Jeremy Corbyn

The SNP do not want to break up the UK - they want Scotland to become independent. And that can never happen if Westminster do not grant the Scottish electorate another referendum. In enabling the Sept 2014 referendum to happen it was actually Cameron that put the UK at risk.


Hahahahahahahahaha. :rofl:

Not one in the same? No?

:)
 
Hahahahahahahahaha. :rofl:

Not one in the same? No?

:)

Not quite - rest of UK remains together. Besides - breaking up the UK implies the SNP is principally anti UK when it is in fact more pro Scotland.

But anyway - I might be drawn to Corbyn but that way is i fear a road to nowhere for Labour and so I hope that Yvette Cooper gets the job if labour is to have any chance of taking advantage of the state we'll be in come the 2020 election.
 
Last edited:
No - rest of UK Remains together. Besides - breaking up the UK implies the SNP is principally anti UK when it is in fact more pro Scotland.

United Kingdom.
There's an ever so subtle clue in the second word in particular actually.

Think about it.




P.S. there really is, never has been, nor will be, anywhere called rest of UK.
 
Not quite - rest of UK remains together. Besides - breaking up the UK implies the SNP is principally anti UK when it is in fact more pro Scotland.

But anyway - I might be drawn to Corbyn but that way is i fear a road to nowhere for Labour and so I hope that Yvette Cooper gets the job if labour is to have any chance of taking advantage of the state we'll be in come the 2020 election.

You really are a broken record - time to stop , it really is time to stop before the hole you dig is too big to climb out
 
You really are a broken record - time to stop , it really is time to stop before the hole you dig is too big to climb out

That will be the hole that is me wanting Yvette cooper to become leader of the Labour Party is it - because I want an electable Labour Party for 2020 by which time I believe many and much will be in a sorry state as a result of Tory policy.
 
That will be the hole that is me wanting Yvette cooper to become leader of the Labour Party is it - because I want an electable Labour Party for 2020 by which time I believe many and much will be in a sorry state as a result of Tory policy.

No it's the one with you constantly dribbling about SNP and your various made up acronyms
 
Not quite - rest of UK remains together. Besides - breaking up the UK implies the SNP is principally anti UK when it is in fact more pro Scotland.

But anyway - I might be drawn to Corbyn but that way is i fear a road to nowhere for Labour and so I hope that Yvette Cooper gets the job if labour is to have any chance of taking advantage of the state we'll be in come the 2020 election.

ref your first point, if I wasn't a baldy .... I'd give you a hair to split. But 'specially for you and that frozen kingdom to the north...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0MK7qz13bU

That will be the hole that is me wanting Yvette cooper to become leader of the Labour Party is it - because I want an electable Labour Party for 2020 by which time I believe many and much will be in a sorry state as a result of Tory policy.

Is it a fluke or is there some sense hidden in there? She'll make a decent make weight and give Labour chance to bring in a credible leader... maybe David Miliband is waiting on a (political) gap between his brother and him returning.
 
Burnham now saying he would work with Corbyn, other way round surely.

Politicians eh, you could not make it up, Dugdale and Burnham now spinning round because they can now see the writing on the wall.
 

But its a newspaper article. Its opinion, and does contradict itself occasionally. Not saying you're wrong, especially as the DWP have admitted elsewhere they've fabricated some of the responses from clients. But, equally, should benefit claimants be able to afford luxuries, or even the latest iphone - why not a Freeview box and a basic (Tesco) mobile instead of Sky and an iphone?

The benefits system is a lifestyle choice for some people. Totally agree that we need a system that helps people, especially the most needy. But it is the most needy that are suffering in the clampdown to catch those that are screwing the system.
 
What odds are they giving for him to win a General Election?

With many disenfranchised voters signing up to vote Labour I would not put it past Corbyn, in an alliance with the other parties, to hold a majority in 2020.
I bet that will totally scunner the loony right wingers who thought it clever to join the Labour party and vote for him.:lol:
 
I voted for Jeremy, my hero. Nationalise the means of production. All he needs is a donkey jacket for remembrance sunday and we are all done.
 
But its a newspaper article. Its opinion, and does contradict itself occasionally. Not saying you're wrong, especially as the DWP have admitted elsewhere they've fabricated some of the responses from clients. But, equally, should benefit claimants be able to afford luxuries, or even the latest iphone - why not a Freeview box and a basic (Tesco) mobile instead of Sky and an iphone?

The benefits system is a lifestyle choice for some people. Totally agree that we need a system that helps people, especially the most needy. But it is the most needy that are suffering in the clampdown to catch those that are screwing the system.

It's a newspaper article reporting DWP guidelines on the impact that sanctions have on the health of claimants.
 
It's a newspaper article reporting DWP guidelines on the impact that sanctions have on the health of claimants.

It's a newspaper article from a left wing rag that is an inverted Daily Mail.

People get sanctioned due to them not attending interviews at job centres or for jobs, not making efforts to look for employment etc. There has to be a deterrent to people dodging their responsibilities in trying to get work.

That article has much subjective information and some of it supplied through trade unions who are going to be biased. It's not reporting on DWP guide lines but someone's interpretation of them.

You take the view that anyone unemployed is a deserving case which is just wrong. As mentioned previously; people that are genuine deserve support to get them back to work where ever possible. The workshy don't deserve the same treatment. I would imagine you would agree with that at least.
 
It's a newspaper article from a left wing rag that is an inverted Daily Mail.

People get sanctioned due to them not attending interviews at job centres or for jobs, not making efforts to look for employment etc. There has to be a deterrent to people dodging their responsibilities in trying to get work.

That article has much subjective information and some of it supplied through trade unions who are going to be biased. It's not reporting on DWP guide lines but someone's interpretation of them.

You take the view that anyone unemployed is a deserving case which is just wrong. As mentioned previously; people that are genuine deserve support to get them back is reporting DWP to work where ever possible. The workshy don't deserve the same treatment. I would imagine you would agree with that at least.

It is a report on the guidelines to DWP Decision Managers when considering applying sanctions. It tells them that it is a fact that sanctions have an adverse affect on the health of those sanctioned, and that they should consider whether sanctions on more vulnerable claimants could be even more harmful. You really do refuse to accept that some of this governments policies are actually harming individuals and families. The government seems to find this acceptable - as it seems you do as you are happy for that harm to be brought about if it gets the swindlers and work-shy, and punishes those who stray. That is not the action of a compassionate government.
 
Top