dAVe80

4 minutes ago, fightoffyour said:

There's not even a 'D' in 'Melbourne'. 

Is their nickname the Devils, and play in red? That kind of puts me off to be honest, cus it make me think of Man United.

Can't profess to knowing anything about the sport, but my mate is a big Melbourne fan, so "Go Ds!"

Just now, lapal_fan said:

First ball from Jimmy swung!

Not looking good mate

I've got it on yeah, swinging like a rusty gate in a gale. 

20 minutes ago, lapal_fan said:

Fingers crossed for @dAVe80 we can get a batting session and Virat and col come out disciplined! 

Let's see what happens. My record of picking days to go and watch England at Headingley is awful. Last time I chose to get tickets the day's play, before the Stokes Ashes day.

1 hour ago, PaulC said:

I think England will bat well into the third day so unless India totally screw up second innings, theres a good chance it should go well into the 4th day 

Yeah I think if they can bat through the first hour, and as close to lunch as possible, I should see some cricket on Saturday. 

1 hour ago, lapal_fan said:

Oh look, Mr "I'm very good, yet only ever get 23 runs" Jonny Bairstow has ANOTHER wafty shot caught.

My number 2 hated Cricketer after Gary "the bastard" Ballance. 

Stop picking him for **** sake. 

If the other ginger was fit, I don't think he would have been picked. Seems white ball is his thing now, and he's bloody brilliant at that. 

9 hours ago, bickster said:

So you are saying any other leader? Are you really sure about that? How about DIanne Abbott? or maybe Jess Phillips? Or even Wes Streeting? or even John McDonald? 4 names off the top of my head from both sides of the party that I'd wager would actually be doing worse. In fact I just looked up the former leaders ratings on YouGov for the sake of comparison, he was in the -60 territory

 

We also have a problem with what ther tweet actually says.It says this is Starmers lowest favourabilty ever even though the actual stats presented state that its exactly the same as last time except that 3% more people find him favourable than last time and 3% more people find him unfavourable, thats net exactly the same as last time

I don't want to speak for him, and I may be wrong, but I think the point Darren was making is, that was the accusation labeled at the previous leader when he actually was ahead in the polls. I'd think Darren is saying it to point out how wrong that statement was, and how Labour missed an opportunity.

Former England cricket captain, Ted Dexter passed away at the age of 86. 

1 minute ago, blandy said:

It depends how you look at it - there's loads of ways:

Hardly anyone voted for any of them - they were all humiliated

The vote was relatively close between each of the 3 individuals and their plans for the Union - none were humiliated

The vote for the other two was much more than for any one of them - so that one was humiliated

Sharon Graham sort of said she'd stick more to doing Union things for members, as did Coyne, so the vote for that stance was much larger - Turner was humiliated.

Delete as apllicable

 

 

Hmm, that's an interesting way of coming at it. Personally I'd say Graham was is much nearer to Turner than Coyne. The way I look at it is the membership that bothered to vote wanted to move away from the establishment as is in Unite, so rejected Turner, but didn't want to lurch to the right and rejected the Murdoch backed candidate. 

My biggest worry from this is the possibility of more petty squabbles on the left, as there are now two left factions organising in the union. She'll need to squash that ASAP I think. 

10 minutes ago, Chindie said:

The centrist candidate humiliated I assume?

Well it depends how you define centrist, but pretty much. 

15 minutes ago, PaulMcGrath_5 said:

Was it you?

Yep

Guess who decided to get day 4 tickets instead of day 3?

18 minutes ago, bickster said:

That is a massive shock, she was the least expected of the three wasn't she?

Absolutely. When Howard Beckett dropped out and backed Turner, there was massive pressure on her to do the same. The relationship between her and Beckett is going to be interesting now. My mate who is a Unite Community rep reckons the Labour left wanted Turner, and the ex Labour left, SP, SWP, Judean People's Front, People's Front of Judea etc favoured Graham. 

Also interesting, or I guess not that there was only a 10% turn out for the ballot. Which I guess goes to show the majority of union members aren't that fussed about the political side of the union. 

Sharon Graham has been officially confirmed the new GS of Unite. Got to say that's a massive result for her, I don't think many gave her a chance, and suspected her standing would split the left vote enough to see Coyne elected. 

Will be interesting to see where Unite go from here, and what their future relationship with the LP will look like. 

Being reported and I've heard from a few people I'd trust on the matter, that Sharon Graham has won the Unite GS ballot. 

BFAWU now seriously talking about disaffiliating from the Labour Party, following them threatening to auto expel their president. Ffs. 

1 hour ago, bickster said:

I think the former leader may be one of those exceptions but even that's just a maybe

Yeah I was thinking, JC, Abbott and maybe Johnny Mac. I don't think any of them would stand down to do that though. Although I guess JC might end up having his hand forced. 

9 hours ago, bickster said:

It has always been a fight over the brand. Control of the brand has always been key

In repect of the MPs themselves, without being in the Labour Party, they know absolutely that they won't get elected. They'll just be another Chris Williamson

As was also the case for the Change UK lot. There are a couple of them who I think could win their seats not using the Labour name, but it certainly helps for the vast majority of them. 

2 hours ago, Jareth said:

I'm wondering what any self declared socialist MPs, or members, are doing staying in Labour. Is the hope that there will be another shot at a leadership election? Obviously the strategy has been to purge them or demoralise them so that they go, and it's looking quite effective - so why not go? 

For me there are a few reasons. The main one is there isn't an alternative at the moment. The Labour Party still represents the best chance of outing the Tories, and bringing about socialism (although that all looks a long way off at the moment granted). As well as that it's kind of part of my role in my union at the moment.

If there was  scenario that saw my union disaffiliates, and becomes part of a new movement or party that can genuinely challenge the status quo, then I'd reconsider sticking around. 

Also at the moment I've got to say I enjoy pitching up and being a pain in the arse at CLP meetings. I don't want to give them the satisfaction of going. I won't let Keir Starmer and his ilk force me out of my party. 

12 minutes ago, bickster said:

The post of General Secretary is an NEC appointment isn't it? Why would talking to Socialist Action have any bearing on that appointment? It rather seems like one of those half truths that seem to get told, of which there a number of examples of just the last two pages, in order to get people angry and garner their support.

If at the point of talking to them it wasn't against the rules at the time to be a member of Socialist Appeal, and in the Labour Party, would it not have been the same as talking to Momentum or Progress? 

Just now, bickster said:

Labour has never been a Revolutionary Marxist Party. The talking to Murdoch thing is an absolute false equivalence

Didn't say it was, I asked if Labour should talk to group like this? In the same way I talk to Socialist Party or SWP members when with my local trades council. We may fundamentally disagree on a lot of things, but there are still similar, universal aims and ideals that most on the left hold. Stop talking to them, and you get them standing against you, and taking your vote away more than they already do. 

I don't see how talking to them to encourage them to vote Labour is any different to talking to Murdoch press, aside from them being more willing to vote Labour, if you gave them hope of living up to socialist part of the being a democratic socialist party. 

57 minutes ago, bickster said:

Socialist Appeal = Trotskyite Marxist Political Party. Formed when Militant split in two in the 1990 (the Ted Grant half of Militant). Militant split over entryism. Ted Grant maintained the need for entryism as espoused by Trotsky, whereas the other half didn't

Of the 4 banned orgs this one should actually be the least shocking. They aren't in the Labour Party to further the aims of the Labour Party, they are in the Labour Party to recruit for the Marxist Revolution they desire. The Labour Party is of no consequence to them. It is a separate Political Party with aims in conflict with the Labour Party, just like Militant were. This is the half of Militant that maintained the policies of Militant

They even come out with the same bollocks, Socialist Appeal is a Newspaper and its supporters organise around the Newspaper. (replace Militant and exactly the same was said in the 80s)

In the same way as some Labour front benchers say you have to talk to Sun readers to win over non Labour voters, is it not the the same thing to talk to these sorts of groups? I know which of the two I'd say were more in line with Labour values. Also how can you be excluded for talking to a proscribed group, prior to them being proscribed? 

Another day, another spurious attempt to purge the left.

Summer of Soul (...or, When The Revolution Could Not Be Televised) is streaming on Star, on Disney + at the moment. Found footage of a cultural festival in Harlem in 1969. Fried gold.