Rayvin

The 500k people who joined the party and the 40% of people who voted for him last time out. Look, let's not do this again. Corbyn was ultimately a symptom of the same failure of the centre that Brexit is. If when Corbyn goes we return to "radical centrism" then I think we can consider the Tories in power for the rest of our lives.

I can't see how it could possibly be true but honestly, it's just unknowable these days. I'm really not sure at all what happens if the Tories win this. Something approximating No Deal Brexit and then 5 years of Tory rule. Corbyn goes, Labour resumes soul searching, the momentum and energy behind the left collapses and a generation of young people give up on the whole affair. Some less threatening individual will replace him but without the vision or boldness that excites people, and it'll all just fall away. I think it might be win or bust for Labour. As it pretty much was before Corbyn appeared, in truth.

Electoral Calculus has the Tories on a 90 seat majority however So maybe I'm just wrong.

I think the Lib Dems could pivot to this without harming their pro-soft Tory stance. They can still claim they'll vote to block all manner of marxist craziness but will vote in support of Labour where it counts. The problem is, that's not much of an incentive for Labour.

I see your point, it'll be a mix of both of course. However, one way or another the Tories need to make significant gains still. National polling (I know) still indicates that the combined might of the Tories and Farage is only 45%.

It's bad news but let's not pretend it wasn't coming or indeed overstate it. The Brexit Party have done this because polling indicates that they're not really making any headway - 6% nationally. When you factor in that they're now not standing in half the seats, I expect that number changes. And as Gemmill's post a few days ago points out, the vast majority of people who would be minded to vote Brexit Party would not have voted Labour last time anyway - so it's arguable how much impact the BP is likely to have. Maybe one or two seats? Meanwhile, the Tories are set to lose 13 in Scotland and hopefully another 10 or 20 to the Liberals. Labour just needs to hold firm, and I broadly think they will.

Knowing this club, and Ashley, almost certainly yes.

Yeah I guess it is about the right time of year to start another bullshit takeover story.

They did, it was the 11 examples they seemed to struggle with. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/04/labour-adopts-ihra-antisemitism-definition-in-full

Well I know, but those tweets they're all citing suggest that they think there is. The lines are getting way too blurred on this now. Anti-semitism definitely is the one tool they have to beat Corbyn with, and he's so grossly mismanaged the whole thing that even I now think he might legitimately be antisemitic. But at the same time it's opened the floor up to any criticism of Israel becoming an issue on the same basis, apparently. I mean the Israelis must be loving this, what was that report a couple of years ago about them orchestrating take downs of anti-Israel MPs as admitted by their own embassy staff? Everything they ever wanted here.

Schofield seems to be accused of "anti-Semitism" in that thread for a tweet from 2010 which notes that David Milliband is pro-Israel in a disparaging way. How is that antisemitic? People are colossal morons these days, it's truly staggering.

This is just unbelievable from Labour, but it's also worth keeping in mind that the press has sat on all of this for apparently years so that it can be used at a time of maximum impact. If the press genuinely thought this was important, it would have come out at the time. Unless it's not the press and is in fact Labour members or politicians who have decided that now is the time to reveal all of this? Somebody knew about this a year ago and did fuck all with it until now.

Some mid-90s homophobia there takes me back.

Aye. It's the not dealing with it that gets me. And like, I understand sticking to his principles in having the freedom to criticise Israel, but at the end of the day it's a minor fucking issue that has no bearing on the country in any real sense. Just kill it off ffs.

Indeed. So dismal...

I'm gonna add that IMO they're probably right about this one in terms of subliminal reinforcement of negative prejudices, if not anyone's actual overt intent in use of the word.

It's not sexist if you use it against me, I'm male and therefore an oppressor not a victim. So fair enough

A thousand apologies Meenzer, I will rephrase - certain 4th wave feminists have at various points in their careers, expressed the view that everything was sexist and racist, and that it should be pointed out at all times. However, upon learning that this switched people off (not, importantly, upon learning that it was not true) they decided to choose the battles more carefully so that they were able to make some headway. As such, we can conclude that the word cunt is sexist, but that it is not politically convenient for this to be expressed at all times. There we go, a more accurate representation of what she says in the video that still basically supports everything I've said. Thanks for your time. FFS

I'm not watching through that for the context, if you have a point to make you can just tell me. Is it the word system? Language is a system. So then, the word cunt could be argued to be sexist because it was established in a linguistic system which denigrates and reduces the contributions and attributes of women, and in particular because this word has the infamy of being 'the worst word in English' while also being a word for female genitalia. Thus the system it was constructed within, and the word itself, are inherently sexist, and neither should ever be used by woke thinking people I'm open to you venturing your own theory on why the word cunt is sexist, I was actually talking entirely in earnest. Although having googled the matter I can see that the Guardian actually defended use of the word so maybe it's just an isolated incident (although I have heard murmurings about it being sexist in the past, not that I can remember where from).

Not sure of the implications of this image but I was quoting a 4th wave feminist directly

Everything is sexist, everything is racist, and you have to point it all out. --4th wave feminism.

Given the cost you've cited in particular, I think that's a fair point. I agree.

Why cant the asset be procured, financed through alternative means of state generated income, and then be operated at a lower price for consumers, thus benefiting society in general. The NHS doesnt make a profit and yet we seem to value that. Whether it's a priority or not is up for debate and i would agree that it probably isn't and is solely an ideological move. But arguing that it doesn't make sense because it wouldn't be profitable doesn't seem to scan for me. The government isn't, and shouldn't ever be, a business.

I think its probably because Watson is a child in a man's body.