How Much is a Corbyn?

MS1950

Labour supporters claim leadership vote 'purge'

http://www.channel4.com/news/labour-supporters-purged-from-leadership-vote

ruggedtoast

MS1950 wrote: »

Labour supporters claim leadership vote 'purge'

http://www.channel4.com/news/labour-supporters-purged-from-leadership-vote

Mark Steele wrote about this a week ago:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/with-hundreds-of-thousands-of-new-supporters-labour-is-on-the-verge-of-something-big--what-a-complete-disaster-10454504.html

Then there’s John McTernan, the former adviser to Jim Murphy, who insists that Corbyn will be a catastrophe, and that the party should continue with the strategy he devised in Scotland, which took the party’s MPs from 41 to a much more manageable one, making it far easier to deal with admin.

These are the types you want to make a party successful, not crowds of young enthusiastic people eager to change society. Isn’t it obvious?

Labour are so upset at having a potential leader that people actually like, that I hear they are planning to bio-engineer a new super leader out of the other 3 candidates. With a Brown / Blair head stuck on the top like a chimera.

They will rename this new entity "The Real Jeremy Corbyn".

antrobus

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Mark Steele wrote about this a week ago:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/with-hundreds-of-thousands-of-new-supporters-labour-is-on-the-verge-of-something-big--what-a-complete-disaster-10454504.html

....

Mark Steel signed a letter supporting Caroline Lucas and thus fell foul of Chapter 2, Clause 1, Section 4(B) of the Labour Party Rule Book;

A member of the party who joins and/ or supports a political organisation other than an official Labour group or other unit of the party, or supports any candidate who stands against an official Labour candidate, or publicly declares their intent to stand against a Labour candidate, shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a party member, subject to the provisions of Chapter 6.I.2 below of the disciplinary rules.

Masomnia

He didn't apply to be a member though.

Shakethedisease

antrobus wrote: »

Mark Steel signed a letter supporting Caroline Lucas and thus fell foul of Chapter 2, Clause 1, Section 4(B) of the Labour Party Rule Book;

A member of the party who joins and/ or supports a political organisation other than an official Labour group or other unit of the party, or supports any candidate who stands against an official Labour candidate, or publicly declares their intent to stand against a Labour candidate, shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a party member, subject to the provisions of Chapter 6.I.2 below of the disciplinary rules.

What if you change your mind ? I thought Labour were supposed to be trying to 'win voters back' ? They leaked voters everywhere to lots of other parties at the last GE.

I don't think this 'purge' will do them any favours. Especially if Corbyn doesn't win and this is a big part of why. I see they aren't planning to publish official voting breakdowns either. Doesn't smell good.

antrobus

martinsurrey wrote: »

Trident missiles can actually carry up to 14 W88 warheads (which are 475Kt and used by the yanks), or 14 W76 warheads which are the uk/us 100kt heads but they are limited to 8 by treaties (which would not be a consideration if you were going to use one!).

and Hiroshima was a 15kt blast, Nagasaki was a 22kt blast, but still only 20% of the smallest nuke we field at the moment...

(your point is spot on, but just thought I would put some numbers out there.)

below is a report by Los Alamos on them
http://atomicarchive.com/Docs/pdfs/00313791.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UGM-133_Trident_II
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W88
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W76

You could be right. But I did try and fact check before I posted. So, for example, that link you have to that Wikipedia entry on UGM-133 Trident II does say that "Trident II missiles are carried by 14 US Ohio and 4 British Vanguard-class submarines, with 24 missiles on each Ohio class and 16 missiles on each Vanguard class."

Of course, since I'm looking things up on the interweb, so I may have misunderstood some of the technicalities. Not that I think it matters that much, whether you are talking about 14 x 8 x 100Kt or 16 x 14 x 475Kt, you can still wipe any country in the world off the map with just one sub. Which is a lot of bang for a mere £2.5bn a year, or thereabouts.

antrobus

Shakethedisease wrote: »

What if you change your mind ? I thought Labour were supposed to be trying to 'win voters back' ? They leaked voters everywhere to lots of other parties at the last GE.

How do you tell the difference between someone who has 'changed their mind' and an entryist, or someone who is just trying to take the p*ss? Do you get them to sit a polygraph?

Shakethedisease wrote: »

..I don't think this 'purge' will do them any favours. Especially if Corbyn doesn't win and this is a big part of why. I see they aren't planning to publish official voting breakdowns either. Doesn't smell good.

It's not a purge, it's an application of Chapter 2, Clause 1, Section 4(B) of the Labour Party Rule Book. The Labour Party have always been hot on that one, both party members and even MPs have been thrown out of the party for contravening that rule. (Think Militant, of nothing else.)

MS1950

antrobus wrote: »

Mark Steel signed a letter supporting Caroline Lucas and thus fell foul of Chapter 2, Clause 1, Section 4(B) of the Labour Party Rule Book;

A member of the party who joins and/ or supports a political organisation other than an official Labour group or other unit of the party, or supports any candidate who stands against an official Labour candidate, or publicly declares their intent to stand against a Labour candidate, shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a party member, subject to the provisions of Chapter 6.I.2 below of the disciplinary rules.

But most of those mentioned in the Channel 4 article I posted haven't breached those (or any other) rules:

http://www.channel4.com/news/labour-supporters-purged-from-leadership-vote

And many of the people posting on this twitter feed are already full members (and some have even been candidates) - but have been rejected:

https://twitter.com/gracecoles1?refsrc=email&s=11

There are many similar accounts all over social media at the moment.

antrobus

Masomnia wrote: »

He didn't apply to be a member though.

If they chuck people out of the party for supporting a rival candidate, of course they are not going to let them have a vote in the leadership election either.

antrobus

MS1950 wrote: »

But most of those mentioned in the Channel 4 article I posted haven't breached those (or any other) rules:
...

I was simply pointing out why Mark Steele was obviously denied a vote. I don't know about anybody else.

Perhaps Labour actually are validating applications against their canvass returns. For example;

Mr Bradshaw told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “In my own constituency, which is probably the best organised Labour party in the country, we have been through all of the new registered supporters and we have cross-referenced them with our voting records. Consistently, 10 per cent of the new registered supporters have always said they had been strongly against Labour, they had never voted Labour, they had always voted for another party."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11808308/Pro-Jeremy-Corbyn-unions-block-Harriet-Harmans-bid-to-weed-out-anti-Labour-infiltrators.html