BS: uk by-elections

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: The Sandman
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 02:37 PM

A UKIP

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: The Sandman
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 02:39 PM

A massive defeat for UKIP, ONE GOOD RESULT FOR LABOUR AND ONE GOOD RESULT FOR THE CONSERVATIVES.

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 04:17 PM

The Labour victory in Stoke has gone a long way towards nobbling UKIP for good. They're imploding at the moment. Ragbag scumbag ratbags.

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 01 Mar 17 - 03:50 AM

Whilst I agree with your last three words Steve, I think that the rest of your post might be over-optimistic. The issue at the moment is that the Tories, and even Labour, have stolen their clothes. This in the long run is not good for the country, and if and when the larger parties return to a more pragmatic approach (e.g. a Blair/Major approach), then the nastiness will resurface. I returned to supporting Labour after the Lib Dems sold out on tuition fees, after Labour have sold out on something more important I will not make that mistake again.

Manchester Gorton is a community which is both ethnically diverse, and highly educated (a lot of students and staff from the Manchester universities live there). I would see both the Lib Dems and the Greens doing very well, and if they formed some kind of a pact they could even take the seat.

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Mar 17 - 04:47 AM

Ukip came second at Stoke and gained vote share in both.
That is not a "massive defeat."

Sir Keir Starmer on the results for Labour,

"Sir Keir also dismissed excuses for Labour's Copeland by-election defeat put forward by Mr Corbyn and his allies, declaring: "I don't think some of the reasons put forward are compelling."
And pointing the finger of blame at Mr Corbyn, he added: "A number of things came up, including the direction of travel of the Labour Party, Labour's ability to communicate and understand what people are saying to them and, of course, the leadership of the Labour Party and we all know that."
http://news.sky.com/story/shadow-cabinets-keir-starmer-writes-off-labours-election-chances-10785427

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Mar 17 - 06:40 AM

I have a cousin called David Carter who comes from Gorton, would you believe! My uncle still lives there.

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Mar 17 - 11:32 AM

This excellent article from the Times, this morning
Makes sense to me
Jim Carroll

BELIEVE IT OR NOT, CORBYN SHOULD LEAN FURTHER LEFT
Instead of continuing with this pathetic muddle, Labour's leader ought to go down fighting for a radical subversive agenda,
Let's be fair to Labour. Preparing briefing notes on what to say if you lose a by-election is a thankless task. I've done it quite a few times, and struggled even to convince myself.
Twenty years ago this week, when I was working for the party, the Tories lost a seat we held, Wirral South, with a 17 per cent swing to Labour. We were only a few weeks from a general election, but the advice we gave ministers who appeared on television was to say that this was only a protest vote. We had always regained the seats we lost at by-elections. Wirral South would come home in May and so would the country.
This wasn't remotely plausible. It sounded completely unconvincing at the time. And the country didn't come home at the general election. Nor did Wirral South. Indeed it is still held by Labour, five general elections laterf But what were we supposed to advise ministers to say? What was there to say?
When I was in the SDP we gave our spokesman some lines to use on the television results programme following the Bootle by-election. When the SDP finished behind the Monster Raving Loony Party, he looked at his briefing and opted to tell the presenter: "I was sort of hoping you had forgotten I was here."
In another SDP catastrophe, my friend as party campaign manager rang headquarters with the result and started giving the winner's percentage with several decimal places. You don't need all those, said HQ. Yes I do, replied my friend. If I don't include the decimal places, we scored zero. Some results simply can't be spun.
Yet even allowing for this, Labour's attempt to explain their debacle in Copeland last week has been abysmal. Their briefing paper leaked to my Times colleague Sam Coates, as most things do in the end, and it was an astonishingly weak effort.
The aim was to convince people that winning Copeland "was always going to be an uphill task", which is absurd, and that the real problem was "unique circumstances". My favourite part was the bit that blamed defeat on the Conservatives. "The Tories threw everything at Copeland," the brief complained. They then said the same thing about
Voters are fed up with mainstream offerings, they want an outsider
Stoke (the Tories "threw everything at it"). It is not necessary to write a statistics column to work out that this doesn't quite compute.
Unsurprisingly, given this thin stuff, party spokesmen have been freelancing, trying just about any old line since last Thursday.
Blaming the weather has been a particular favourite.
What's strange about this is that there was a ready-made position that could have been taken. And the fact that Labour hasn't taken it suggests that even Jeremy Corbyn has lost faith in his own thesis.
Here is the argument for a left- wing leadership: New Labour may have won three elections but its appeal had faded and cannot be renewed. This is not just because core Labour voters had begun to lose faith in it. It is also because it depended for success on a strong economy. This allows spending increases and redistribution without higher taxes on the well-off. After the banking crisis this was no longer possible.
So a more radical position was needed after both the Blairite and then Brownite versions of New Labour ran out of steam. The party can't repeat what Ed Miliband did, nor return to the politics of Tony Blair.
All over the world, this argument contends, centrists are being overthrown by radicals. The idea that you can only win elections by bunching in the middle has been disproven. Voters are fed-up with the mainstream offerings. They want an outsider, someone who isn't just another cookie-cutter pol, but an anti-politician. Labour needs to try something new, a bold radical departure. It can win on the left.
Instead of a traditional party centred on parliament, Labour should be a grassroots campaign, built through social media and attracting radical parties and pressure groups which can bring energy to the cause. The economy is going to hit a rough patch, the Tories will get tired and a vigorous extra-parliamentary campaign can run them ragged.
I've never been persuaded by this theory of how to win or remotely attracted to the sort of politics it leads to. But then I wouldn't be.
What astonishes me is the lack of faith Corbyn himself shows in what is the only argument for his leadership.
Daniel Finklestein, The Times 1st March 2016

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: The Sandman
Date: 01 Mar 17 - 01:11 PM

LABOUR came first in Stoke on Trent, So why are the mediaquestioning Corbyns leadership, and not the leadership of the lib dems or ukip?two parties that failed to win seats?

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Mar 17 - 01:31 PM

"So why are the mediaquestioning Corbyns leadership,"
Like God, they are not on our side Dick
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: bobad
Date: 01 Mar 17 - 02:02 PM

So why are the mediaquestioning Corbyns leadership

It's all a plot by the Jew owned media and that nefarious "foreign government", don't you know, as is the anti-Semitism in the party.

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 01 Mar 17 - 02:34 PM

Can't speak for the media but I am questioning his leadership because he won't stand up for the future of Britain in Europe.

The media are, as you know bobad, very largely foreign owned. And they have has such a corrosive influence on public discourse, not only over the last year but the last three decades, that I cannot help but feel that their proprietors, and one in particular, really wish the British people ill.

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 01 Mar 17 - 02:40 PM

i suppose the reason virtually everyone is questioning Corbyn's leadership is that we don't really have a clear idea of whither we are headed.

there's a deal of confusion being felt.

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Mar 17 - 02:50 PM

"as is the anti-Semitism in the party."
So sayeth the man who blames the Jewish People for the srimes of the Israeli regime and would rather pander to antisemites by refusing to comment on an accusation the the Jewish members of Parliament refused to identify Labour semitism for the good of the party - not to mention dismissing all Jews who criticise Israel, such as Gerald Kaufman, as "Self Hating".
Give it a rest Bobad - your cover is well blown
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Teribus
Date: 02 Mar 17 - 02:39 AM

Jim Carroll - 01 Mar 17 - 11:32 AM

"This excellent article from the Times, this morning
Makes sense to me" - Jim Carroll

Really Jim?? I take it that you do know what Daniel Finklestein is saying don't you? It is in the first sentence:

"Labour's leader ought to go down fighting for a radical subversive agenda"

The bit in the middle is largely waffle, illustrating that Daniel Finklestein is a man of no real political conviction, in addition to detailing how abysmal Labour were but the bit right at the end was the bit I found most interesting:

"All over the world, this argument contends, centrists are being overthrown by radicals. The idea that you can only win elections by bunching in the middle has been disproven. Voters are fed-up with the mainstream offerings. They want an outsider, someone who isn't just another cookie-cutter pol, but an anti-politician."

Here Daniel Finklestein could equally well be talking about Donald Trump.

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: The Sandman
Date: 02 Mar 17 - 03:18 AM

THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT CORBYN IS, HE IS A MAN OF CONVICTION AND PRINICIPLES

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Mar 17 - 03:27 AM

I agree GSS, but due to the power of the media and the establishment parties, is ideas are only accepted by a tiny militant minority.

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Stu
Date: 02 Mar 17 - 03:55 AM

"is ideas are only accepted by a tiny militant minority"

Not true at all. Many of his ideas are accepted by the wider Labour movement, it's his leadership ability and style that people don't like.

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Mar 17 - 04:12 AM

"I take it that you do know what Daniel Finklestein is saying don't you? It is in the first sentence"
I know that, and have said exactly the same
Labour has no function if it a pale echo of Conservatism - Corbyn should fight on that principle, not an a watered-down destructive policy to win seats in a Parliament which has long ceased serving the British people as a whole and is now a private club on behalf of the few.
The bit in the middle is the most important statement that has been made regarding the role of the Labour Party - you are doing your old usual in taking the bit that suits your own agenda and discarding the awkward bits, as you did with your extracted bits on Attlee and the Bomb.
Any propagandist can do that, and does regularly.
Labour has to offer and alternative to increasing inequality in a country that is no longer able to stand on its own two feet and look to the well-being of the entire population - the last Irish election proved that.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Mar 17 - 04:17 AM

And no - Finklestein could no as well be talking about Trump
Trump is a fascist with no interest for the welfare of the people - Billionaire politicians tend to be like that - that's why he had to go though the charade of passing on his financial interests before he could take office - a sick joke, publicly delivered.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Mar 17 - 06:19 AM

GSS,

LABOUR came first in Stoke on Trent, So why are the mediaquestioning Corbyns leadership, and not the leadership of the lib dems or ukip?

Labour suffered a large loss in votes to the Tories. Opposition parties usually take votes from the governing party in elections.
Labour itself acknowledges that it performed very badly, and they should know.
That is why their leadership is being questioned again.

Ukip made a small vote gain but the result was disappointing for them, and their leadership is also being questioned.

The Lib Dems were pretty irrelevant.

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Iains
Date: 02 Mar 17 - 06:37 AM

General Election 2015 Stoke Central


Labour         Tristram Hunt                12,220         39.3         +0.5
UKIP         Mick Harold                7,041         22.7         +18.3
Cons         Liam Marshall-Ascough 7,008         22.5         +1.5
Inde.         Mark Breeze                2,120         6.8         N/A
LibDem         Zulfiqar Ali                1,296         4.2         -17.5

By election 2017

Party         Candidate                Votes         %         ±
Labour         Gareth Snell                7,853         37.1         -2.2
UKIP         Paul Nuttall                5,233         24.7         +2.1
Conservative         Jack Brereton         5,154         24.3         +1.8
Liberal Democrat Zulfiqar Ali         2,083         9.8         +5.7

In the 2016 EU Referendum, Stoke-on-Trent (the whole council area) voted heavily to Leave the European Union: at 69.4%, this was the highest percentage in the West Midlands region. As the constituency is not coterminous with any local authority, the exact result for the parliamentary seat is unknown.

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 17 - 07:16 AM

On the dramatic loss of Labour members,
"However, former PLP chairman Lord Watts told the Times: "I think the tide is turning. I imagine people are losing heart because they can see the polls, they're talking to their neighbours and people they work with, and are coming to the conclusion Labour is not doing well and, at this point, not convincing the public."
Last week, Labour was humiliated by a historic defeat to the Tories in the Copeland byelection, a seat it had held for more than 80 years.
Reports of a membership slump come after figures showed Labour raised less money through donations than the Liberal Democrats in the last three months of last year. Party sources said it was the first time the Lib Dems had outstripped Labour in fundraising"
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/03/labour-party-lost-members-mid-2016

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: The Sandman
Date: 03 Mar 17 - 07:26 AM

The leadership is being questioned because the media has it in for Corbyn, no one has questioned the Conservative leadership, however they failed to win the stoke on trent seat, that was a conservative failure.
Thersa May has proved she has no principles, she voted remain, but has changed her position so that she can further her career.

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Mar 17 - 07:27 AM

Lord (Baron Watts is a right wing opponent of Jeremy Corbyn who has stated that New Labour should not reform itself but win elections on right wing policies
What else is he going to say?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: The Sandman
Date: 03 Mar 17 - 07:42 AM

Exactly,Jim.
Keith, Lib Dems are relevant , they took part in the election therfore they are relevant, they failed in both seats, as did ukip.

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Stu
Date: 03 Mar 17 - 09:13 AM

"The leadership is being questioned because the media has it in for Corbyn"

The leadership is being questioned because there is no effective opposition at a time when we need it. There is no noise form the Labour benches about the way Brexit is being handled and no real attempt by Corbyn and Labour to ensure we stay in the single market and protect jobs and businesses that rely on Europe.

Corbyn was ideologically opposed to Europe and is in no rush to get the best deal when we leave; like the Brexiteers he simply wants out. After all, it's not him who will pay in the long run.

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 17 - 11:03 AM

Dick, I disagree with your assessment.

It is very rare for a governing party to take votes from opposition parties at by elections.

Labour previously had a large majority in both seats.
We saw a large swing away from Labour, a small swing to Ukip and a large swing to the governing party which is an extraordinarily rare occurrence.

Hence my assessment in the OP,
"It looks like a disappointment for UKIP, a catastrophe for Labour and a triumph for the Tories. "

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Mar 17 - 11:05 AM

Of course Corbyn was opposed to the EU...he has been so all his political life, after all the man is a socialist and not a "liberal".
He was drawn into supporting remain in an attempt to keep his shambolic Party together.....all the politicians thought remain would win quite comfortably...took their eyes off the ball, didn't they.

How can you say that there is anyone of any political stature in the PLP......self serving scum all of them.

Labour will be an opposition movement for the next few years, explaining what socialism means and the effects that it will have on people's lives in the future. Within the next decade, their will be great changes to UK society...unimaginable changes, and socialism will play a large part, but it will not be the sort of socialism which is presently represented by Labour MP's, the Ummuna's, the Benn's, and all the other Labour "snowflakes"

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Mar 17 - 07:39 PM

Say goodnight to the folks, Gracie...

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 04 Mar 17 - 11:25 PM

just in case anyone else is wondering

coterminous
kəʊˈtəːmɪnəs/Submit
adjective
having the same boundaries or extent in space, time, or meaning.
"the coterminous Borough and Parliamentary Constituency of Blyth Valley"

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 04 Mar 17 - 11:30 PM

its a bit like one of those words from a 2 Ronnies sketch

I say Smith your garden seems coterminous ...

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Mar 17 - 06:12 AM

Here is a comment from Prescott.
It is not helpful to dismiss such comments with "He would say that."
The fact that such prominent people are expressing such criticisms of the party serve to show how deep in the mire Labour is.

"I've served under nine Labour leaders and fought 12 elections, with the majority of those years under a Tory government.
When I entered Parliament in 1970, Labour averaged 11million votes – or 40 per cent.

That fell to 30 per cent at the last election with eight million voting Labour. We've been as low as 25 per cent in some opinion polls.
So Labour has lost over three ­million votes over 45 years.
You can't put it down to any one leader. But if this decline continues, the chance of Labour returning to government is impossible.
During my 47 years in Parliament I have attended over a thousand Parliamentary Labour Party meetings as a backbencher and Deputy Leader. While they've always been boisterous, what was said in the room always stayed in the room.
Now I regularly see a minority of MPs texting journalists a negative running commentary of the meeting. But it wasn't helped that after losing Copeland to the Tories, the leader and two of his Shadow
­Cabinet members(Abbott and Chakrabati) failed to turn up.
One MP showed me a picture of the missing women – they were drinking wine in the Lords bar! No wonder their fellow MPs were ­furious. Labour, from the leader to every MP, has to get its act together or we're finished."

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Mar 17 - 06:32 AM

"He would say that."
Why not
"Two Jags" Prescott was one of those parliamentarians who abandoned his socialist principles and opted for career politics - he was Blair's 'running mate as Deputy Prime Minister when Labour formally abandoned its principles and became a watered down Tory Party.
Labour's parliamentary vote reflects the abandoning of those principles - under Blair, it reached it nadir and since then it has just fumbled its way along.
Unless you are prepared to accept those facts rather than to attempt to smear Labour as if it was a left party losing support on the basis of right wing statements, you are pissing in the wind
There is a battle going on in the Labour Party at the present time between the establishment careerists who count parliamentary success as a goal and the membership, who have shown by their selection of leader, that a total change of direction is necessary in order to put the Party back on course.
If the Present Labour Perty were to romp home in the next General Election, it would not change Britain's present decline one iota - at present, it doesn't deserve to win a raffle.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Mar 17 - 06:49 AM

Give over, Keith. Your obsessive one-man Mudcat mission to badmouth Labour at every conceivable opportunity is threadbare, negative and tedious in the extreme. You're not telling us anything we don't already know. It's not as if you'd ever in your little life have hung on to any word of Bruiser John anyway. Find something else to talk about. How are the spring flowers in Hatfield Forest? The pussywillow is out here along the Bude canal, though rough winds do shake the darling buds of March this morning. Can Hertfordshire compete with that?

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Mar 17 - 07:48 AM

Soddin' nettle is coming up again in one of our flower beds. Any advice?

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Mar 17 - 07:58 AM

I am not badmouthing Labour, but so many senior and prominent Labour names are.
It is worthy of discussion.
I love to see and walk among the flowers, but I come here for stimulating debate.
Why do you come here? Just to shut down debate?

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Mar 17 - 08:02 AM

I come here for stimulating debate.

And I thought you had no sense of humour, Keith. Good one :-D

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Mar 17 - 08:39 AM

Matthew Turner in the Indy. today,

"As an ardent supporter of Jeremy Corbyn's leadership, I will be the first to admit that the Labour Party is in disarray. Latest opinion polling indicate a catastrophic defeat in a hypothetical general election, and despite fending off the threat of Ukip in Stoke, the loss of Copeland was a huge blow to all who wanted to see the Corbyn project succeed."

His solution,
"the only way this will be possible is by replacing the right wingers in the Labour Party. It is a prerequisite for the success of the Corbyn project. "

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Stu
Date: 06 Mar 17 - 08:47 AM

"Soddin' nettle is coming up again in one of our flower beds. Any advice?"

Nettle soup.

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Raggytash
Date: 06 Mar 17 - 08:50 AM

I'm pleased to report that our fund raising for the Rescue Boat totalled £957.50 this weekend. A very good amount.

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Mar 17 - 09:04 AM

"I am not badmouthing Labour, "
Yes you are Keith and you have been a leading badmouther since the false accusations of Antisemitism and misogyny - it all came from you.
As a right-winger, you have no interest in a putting right what has gone wrong in British politics - you have opposed every progressive suggestion and promoted some of the wworst developments in British politics - including your (non) support of Ukip's lunatic fringe.
Even your Mathew Turner quote (deliberately unlinked) was taken totally out of conteext so you can give the impression his article was agreeing with your claims
He is making exactly the same point as Daniel Finklestein was in the article I put up ealrier
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/jeremy-corbyn-labour-party-plp-left-wing-mandatory-reselection-a7613466.html
Dishonest, Keith - but I don't suppose you "win things" by telling the truth
Wonder how Briexters feel about the news that Vauxhall has just been purchased by the French - another major industrial gone walkabout!
No problem with the usual suspects, I shouldn't wonder
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Teribus
Date: 06 Mar 17 - 09:25 AM

Listening to those stating that all is well within the Labour Party - No problems with racism, misogyny and threatening behaviour reminds me of the 1970s and Callaghan's, "Crisis! What crisis?". Labour and the country were in the shit in the 1970s, just as Labour is in the shit today - the deniers are the same - totally deluded.

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Mar 17 - 09:58 AM

"Crisis! What crisis?
I know exactly what you mean - I feel the same when I ask for proof and none is forthcoming
Without specified and enumerated cases - there is no charge to answer
All we have are unfounded accusations
Maybe you can make a better job of providing this evidence than you did of providing examples of Keith's witnesses to his "implant" theory -but I won't hold my breath
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Mar 17 - 10:30 AM

Callaghan said nothing like that. Alt-truth again. Get busy, Teribus. We all love your steaming ripostes. Come here for stimulating debate, eh, Keith? Well next time you post, try it. That'll be a first! Rained Datsun cogs here this morning and our lane flooded. Windy too. We have sun with towering cumulonimbus capillatus anvils now. March hath cometh in like a lioneth. We had a very bracing stroll over the downs between Summerleaze and Crooklets beaches. Mrs Steve's making biscotti with cranberries and pistachios now and I'm listening to Mitsuko Uchida playing Mozart's Piano Concerto no 22 in E flat. My favourite pianist playing my favourite Mozart.

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Mar 17 - 11:52 AM

Glorious sunshine here in Airedale at the moment. If this carries on the Damart longjohns can be put away. Made just down the road in Bingley BTW. Nick Dow on at Swinton tonight and I am very tempted but an hours drive back near midnight and getting up at 6am would probably kill me off at the moment.

Sorry if you read this, Nick, but I will be with you in spirit and will get to see you sooner or later :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Mar 17 - 12:06 PM

"Glorious sunshine here in Airedale at the moment."
What are you doing to that dod - gerroff
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Mar 17 - 12:07 PM

Jim,
"I am not badmouthing Labour, "
Yes you are Keith

If that is not a lie, then find a quote!

the false accusations of Antisemitism and misogyny - it all came from you.

False or not, THEY ALL CAME FROM WITHIN LABOUR!
None came from me.
Again, if you are not lying, quote me!

As a right-winger, you have no interest in a putting right what has gone wrong in British politics

Untrue again! I am an ex-Labour voter.

Even your Mathew Turner quote (deliberately unlinked)

I said it was in today's Indie.
If that was not enough you could just google some text.
Nothing was "out of context. You lie again!

Here is the link which proves you a liar,
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/jeremy-corbyn-labour-party-plp-left-wing-mandatory-reselection-a7613466.html

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Mar 17 - 12:14 PM

Steve and Dave,
Come here for stimulating debate, eh, Keith?

Yes I do. You people seem to be afraid of it.

Instead of engaging, or choosing not too, you prefer to make yet more failed attempts to prove me a bad person based on years old posts, or witter on about flowers!

What are you afraid of?

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Mar 17 - 12:15 PM

Dave, I give you 100.
Make your day.

Subject: RE: BS: uk by-elections
From: Raggytash
Date: 06 Mar 17 - 12:17 PM

Please miss it wasn't me, that big boy said it.

You ****ing posted it on this site therefore you are responsible for it.

Gods teeth is really is like listening to a spoilt brat!!