[Tubby Isaacs]

Creasy leaves open chance of Labour leadership bid and calls for Palestine Action law change – UK politics live
The MP said police should be focusing on people who are members of the group, not those who ‘recklessly express support’ for it

Not the obvious politician to win back the Red Wall. And what does the second bit mean? The law says that expressing support is an offence. You either take them off the list, or you accept that people who set out to be arrested are going to be arrested.

[Tubby Isaacs]

How about Lisa Nandy, or is she now written off as irredeemably far right, or whatever?

[Youngian]

She means if you cause criminal damage then you should be charged for it.
Stella would be a devisive figure but is Starmer's dull managerial consensus rousing any group?

[Tubby Isaacs]

If it's on the list, you get arrested for expressing support. If she means take it off, that's fine, but does she say that?

[Youngian]

How about Lisa Nandy, or is she now written off as irredeemably far right, or whatever?

You don't want to upset dog owners. Many of whom won't be aware of the ghastly death toll the greyhound industry tots up but I'm sure Zack Polanski can find time to tour the suburbs of middle England to inform them.

[The Weeping Angel]

[Tubby Isaacs]

So, having pubished a manifesto and a bill, which they agreed with the unions and voted for in the Commons once, they didn't get suddenly think "You know what? The Tories and The Lib Dems in the House of Lords are right about this stuff? I'm amazed.

File with Bridget Philipson, Lisa Nandy and Lord Hermer being sacked.

[Tubby Isaacs]

How about Lisa Nandy, or is she now written off as irredeemably far right, or whatever?

You don't want to upset dog owners. Many of whom won't be aware of the ghastly death toll the greyhound industry tots up but I'm sure Zack Polanski can find time to tour the suburbs of middle England to inform them.

That's the best use of Zack's time I've heard so far. I mean that. And it may be more what some people who voted Green last time think he should be doing rather than what he will be doing.

[Youngian]

Currently in Clacton
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... PKdtbAQW-A

[The Weeping Angel]

So, having pubished a manifesto and a bill, which they agreed with the unions and voted for in the Commons once, they didn't get suddenly think "You know what? The Tories and The Lib Dems in the House of Lords are right about this stuff? I'm amazed.

File with Bridget Philipson, Lisa Nandy and Lord Hermer being sacked.

I've not noticed people calling the Lib Dems out for that.

[Tubby Isaacs]

The Lib Dems who are apparently going to join with the Greens and lead a more leftwing government.

I can't read Sam Freedman's Substack, but apparently it's a "Blue Labour" reshuffle. What does that actually mean? Reducing net immigration was in the manifesto, they were going to open up safe asylum routes from France. Is borrowing for investment "Blue Labour"? Is "DEI" going to be banned? Weren't they supposed to have got Lord Hermer and Ed Miliband sacked?

Just like "neoliberal", Blue Labour looks like becoming short hand for "why can't they do everything I want now".

[Tubby Isaacs]

I've looked again at this feeble document. Blue Labour- What Is To Be Done?

https://www.bluelabour.org/home/what-is-to-be-done

My view is that they're The Man In The Pub, but apart from the obnoxious rubbish about law and immigration, there's lots that left critics of Starmer would agree with. And some of the striking bits are clearly not happening- Reeves isn't going to say "Yeah, fuck the OBR!" Despite what people say about Shabana Mahmood, she's not going to stick it to do what they want. The Police aren't going to be repurposed as Robocop.

So what are you left with, in terms of what the Government is doing? Not all that much that you can't explain by public opinion in the "heartlands". Nonody neeeded Maurice Glasman to tell them that asylum hotels aren't very popular.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Several senior female Labour MPs drop out of party deputy leader contention
Compressed timetable for nominations and worries about potentially toxic atmosphere narrows field to replace Rayner


A series of senior female Labour MPs have dropped out of contention to replace Angela Rayner as the party’s deputy leader, as a compressed timetable for nominations and worries about a potentially toxic atmosphere narrowed the field.

Phillips and Nandy aren't runnig. Bridget Philipson probably is, and Emily Thornberry< Alison McGovern and Stella Creasey might. Not sure how many women candidates who think they can get 80 nominations you'd epect to run, toxic atmosphere or not? I certainly recognize the misogyny of the media, but let's be clear that's what we're talking about.

One Downing Street insider said Morgan McSweeney, Starmer’s influential chief of staff, hoped to “flood the zone” with contenders so that very few candidates ended up making it over the 80 threshold, limiting the choice presented to party members.

Somebody might have said this (presumably because they don't like McSweeney) but it's absolute bollocks. Even allowing for the view that McSweeney is an evil genius, how exactly does he get a load of people to impede each other by running when they shouldn't? Anyway, the hope that they don't end up dicking about with a load of candidates knocking bells out of each other isn't something confined to McSweeney, you might think.

[The Weeping Angel]

The Lib Dems who are apparently going to join with the Greens and lead a more leftwing government.

I can't read Sam Freedman's Substack, but apparently it's a "Blue Labour" reshuffle. What does that actually mean? Reducing net immigration was in the manifesto, they were going to open up safe asylum routes from France. Is borrowing for investment "Blue Labour"? Is "DEI" going to be banned? Weren't they supposed to have got Lord Hermer and Ed Miliband sacked?

Just like "neoliberal", Blue Labour looks like becoming short hand for "why can't they do everything I want now".

I'm looking through it now. I like Sam Freedman, and I've subscribed to his Substack and I've looked through it and the closest claim about a blue Labour reshuffle is this.

Taken together all of this represents a clear doubling down of the government’s existing strategy. Go harder on boats. Go back to welfare reform. Push again on growth. It’s a gamble. It is very unusual to make so many changes to a cabinet this early on and an open admission that they got it wrong the first time. The majority of departments are now led by a new minister. By contrast Tony Blair had more or less the same top team throughout his first term, except for Health and Defence. David Cameron had the same Chancellor, Home Secretary, and Foreign Secretary for his first four years, and made limited changes to other key jobs.

If going again with the same strategy and a new team doesn’t work it’s hard to see what the excuse is going to be for further failure. And it’s a political strategy that will continue to alienate the soft left of the party (let alone the actual left). As such it heightens the risk to Starmer if polling continues to be dire and elections next year are as catastrophic as they currently look like being. Rayner may have been the most likely alternative leader, but they had developed a good relationship. Now others may look to take opportunities.

[Tubby Isaacs]

I saw that bit. The "no excuse" bit is a load of nonsense- like if things had gone to shit with a new team, people would have said it was OK?

What does "go harder on boats" mean? The policy's been clear for ages.