Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2013 14:24:17 GMT
Snigger. Look, IF I can use stepney as an example, or even timrollpickering. We'd have a pint, maybe a jacket potato, and agree on quite a lot. Then I'd tell them about what I believe about drug law, separating church from state, defence spending, European integration, taxation, pornography law, and electoral administration, and they'd drain their glasses sharpish. I am on the right of the party *in specific circumstances* and when compared with the rabid lefty nonsense from the Labour Party. But I agree with our preamble to the constitution as much now as ever. Not a Tory, never a socialist. |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Mar 17, 2013 17:06:53 GMT
Well, this was the man who called the Labour leadership for David Miliband by a convincing margin two days before conference. Which would have been the result were it not for the Union paymasters. Which is like saying the AV referendum would have passed if it wasn't for all the people voting no. You're not quite that much of a fuckwit, stop acting like you are. |
|
|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on Mar 17, 2013 17:53:00 GMT
Which would have been the result were it not for the Union paymasters. I thought Hugh Grant ran the Labour Party? |
|
|
|
Post by stepney on Mar 17, 2013 18:02:26 GMT
Which would have been the result were it not for the Union paymasters. Which is like saying the AV referendum would have passed if it wasn't for all the people voting no. You're not quite that much of a fuckwit, stop acting like you are. The majority of the Parliamentary Labour Party voted for Miliband D. to become leader, as did the majority of the membership of the Labour Party nationally. He was defeated by the votes of people who overwhelmingly aren't members of the Labour Party but who are members of organisations which elected to send Ed propaganda to its largely apolitical membership along with their ballot papers. As such, you're well aware your analogy is completely flawed. You're not quite that much of a fuckwit, stop acting like you are. |
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 15,818 
|
Post by john07 on Mar 17, 2013 18:24:33 GMT
The majority of the Parliamentary Labour Party voted for Miliband D. to become leader, as did the majority of the membership of the Labour Party nationally. He was defeated by the votes of people who overwhelmingly aren't members of the Labour Party but who are members of organisations which elected to send Ed propaganda to its largely apolitical membership along with their ballot papers. As such, you're well aware your analogy is completely flawed. You're not quite that much of a fuckwit, stop acting like you are. The largest number of the electorate voted Labour in 1951 but the Conservatives 'won' the election. The majority of the US electorate voted for Al Gore in 2000 but George W Bush became President. You may not quite that much of a fuckwit, but you certainly act like one. |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Mar 17, 2013 18:29:34 GMT
Which is like saying the AV referendum would have passed if it wasn't for all the people voting no. You're not quite that much of a fuckwit, stop acting like you are. The majority of the Parliamentary Labour Party voted for Miliband D. to become leader, as did the majority of the membership of the Labour Party nationally. He was defeated by the votes of people who overwhelmingly aren't members of the Labour Party but who are members of organisations which elected to send Ed propaganda to its largely apolitical membership along with their ballot papers. As such, you're well aware your analogy is completely flawed. You're not quite that much of a fuckwit, stop acting like you are. No, it is not flawed. As was made exceedingly clear before the election, the Labour Party chooses it leader using an electoral college, in which union members have a third of the votes. Suggesting that the fact that unions had an impact upon the outcome of the election is to state the bloody obvious. They had an impact because the rules were designed to make sure that they did. Because the Labour Party is noticeably keen upon the unions having a political voice. Not liking the rules, or not paying attention to them, does not change the outcome. There was an election, David Miliband lost it. Everything else is details. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2013 18:30:58 GMT
shall we remind Stepney that the majority of the Tory MP's did not vote for Cameron in the first round and he only topped the poll thanks to AV
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Mar 17, 2013 18:39:56 GMT
The majority of the Parliamentary Labour Party voted for Miliband D. to become leader, as did the majority of the membership of the Labour Party nationally. He was defeated by the votes of people who overwhelmingly aren't members of the Labour Party but who are members of organisations which elected to send Ed propaganda to its largely apolitical membership along with their ballot papers. As such, you're well aware your analogy is completely flawed. You're not quite that much of a fuckwit, stop acting like you are. The largest number of the electorate voted Labour in 1951 but the Conservatives 'won' the election. The majority of the US electorate voted for Al Gore in 2000 but George W Bush became President. You may not quite that much of a fuckwit, but you certainly act like one. Al Gore didn't even win a majority of those who voted in 2000 never mind a majority of the electorate. You're not that much of a fuckwit...  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2013 18:50:10 GMT
is he for real or just a troll ? Dan Hodges @dpjhodges Hodges Poll Rule. Drop Ukip to 6%, give rest to Tories. Take LD up to 15%, take from Lab. That's the real poll result. LOL So Hodges takes Lab: 37 Con: 28 UKIP: 17 LD: 9 and turns it into Con: 39 Lab: 31 LD: 15 UKIP: 6 What a complete tool. He makes Dick Morris' polling analysis look sane. Dick Morris is the funniest thing on Fox News, whose 'analysis' is completely based on his complete hatred of Hilary Clinton and most of the Democratic Party. I cannot understand why they keep paying him to come on as he is so wrong; unless it is because Mr "Welcome to the No-Spin Zone" keeps winning bets for free meals off him. Now - being the waiter to Dick Morris and Bill O'Reilly, isn't that the job from hell? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2013 18:52:36 GMT
Well, this was the man who called the Labour leadership for David Miliband by a convincing margin two days before conference. Which would have been the result were it not for the Union paymasters. Is it bad manners to mention that if it wasn't for the postal system, then the leader of the Lib Dems would probably be Chris Huhne (cough, cough)? |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 39,009
|
Post by The Bishop on Mar 17, 2013 18:55:21 GMT
Yes, the older Milibrother won the MPs and members sections (though both were reasonably close - far from the blowout that some like to pretend) But in the MP section particularly (though to a lesser extent the membership as well) quite a few supported him because "he was going to win anyway" - his campaign used the same "strategy of inevitability" that Hillary had used against Barry back in 2008 (and in the end, with about as much success  ) It also didn't help the cause of the Rt Hon Member for South Shields that too many in his campaign were "Blairite Undead" zombies who basically saw trade unionism as "unclean" and engaging with that part of the selectorate as beneath DM's dignity. A mistake unlikely to be repeated by whoever is the front-runner in the next contest..... (this party member voted 1DM 2EM, for the record - and I am delighted in retrospect that things worked out as they did) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2013 18:55:49 GMT
Which would have been the result were it not for the Union paymasters. Is it bad manners to mention that if it wasn't for the postal system, then the leader of the Lib Dems would probably be Chris Huhne (cough, cough)? Hahah, that may well be a fair point  I used to proudly declare that my first preference was Huhne over Clegg........ |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Mar 17, 2013 19:15:56 GMT
It also didn't help the cause of the Rt Hon Member for South Shields that too many in his campaign were "Blairite Undead" zombies who basically saw trade unionism as "unclean" and engaging with that part of the selectorate as beneath DM's dignity. A mistake unlikely to be repeated by whoever is the front-runner in the next contest..... This is definitely true. David Miliband was never particularly likely to win the union section of the college, but if he'd made more effort to appeal to them or to boost turnout in those unions sympathetic to him he'd have cruised to victory. What's more, if his campaign hadn't seen engaging with the unions as beneath them, it's quite likely that there wouldn't have been a shit in institutional union support from Balls to Ed Miliband as a stop David candidate. David Miliband took his eye off the ball. I have a hard time seeing how he could have been beaten if he hadn't acted like he'd already won. |
|
|
|
Post by marksenior on Mar 17, 2013 20:14:21 GMT
Which would have been the result were it not for the Union paymasters. Is it bad manners to mention that if it wasn't for the postal system, then the leader of the Lib Dems would probably be Chris Huhne (cough, cough)? It would not be bad manners but it would be factually incorrect . Clegg would still have won but with a much smaller margin . |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2013 20:41:43 GMT
Is it bad manners to mention that if it wasn't for the postal system, then the leader of the Lib Dems would probably be Chris Huhne (cough, cough)? It would not be bad manners but it would be factually incorrect . Clegg would still have won but with a much smaller margin . Would it be bad manners to say that I have developed a deep, though chaste, affection for you Mark? |
|
Pimpernal
Forum Regular
A left-wing agenda within a right-wing framework...
Posts: 2,873
|
Post by Pimpernal on Mar 17, 2013 22:34:36 GMT
So Mark has different figures to the rest of the world then? How very Lib Dem...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2013 18:29:47 GMT
Comres monthly
Conservatives 30% (+2)
Labour 38% (+1)
UKIP 15% (-2)
Lib Dem 8% (-1)
Others 9% (0)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2013 20:00:59 GMT
Interesting age breakdowns
@roadto326 #Labour lead by age group in #comres poll - 18-24 (+32) 25-34 (+19) 35-44 (+19) 45-54 (+16) 55-64 (+0) 65+ (-18)
I presume the lead is only 8% as the older age groups more likely to vote. However shows a age timebomb that could hit the tories ..
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Apr 13, 2013 21:09:23 GMT
Interesting age breakdowns @roadto326 #Labour lead by age group in #comres poll - 18-24 (+32) 25-34 (+19) 35-44 (+19) 45-54 (+16) 55-64 (+0) 65+ (-18) I presume the lead is only 8% as the older age groups more likely to vote. However shows a age timebomb that could hit the tories .. It could mean that although on the other hand the Tories came third amongst the youngest age group in the 1974 elections behind the Liberals. |
|
|
|
Post by froome on Apr 13, 2013 21:09:42 GMT
Interesting age breakdowns @roadto326 #Labour lead by age group in #comres poll - 18-24 (+32) 25-34 (+19) 35-44 (+19) 45-54 (+16) 55-64 (+0) 65+ (-18) I presume the lead is only 8% as the older age groups more likely to vote. However shows a age timebomb that could hit the tories .. As the age that people are living to is increasing rapidly each decade, you could read that in exactly the opposite way, that the 'age timebomb' could hit Labour, as that poll shows how much voting intentions change as people age. That would be an interesting discussion thread in its own right - it is often said that people become more right-wing as they age, so how true do we think that is? |
|
)
