply to children under the age of seven.

It was Heath's idea.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Top, Truss, you need to stop flirting so much on here. It makes some of us really jealous. And I'm much more subtle than you two, so Duty might never realise I'm coming onto him.

Oh you. *insert limp hand gesture*

Can you honestly see thatcher putting up with getting over ridden like that in her own department come on now....

wheelchair1991 wrote:Can you honestly see thatcher putting up with getting over ridden like that in her own department come on now....

Well evidently she did, and as she was serving under Heath at the time she would have very little choice in the matter.

And I suppose reaching a compromise meant she didn't feel wholly overruled.

I'm happy I never saw Thatcher getting ridden in whatever department she wanted.

Carry on 606v2 is gonna make it big

Wonder which part truss would play in the carry on 606v2?

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:I'm happy I never saw Thatcher getting ridden in whatever department she wanted.

Carry on 606v2 is gonna make it big

Would it have scarred you for life? I think we should move on for your sanity if nothing else.

They used to have a nickname for ol Maggie when I was a toddler. I can remember it fairly clearly but people give me strange looks whenever I speak it aloud. Maybe someone can verify it for me?

It was Margaret Thatcher the snatch milker?

Comres poll..............

Q. Would you vote for the following If they were leader ???

Yes No

Burnham 22% 54%
Corbyn 22% 58%
Cooper 21% 57%
Kendall 16% 55%

If Corbyn is a nutter he seems as electable as the other three that aren't nutters...

Pretty sobering poll...for wheelo..

There's a lot of 'don't knows' to tap into - something Burnham would be more adept at, marginally, than Corbyn.

Kendall looks sunk no matter what.

Interesting polls although that kind of poll is very unreliable, its a bit like 'would you vote for labour if Gorgon Brown was leader' we used to get those all the time during TB's time as PM they always showed GB was more popoular. Of course when they actually become leader it all changes

You're wrong...Remember the election that never was...

Brown would have beaten Cammy had he gone early...

Only later did Brown's ratings plummet.

I remember that but the point is when asking hypothetical questions like would you vote for a party if A or B was leader is very unreliable

I see Cooper is on her sexist march again ....This time about Corbyn enquiring into single sex cabins as attacks on the fairer sex have gone up on trains apparently..

Please don't let chip on her shoulder "Pankhurst" win..

Well attacks on women have gone up on public trasport that cannot be denied however Cooper saying essentially 'elect me as i am a women' annoys me greatly. I happen to believe regardless of sex the best person should be chosen for the job. Niether Kendall or Cooper are the best person for the job in my opinion

Corbyn's idea about gender segregation on trains is nonsense. It doesn't tackle the root of the perceived problem, and it seems to imply that all men are potential attackers. Cooper and Burnham are perfectly right in opposing it, saying it would 'turn the clock back' and be an 'admission of defeat'.

That's pretty much the only thing Cooper has done right. She continues to bang the feminist drum, under the guise of 'equality' - she even wants to have feminism taught in schools!

Silly woman....oh dear, is that sexist?!

And we need to stay in the EU to support jobs and growth, according to her - right OK, that would be the same EU that is causing net migration to hit record levels at over 300,000, thus saturating the unskilled labour market, and thus causing wage compression. It is also the same EU that means this country has to turn away skilled migrants, therefore having an adverse effect on our economy.

[To the mod that banned me for 24 hrs (I suspect Dolph), thank you for the little note of explanation that came with the notification when I tried to log on yesterday. It probably took no more the 30 secs to tap out but it made the punishment much more palatable and I acknowledge I probably crossed a line...]

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Green = far liberal-left

I know, but Conservative isn't, so it shows I can swing more than a saggy old pair.

Lol

In fairness, I've swung myself. In 3 GE's I've been eligible to vote, I've gone Labour then LD then Tory.

And next time I think I'll switch again as I am vehemently opposed to aspects of Gideon's latest budget and can't shake the thought that I preferred the coalition gov't where the Tories were tempered slightly by LDs.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Green = far liberal-left

I know, but Conservative isn't, so it shows I can swing more than a saggy old pair.

Lol

In fairness, I've swung myself.  In 3 GE's I've been eligible to vote, I've gone Labour then LD then Tory.

And next time I think I'll switch again as I am vehemently opposed to aspects of Gideon's latest budget and can't shake the thought that I preferred the coalition gov't where the Tories were tempered slightly by LDs.

UKIP or nothing for you then.....

See Mandelson has had another pop at Corbyn...

Just the push the lefty needs to get him over the top on the first round ballot..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:See Mandelson has had another pop at Corbyn...

Just the push the lefty needs to get him over the top on the first round ballot..

Blair and Peter Mandelson never seem to understand the more they speak the more support JC will get

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Green = far liberal-left

I know, but Conservative isn't, so it shows I can swing more than a saggy old pair.

Lol

In fairness, I've swung myself.  In 3 GE's I've been eligible to vote, I've gone Labour then LD then Tory.

And next time I think I'll switch again as I am vehemently opposed to aspects of Gideon's latest budget and can't shake the thought that I preferred the coalition gov't where the Tories were tempered slightly by LDs.

UKIP or nothing for you then.....

I'd actually be interested to see where LD get to in 4-5 years......

I am supportive of a lot of their policies and think the Tory cuts have gone too far in some instances.

Will the labour party have finished electing a leader in time for the next general election. Isn't everyone heading butting walls or slitting wrists just to relieve the monotony of it.

Doesn't make them seem like a streamlined unit fit for action. "Well we were going to deliver on our mandate, but by the time we'd  set up the steering committees, orgainsed the meetings to organise the meetings well, we just didn't have time. Can we have another 5 years?"

Look Milky, this is not a matter to be taken likely. The Labour Party are in danger of electing a left wing leader!

In fairness the Labour party decided instead of having a short election...to have a mature prolonged discussion about the their party.......and it's been very revealing....

We've learned that the Labour party have offered these conclusions...

The winner is apparently a jew hating, moronic, Terrorist loving... economicly stupid dreamer.....and sexist to boot lest we forget !!

The second placed guy is a flip flopping muppet who is apparently sexist and hasn't a clue about anything...Ed Miliband clone too..

The third place woman is an angry women's libber that makes Emily Pankhurst look moderate...and is also an Ed Miliband clone..married to an a-hole to boot !!

The fourth place candidate is Maggie Thatcher reborn and has no right being leader according to some members because no one has knocked her up !!..........

That's just what the Labour thinks of it's own..

Soon we can start debating..

Fair point rowley. It does warrant a lot of 'are you sure's?'... and 'are you really really sure?'

It's the modern day dilemma for labour isn't it. Stick to your principles and never get in power to practice them... or elect a 'pragmatist' as a leader who'll sell your soul to the devil to get in power but doesn't have a left wing policy worthy of the name if/when he gets there.

I don't see why it's so cut and dried...

I'm of the persuasion that Governments are voted out rather than voted in..

often truss, but it does depend on whether the great unwashed feel the alternative is at least credible. The idea that we should all live as a happy commune where we help each other is a hard sell in a society steeped in materialism and selfishness.

and i speak from a position of materialsism and selfishness

You make good points..

I didn't rate Ed Mili but he was up against a government that cut unemployment....(Whether through accident or design) stabilized the economy and took low earners out of tax.....

I voted Labour but I never saw Mili winning.....Thought he might sneak a coalition.....But I didn't see the Libs being destroyed like they were..

If you are a bum that can't be bothered to get a job then you're hardly likely to vote....(I have lots of time for guys who are unemployed that want to work).....

Mili spent too much time looking in the wrong places.....If the government do their job well...It won't matter who leads Labour.

What I find amusing about this contest .....Is that I keep hearing from Cooper, Burnham and Kendall that it's about policies that win Elections...

Yet they are all failing miserably to win this one..

Burnham out from 4/1 to 6/1
Cooper out to 12/1 from 10...

Done deal according to odds makers. ..

Apparently Blair cancelled a speech at the World hunger foundation because his 330,000 pound fee couldn't be met..

Loathsome, despicable creature he is....

Tony Blair is a stain on this great country's history.

Done deal with this election - perhaps. But I wouldn't rule out a Burnham victory just yet!

http://www.buzzfeed.com/jimwaterson/cats-always-need-better-vetting-procedures#.lkeLZj9kj

Oh dear.

Yeah that's about your level duty

Corbyn should he win needs schooling and fast......Has to realise the press is full of scumbags and you have to watch what you say...

As with this Bin Laden remark........Saying "It's a shame Bin Laden died" is radioactive jerk material for these guys.... I mean you know the press are going to forget the "He should have been brought to trial " bit that came after.....

People moan that politicians refuse to say anything these days... and no one moans more than the press themselves...

Unfortunately they are mainly to blame.....With this crap.

Corbyn is a disaster waiting to happen for the Labour party..........But I doubt this Laden thing will resonate...

People can see he's a genuine, caring guy.....

Just a genuine, caring guy who's policies and whole appearance reek of yesterday....He won't last long !!.

Bet on Dan Jarvis in 2017/18 (Dave Miliband is worth a slap too)......Jarvis would make Osbourne crap himself..

If he was on the ballot Jarvis would have been the guy i would have backed

Hi wheels, you clearly have an ear close to Labour's ground. What's your view of Blair's ''Alice in Wonderland'' speech and the effect it might have on the party's voters?

For my own part, I wonder if Blair underestimates the backlash against him now (''illegal'' war, ''moneygrubbing'' in particular) and whether his comments are more likely to increase Corbyn's share of the vote.

guildfordbat wrote:Hi wheels, you clearly have an ear close to Labour's ground. What's your view of Blair's ''Alice in Wonderland'' speech and the effect it might have on the party's voters?

For my own part, I wonder if Blair underestimates the backlash against him now (''illegal'' war, ''moneygrubbing'' in particular) and whether his comments are more likely to increase Corbyn's share of the vote.

Every time Blair says to Labour members don't vote for Corbyn his vote increases more. Blair and Blairism are poisonous words for the most ordinary labour members.
Right or wrong that's how it is

Cheers, wheels. That was my perception although it's interesting to hear a down to earth Labour member say the same.

As to whether it's ''right or wrong'' ... well, I certainly think it's understandable. Imo Blair's integrity has suffered heavily in recent times and that can only be damaging to candidates previously associated with him. Corbyn automatically benefits from not having been in that camp and. as you suggest, that benefit now increases further every time Blair opens his trap.