shurlock

If Hull get the draw today, cant see spurs jumping us (i.e. they wont beat everton).

Les, what's your point about PR? It appears to make very little sense.

I think he had it easy in terms of Scotland and the North being captive Labour voters. However much he drifted to the centre or trumpeted globalisation, he knew those two bases, however reluctantly, would follow him. That no longer appears to be the case. Any future Labour leader not only has to appeal to the South but rethink how to connect with voters that previous Labour leaders, including Blair, could afford to take for granted. A much more challenging task.

Be easy on batman. He brings a lot of s**t onto himself; but without intending it, some of your posts come across as adding salt to the wounds.

Another straight-bat rerun of Blairism would never work. Ultimately Blair could afford to take the North and Scotland for granted as he made peace down South. In the short-term, it worked spectacularly well; but it also began a long-term process of estrangement that has seen support in the North and Scotland splinter to the SNP, UKIP and other smaller parties. That is the most salient legacy of Blairism as it relates to the rebuilding and future of the Labour party. Blair had it relatively easy; any future Labour leader has the nightmare of realigning three different constituencies. The biggest thing Labour can hope for is that the Tories become spectacularly unpopular and voters realise that FPTP is, at its core, a two-party game.

Agree. Whatever might have been there pretty much disappeared after you met. Smart money is on Batman.

Les, it was always an opinion until you flustered and blustered off on a flight of fantasy. Feel free to check the other press, Newsnight and Sunday Politics show if you want further corroboration. As the Telegraph asked very recently: "How would the CCHQ attack machine approach a Labour leader who served his country in two wars? A man who is raising two children alone after losing his wife to cancer. Like it or not, personality and persona count for a lot in politics today". As for the Spectator article, you wanted to know what his attributes were, that was as good a starting point as any.

All rather incestuous. UJ, Batman and Pap have been going at it hammer and tongs for the last few days. Batman's now a registered user. Pap is banned. Perhaps Tokyo can channel his inner grass and use his powers to get to the bottom of this.

Thats a fair number. How quickly have you grown to that size?

How many people do you employ?

Blair mattered enormously; but he's also inspired a huge hagiography among Blairites such that context -i.e. the Tories deep unpopularity and the fact that John Smith was also successfully steering a moderate, albeit slightly different course- that it tends to fall out of the picture whenever his contribution is assessed.

Les, are you really that thick or deficient at reading. I've never tried to claim that its the position of Tory bigwigs. I've always presented it as my own personal opinion. Nothing more. My only contention is that I'm not the only one thinking it.

The tories have a 100 seat majority, so whoever wins will have a huge task ahead of them. Cooper and Burnham feel like reheats from the Brown/Blair days -something that clearly hobbled Miliband. No number of photos of Burnham sipping a prematch pint at Goodison is going to change the fact that, as with Cooper, he's perceived as a Westminster clone. Never mind that he's tainted by the Mid-Staffs scandal. I find Chuka Umunna the least credible, even though he's the current bookies favourite. Sharp insofar as he can parrot a brief; but devoid of any real sincerity and intellect and smacks of London elitism. He's like the Morcheeba of politicians and Mandy is more Simon Cowell than Simon Cowell. At root, his patronage is based on a wonky reading of history - as if the 1997 election was all down to Blair when, in reality, with the Tories in utter disarray, John Smith would have likely coasted to a similar victory. Agree some will grow into role, though I think knowledge and expertise are easier to address/hone than perceptions of personality and other related intangibles. As to whether the government is shaping up to be more divisive, think that politically and rhetorically, the Tories are doing a pretty savvy job of driving a wedge between the deserving and undeserving poor which will cushion any fallout. That said, I do think the Tories are far more vulnerable on the economy than people are assuming.

The show me cast-iron proof evidence fallacy. As if anything falling short of that becomes specious generalisation. Les, the last time you challenged me and you spent the next week wiping egg off your face. No its based on what I've heard, seen and read. Indeed, Kuenssberg reported something to a similar effect last week on Newsnight. As to his attributes in taking on the tories, there's a pretty good piece on him in the Spectator from 2012 http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/7764333/is-dan-the-man/ -and since then his stock has continued to climb. Otherwise there's the swivel-eyed court of public opinion aka the Daily Mail comment section that you're no doubt at home in.

This.

Dan Jarvis would have scared the living daylights out of the Tories. The other candidates are even less promising than 2010's pretty mediocre vintage.

Both are bellends in their own ways.

Glad you agree with me.

No Jeff, I'd think it was facetious and childish and move on. Just like your gravity-defying analogies.

Just imagine if she started to force people to identify themselves by wearing yellow stars. Imagine that, Jeff.

Pre-UKIP, the working class vote for Labour has been broadly stable with a cyclical element - no doubt, reflecting the state of the economy and intangibles such as leadership. As to housing, those in council housing and to a lesser extent those renting privately have largely been labour voters. What really stands out, however, is the extent to which Labour has never really managed cracked voters who are owner-occupiers, even at the height of Blairism and the fag end of Tory rule in the early-mid 1990s. https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/poll.aspx?oItemId=93&view=wide

Pelle has been a better signing so far than Tadic.

A slightly more serious source: https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/poll.aspx?oItemId=101&view=wide

What does this mean for shame long?