Mailwatch(ed) Forum

And remember, if UB40 and their recommendation were repeated across the country, Jezza would have taken Downing Street by storm with a bigger landslide than Attlee.

I stopped listening to UB40 after Signing Off...it seems I might not be alone.

What are those spider maps with string and photos of villains called that they use in cop shows to explain the plot? Bet Mic has them on his wall

Is “noncing” even a word ?

It is now.

Not A Cult.

Ex-Jez senior adviser. "Failed diplomacy".

If by a failure of diplomacy they mean Truss appearing clueless about which places were actually in Russia or Ukraine, perhaps. But it's a fucking awful cliché. It wasn't a failure of diplomacy that blew up the Mukden railway line or shot up a radio station on the German/Polish border. Sometimes, dickheads just want a war.

When it comes to unwitting photos with undesirables he must be the unluckiest man who ever lived.

That one takes the biscuit, Supportive of Andres Breivik’s aims, Holocaust Denier, supported apartheid.

mattomac wrote: ↑Mon Jun 05, 2023 12:37 am That one takes the biscuit, Supportive of Andres Breivik’s aims, Holocaust Denier, supported apartheid.

It isn't St Jez's fault if a complete stranger asks for a selfie. It never is.

Apparently it was a free Julian Assage protest, it’s where the horseshoe model demonstrates itself well.

Did Corbyn know who this guy was? Probably not.

Would he have posed with him if he had? Probably not.

Would another high-profile politician who has a history of gaffes concerning being with the wrong people in the wrong place at the wrong time *possibly* think that - given he was attending a conference about a guy who is quite popular with the right wing as well - maybe take a few precautions and not pose with every random who pitches up? Probably.

Does Corbyn have a history of liking flattery and attention and not grasping when he’s being used or when the adoration is actually taking the piss? Probably.

Is this sort of lack of thinking why Jez is a fucking liability and should never have been leader? Definitely.

Yup, perfectly demonstrates why he shouldn’t be the leader of one of the biggest political forces in the UK.

In fact with this kind of political judgement I wouldn’t allow him near leadership of a parish council.

Looking back at the last manifesto. Apparently this would have romped home apart from Brexit and Blairites attacking its brilliance.

https://www.ft.com/content/7364ee82-0c6 ... c8d9dc6d84

Aside from whether the costings and tax raisings are correct (all paid for by other people, yeah) the scale of the increase in spending is enormous. From 37.8% to 44% of GDP in 5 years. The FT and IFS point out that this is a lot, and there'd be very large misallocation.

Luckily John McDonnell was on hand to refute their arguments.

“The IFS assessment of Labour’s plans is that we are too ambitious – we accept that with pride. We are ambitious for our country and will be investing on the scale needed to end austerity, tackle climate change and build our country’s future.”

Not that the Tories were running as policy heavyweights, of course, but I reckon they could have rallied a few against this stuff.

I haven't seen it published anywhere, but Dave Nellist said yesterday that the Greens should step aside should the blessed St Jeremy wish to grace the next election with his presence.

Looking at the replies to this. It's amazing how little the online Corbynites know about local government. There's lots of it, so the chances are somewhere or other somebody will be changing parties. What matters is the direction of those- seemingly away from the Tories at the moment. That doesn't mean "Labour is the new Tory Party". Parties tend to happily accept defections, for obvious reasons. That doesn't mean "Tories are welcome in Starmer's Labour".

As an aside, I'm rather mystified by the conversion to PR among lots on the left. What do they think that's going to involve in practice, if not a lot of working with people who they regard as "Tories"?

As an aside, I'm rather mystified by the conversion to PR among lots on the left. What do they think that's going to involve in practice, if not a lot of working with people who they regard as "Tories"?

They think it means no more Tory governments.

How does that work? They regard any government which isn't led by St Jez as Tory.