The Chairman Mao resembling, Monarchy hating, threat to Britain, Labour Party thread

[Davkaus]

I didn't really know much about Angela Rayner, but I've read a bit about her background this evening.

A mum at 16, raised in a family with an unemployed father (due to health issues), and a mum who couldn't read or write. She left college with no qualifications to raise her first kid, and went on to get back to work, and worked her way into becoming an MP. She's not had an easy life of being born into wealth and parachuted into a safe seat, she's encountered the kind of difficulties her constituents have, and wants to make things better for people. It certainly hasn't been life on easy street, I have a lot of respect for her getting to where she is today.

1 minute ago, foreveryoung said:

Angela Raynor.

Okay I would. There you go, you made me say it. 

I know you're having a laugh mate, but this is pretty poor form, IMO.

[mjmooney]

10 hours ago, markavfc40 said:

Regardless of if they they talk as if they have a plum in their mouth or sound common as muck give me an Angela Raynor every day of the week, and twice on a General Election day, over a Jacob Rees Mogg or Boris Johnson.

Let's have Brummie Jess Phillips, just for the lols. 

[Jareth]

32 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

Let's have Brummie Jess Phillips, just for the lols. 

She was so convincing on Politics Live t'other day - her real slam dunk was referencing Belinda Carlisle. Every party has one I suppose. 

[ml1dch]

One of those "it's not a conspiracy theory if it's actually true" threads (Chris Curtis, formerly of YouGov)

Includes "Despite it being entirely predictable, everybody panicked at the backlash to the MRP. Nadhim Zahawi called up the CEO and said he would call for his resignation if he was wrong. It became pretty clear we would all be out of a job if we were wrong now"

And...

"We did a fantastic debate poll in the hours following the debate that Corbyn took part in. The results were stark - Corbyn won by a country mile, and one in four Tory voters thought he was best. But despite having written the story and designed the charts, we were banned from releasing the story because it was too positive about Labour"

[bickster]

Some of that thread now appears to be missing... (Conspiracy theory you say )

Here's next bit that is missing the rest is on thread reader

Quote

But we looked at excluding people who had joined the panel more recently, and it made no difference to the final numbers. At one point, and I feel stupid saying this now, I seriously wondered if we had been hacked by nefarious actors. 

And then we released the MRP. This was probably the worst possible idea. The MRP was actually showing exactly the same thing as our standard polls would have, but it was the first time anybody had said "hung parliament". 

So rather than doing what we should have done - pointing out that traditional polls were showing the gap was narrowing dramatically and this is something to be taken seriously - it was "new experimental methodology" that showed it, which was therefore dismissed. 

When anybody from the Tory campaign tells you they also knew this was happening, I would to point out that this was the quote from Crosby at the time. (as per @ShippersUnbound )

 

[markavfc40]

Wes Streeting nailed the Tories on QT last night. He comes across really well every time I see him be it in the commons or in interviews. Has that ability to connect with people. Nailed on surely as a future leader of the Labour party.

 

[bickster]

8 minutes ago, markavfc40 said:

Wes Streeting nailed the Tories on QT last night. He comes across really well every time I see him be it in the commons or in interviews. Has that ability to connect with people. Nailed on surely as a future leader of the Labour party

Careful now, you'll be getting accused of being centrist scum by certain sections of the left for holding those thoughts

[markavfc40]

16 minutes ago, bickster said:

Careful now, you'll be getting accused of being centrist scum by certain sections of the left for holding those thoughts

I romanticized for a while about a Labour party more true to its original roots getting into government. That ship has long sailed though.

Give me a centrist Labour government every day of the week over this right wing shit show. This country is on its knees and is in last chance saloon in terms of being able to pull itself back up and can't endure another 5 years of Tory rule on top of the 13/14 it will have seen come the next election.

The sooner every faction of the Labour party gets on board with doing whatever it takes to defeat the Tories, including swallowing a bit of pride and ideology, the better. Get into power then try to incrementally move further left but make sure you do the part that matters most of getting into power first. Only from that position can you implement change that matters.

[bickster]

2 minutes ago, markavfc40 said:

I romanticized for a while about a Labour party more true to its original roots getting into government. That ship has long sailed though.

Give me a centrist Labour government every day of the week over this right wing shit show. This country is on its knees and is in last chance saloon in terms of being able to pull itself back up and can't endure another 5 years of Tory rule on top of the 13/14 it will have seen come the next election.

The sooner every faction of the Labour party gets on board with doing whatever it takes to defeat the Tories, including swallowing a bit of pride and ideology, the better. Get into power then try to incrementally move further left but make sure you do the part that matters most of getting into power first. Only from that position can you implement change that matters.

Sadly there is a good proportion of the idealists on the left that will never subscribe to this idea, it's been that way since forever and will not change

[MakemineVanilla]

16 minutes ago, markavfc40 said:

Wes Streeting nailed the Tories on QT last night. He comes across really well every time I see him be it in the commons or in interviews. Has that ability to connect with people. Nailed on surely as a future leader of the Labour party.

 

Sweeping generalisations might prove useful and even satisfying but their appeal is mostly specious.

Some people think that the ultimate test of character is a person's willingness to return a shopping cart but for MPs I think the best measure is the level of zeal they demonstrate in monetising their political career.

Therefore, Dennis Skinner and Gordon Brown come out well by this measure but Tony Blair (£50m) and Theresa  May (£600k/speech) do not.

Jess Phillips' reported £5m reinforces the suspicion that she is a cynical grifter.

In politics, the guilty are many and the innocent are few.

 

 

[markavfc40]

15 minutes ago, bickster said:

Sadly there is a good proportion of the idealists on the left that will never subscribe to this idea, it's been that way since forever and will not change

They overcame it in 97 of course and swept into power. The big difference now is that then they had Blair and back then he had what it took to connect with the electorate. Streeting has more than a bit of that about him. The big problem may well be that Starmer doesn't. 

[Wainy316]

21 minutes ago, markavfc40 said:

I romanticized for a while about a Labour party more true to its original roots getting into government. That ship has long sailed though.

Give me a centrist Labour government every day of the week over this right wing shit show. This country is on its knees and is in last chance saloon in terms of being able to pull itself back up and can't endure another 5 years of Tory rule on top of the 13/14 it will have seen come the next election.

The sooner every faction of the Labour party gets on board with doing whatever it takes to defeat the Tories, including swallowing a bit of pride and ideology, the better. Get into power then try to incrementally move further left but make sure you do the part that matters most of getting into power first. Only from that position can you implement change that matters.

Yep this is where I am.  1997 to 2008 were the most prosperous times in living memory for the UK, so although it might not be my perfect iteration of Labour, things will be better by them just not being Tory.

[blandy]

10 minutes ago, markavfc40 said:

Get into power then try to incrementally move further left but make sure you do the part that matters most of getting into power first. Only from that position can you implement change that matters.

This, thisity, this.

Absolutely spot on. Unfortunately the general sway of the media and ingrained thinking in the UK, and England particularly is embedded to such a degree that anything "too left wing", or a bit different from the recent-ish orthodoxy is hammered relentlessly as wreckless and scary and bad and awful, and as such will scare too many horses to ever be accepted straight off as "this is what we need, I'll vote for that" and so Labour needs to understand that it has to, to an extent, show how it will be better than the tories AND that the Labour solution isn't "pie in the sky anti British flummery". They also need to stop being scared of their own shadow.

They're getting there, I think, but they're not there yet. More of their spokespeople appear to be competent media performers and clearer thinkers than has recently been the case. It's also beneficial that some of their policies have been snaffled by the Tories (Windfall tax on Oil companies) because it shows that they can come up with genuine solutions to problems.

While the Leader is not particularly inspiring, he's also a step up from the likes of Johnson and [y'know, the previous one who shall not be mentioned] in terms of competence and a perception of decency in the public eye.

When they get in there's going to be an almighty mess to clear up, an absolute clusterpork of problems and they need to be prepared with actual solutions and steps not based around ideology, but around "will this work, and how will it work".

Work in progress but they're getting there.

[blandy]

17 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said:

Jess Phillips' reported £5m reinforces the suspicion that she is a cynical grifter.

What that looks like to me is "we're a bit scared of her, she connects with people, let's allege she's somehow loaded and therefore a fraud"

Given that MPs have to declare all their income etc. I strongly doubt that she's a multi-millionaire.

[Seat68]

14 minutes ago, blandy said:

What that looks like to me is "we're a bit scared of her, she connects with people, let's allege she's somehow loaded and therefore a fraud"

Given that MPs have to declare all their income etc. I strongly doubt that she's a multi-millionaire.

Maybe the books earned her some money, and if so why the hell didn't she have a sticker on them saying pay no more than 49p. Or it maybe inherited wealth from her parents, everyone knows that teachers are loaded. 

[MakemineVanilla]

1 hour ago, Seat68 said:

Maybe the books earned her some money, and if so why the hell didn't she have a sticker on them saying pay no more than 49p. Or it maybe inherited wealth from her parents, everyone knows that teachers are loaded. 

I looked up her income as recorded on the register of financial interests, a few years ago, when her first book came out (2017) and she was definitely in the top tax bracket.

Presumably she had arranged things so that the advance on her book was spread over a number of tax years.

The book was adapted for television, which also earned her income.

She published her second book in 2019.

Her feminist credentials have established her as a regular contributor to various women's magazines, and no doubt her recent weight-loss and make-over have been featured in magazines, which has provided a very decent income stream.

In 2018-19 she earned over £360k as an MP including expenses.

I don't think £5m is an unlikely amount of wealth for someone who has been an MP since 2015.

In Marx's terms, an undoubted member of the bourgeoisie, living off the sweat and toil of the proletariat.

Edited June 10, 2022 by MakemineVanilla

[blandy]

37 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said:

In 2018-19 she earned over £360k as an MP including expenses.

I don't think £5m is an unlikely amount of wealth for someone who has been an MP since 2015.

I do. Firstly expenses may allow MPs to live comfortably, with first class travel, nice food etc but that’s not the same as “being worth”. From that 360 k she will be paying for staff, an office premises, computer, power heating, paperwork, phone and all the rest, too.

Secondly 80 k a year, taxed, for 7 years even with no mortgage and bills takes an MP nowhere near 5 mill. 2 books and some speeches, articles, TV stuff likewise. She’s like most MPs very well off, but the multimillionaire stuff sounds like utter nonsense to me. Joint worth with husband probably over a million, given house prices, sure, quite possible, but beyond that I’m entirely unconvinced. 

[bickster]

51 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said:

I looked up her income as recorded on the register of financial interests, a few years ago, when her first book came out (2017) and she was definitely in the top tax bracket.

She's an MP, they are all in the top tax bracket

51 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said:

Presumably she had arranged things so that the advance on her book was spread over a number of tax years.

What would be the point, she's in the top tax bracket

52 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said:

In 2018-19 she earned over £360k as an MP including expenses.

No she didn't expenses are not income, in fact the large part of MPs expenses is her staffs wages, those are other peoples income not hers

53 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said:

I don't think £5m is an unlikely amount of wealth for someone who has been an MP since 2015

I do, it's levels of magnitude higher 84k x 7 is 588k, She's nowhere near 5m even when you add in the publishing income (which is in the register) 

[MakemineVanilla]

1 hour ago, blandy said:

I do. Firstly expenses may allow MPs to live comfortably, with first class travel, nice food etc but that’s not the same as “being worth”. From that 360 k she will be paying for staff, an office premises, computer, power heating, paperwork, phone and all the rest, too.

Secondly 80 k a year, taxed, for 7 years even with no mortgage and bills takes an MP nowhere near 5 mill. 2 books and some speeches, articles, TV stuff likewise. She’s like most MPs very well off, but the multimillionaire stuff sounds like utter nonsense to me. Joint worth with husband probably over a million, given house prices, sure, quite possible, but beyond that I’m entirely unconvinced. 

According to the Evening Mail, she pays her husband as Constituency Support Manager, and can get up to £15k for a day's work as a consultant.

So unless Tom is getting minimum wage, I would guess that a substantional part of that £360k is acccounted for by her and her husband's salaries.

All totally legitimate of course but it doesn't exactly make her as humble as Keir Hardy.

Even if her accumulated wealth only amounts to a measly £2m, I think most of her constituents would consider her to be "rich".

I don't begrudge her the money, I just think it suggests that she is not quite what she is purported to be.

PS It seems my estimation of Dennis Skinner's wealth was a pathetic underestimation - no wonder he claimed so little in expenses.

 

[Chindie]

Philips family isn't exactly working class either. Her mom was a high ranking NHS director for the region. There'll be some family wealth in there.

Her accent does some heavy lifting for her.