UKH

So what's your take on our shadow deputy leader then?

Mine, for what it's worth, is that I'm really glad for her no-nonsense labour heartland views on the front bench, but I don't feel she has the skills for the top job, at least not yet.

To give some context, I'm a disenfranchised left-wing libdem who often votes for the blues when there seems to be no other option, however I'm currently looking for absolutely *any* other possibility with a ghost of a chance, and so am considering my options!

The reason for the top job comment is that she currently seems to be a bit of a rebel, and the plain-speaking doesn't lend itself to being seen as a top player, which is presumably why RLB initially beat her to the job.

Love her.  She's a breath of fresh air.

What on earth does that mean?  Do you have any views of your own, or is it just a sort of a game where you vote for the one you think is going to win?  If you "often vote for the blues" you're not a left-wing libdem, you're a tory aren't you?  How is there "no other option"?  Do you live in a constituency where it's only the Tories, the BNP and the Raving Loony Party that stand?  (With a very heavy heart, the Tory would be my second choice in that scenario.)

Here's a profile of her from back in the summer.  It's a good read.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jun/20/angela-rayner-boris-johnso...

I vote for anyone offering "decency, fairness, opportunity, compassion and security", along with some likelihood that it could be delivered. I assume by security he means a life that can be lived with respect, in safety and without want. I have a British passport, but at the moment, quite frankly, I'm not sure if I want to keep it

Loving the breath of fresh air. The Guardian article (they have a small favour to ask) was one of the things I read which prompted me to ask UKC what they thought of her.

Personally I find a bit of plain speaking makes a refreshing change from all the lying.  

I'm sure they've always done it (lying), but it was elevated to an artform during Tony Blair's time as PM with all the spin doctoring.

I just wish politicians were able to admit to mistakes, "we got that wrong but we can see what mistakes we made so we'll do better next time" is perfectly acceptable to me. A bit of honesty and not treating the population as idiots would be nice for a change.

The problem is that a large portion of the population are idiots.

Not saying it's acceptable "parliamentary language" but the guy in question was mid-flow justifying financially punishing GM during a national health crisis for having a popular Labour Mayor and shortly afterwards voted for kids to go hungry, so maybe she had a point.

I think calling someone like that scum is a bit of an understatement.

More plain speaking and calling out racist and elitist policies should become the norm for the opposition.

Imagine at PMQ if BoJo was asked why he wants to leave the poorest to starve, yet provides financial support so the elite can carry on hunting.

50%* of the population have below average intelligence.

A bigger problem is that many people have replaced their critical thinking abilities with Twitter and the Daily Mail**.

* almost exactly.

** other shameless lying mouthpieces for very rich tax dodgers are available.

She’s out of control.  Keir needs to Rayner in.

On a serious note: she’s played right into the hands of many people who think labour are full of rude people when like throwing insults, a value that many Tory voters fee strong about. Stupid people of her, but doubt it will swing an election 

Very good, and I agree. Trouble is, some (not all) Tories ARE scum. They lack compassion, humanity, empathy, imagination and any real experience of 'how the other half live.'  (Take a bow, IDS.) 'Vermin' would be another good word, and it rings a bell for some reason...

Just a mathematical digression: if you had ‘below average’, ‘average’ and ‘above average’, then 33% of the population are below average?

No, because it is a spectrum rather than being discrete bands.  There is probably a bell curve distribution so many will be slightly above or below but very few people will be exactly average.

So you can get bell ends at both extremes of the curve?

I've got an above average number of legs.

I suspect it’s not a normal distribution and it’s seriously skewed to the left. 

That would depend on what you include in your sample. If you include horses, you're below average.

It was a mistake but not a stupid one.  The guy was talking about punishing her constituents (and his own!) for failing to tug their forelocks and say "Yes Boris.  Thank you very much Boris." and meekly accept whatever they were offered.

She didn't intend it, it was a momentary loss of control, like swearing when someone steps on your toe.  Price you pay for having someone in her position who genuinely cares passionately instead of someone who just regards it all as some sort of a game.

In reply to freeflyer:

Your thread appears to have been sanitized and generally tidied up for some reason, leaving your comment hanging in mid air. Personally I think some posts should simply be left as a lasting monument to the prejudice and intolerance of the author.

"I'm a disenfranchised left-wing libdem who often votes for the blues"

Jesus wept.

E

I'm baffled by this thread. Where does the title "scum" come from? What have I missed?

Christ on a bike - I think that's the problem right there pal, not Angela Rayner. May I suggest it is you that is intellectually challenged rather than her?

She called him scum and then tried to deflect by accusing him of insulting her before being forced into an apology hours later. Classy.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54638267

She should do a Priti Patel "I'm sorry being called scum offendeds you "

Fun fact - Nye Bevan was in Manchester when he made that "lower than vermin" speech.

Here are a couple of other lines from that speech:

"They condemned millions of first-class people to semi-starvation. Now the Tories are pouring out money in propaganda of all sorts and are hoping by this organised sustained mass suggestion to eradicate from our minds all memory of what we went through."

"“In 1945 and 1946, we were attacked on our housing policy by every spiv in the country – for what is Toryism, except organized spivery? They wanted to let the spivs loose.”

It's almost spooky.  Seven grand a day for a consultant who doesn't know the difference between a column and a row in Microsoft Excel?  Wow, have they ever "let the spivs loose" lately!

Exactly, like this

youtube.com/watch?v=EzJjw6jx4fs&

but then 'left-wing Lib Dems' would rather enable the well spoken, selfish, incompetent Tories who swear is posher accents, than actually join with people who share their politics, but are a bit 'common'.

I think this is the main reason the Tories have dominated politics for so long (new Labour were a blip), despite only having minority support. Snobbery, basically.

If I may say so, you're cooking on gas today...

Just done a quick ask with 4 left leaning colleagues:  we all think it was stupid but not a mistake.  She intended it alright.

BTW, I think she's a great MP and agree with all the positive comments about her.  I'm struggling to control my anger with the Tory party at the moment, totally fuming at them..  They did eff all to control the virus in the first place, and their policies have only increased the north south divide and made the north poorer (the key factor behind high Covid cases/death).  

Interesting, think you might be onto something there.

Protest votes.  Many of them must regret it now.

No, but the speed with which they've rubbed the electorate's nose in their decision is something to behold.

It seemed blindingly obvious what was going to happen. If it is a protest vote I guess anyone that voted for them can't complain about what is happening, that is the consequence of the protest. 

Tories gonna torrie

Just as well then we, the overwhelmingly Labour-supporting majority here on UKC, are the 'good guys' and able to dismiss a vast swathe of the population (the other) as vermin or scum, isn't it? 

I mean, thankfully this side of the political spectrum is intrinsically good and wholesome, unlike 'them', and can therefore be trusted with the sorts of sweeping generalisations and de-humanisations that we can't bear Tories making.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/04/rwanda-shows-how-hateful-...

Whatever you think of Tories, it is highly likely they are Tories and vindicated in their opposition to Labour precisely because of the language and attitude you employ here. But its ok, because we're safe in the knowledge that they are, and always will be, the bad guys in the equation.

Have you ever thought about looking at the policies?

Whatever. I'd still rather put a square meal in the mouth of a hungry kid than adopt your kind of thinly-disguised apology for the pernicious policy intent of the scum that are charged with (by their own account) the task of finding closure and letting the healing begin.

Piss-ups and breweries spring so readily to mind

I apologise - I was referring to Tory Politicians rather than the general electorate.

If you were referring to either you would have been correct, you did say some (not all), RentonCooke seems to have missed that bit and is getting defensive, worried they fall on the wrong side of it maybe.

Just as well you are incapable of reading what someone writes isnt it?  Someone writes "some (not all)" and you immediately decide that applies to "vast swathe" whilst, entertainingly, deciding unilaterally what "Labour-supporting majority" thinks.

A superb case of projection and inability to handle anything other than the broadest categorisation.

"I vote for anyone offering "decency, fairness, opportunity, compassion and security"

Sorry but that means not voting Tory for the last 10 years!!

I don't like that kind of language used in politics, it's too personal and suggests that someone has an irredeemable character defect rather than a different way of looking at the world which can be changed through debate.

At the same time I can understand her saying that in the heat of the moment and in response to the odious things he said.

Eh?

How can you be a disenfranchised LibDem, how can there be no option but to not vote for the party you would like to support but instead for the one least like it? It's not a game of guess the winner. The LibDems stand candidates absolutely bloody everywhere, whether it makes sense to do so or not!

If you usually vote Conservative you're a Conservative voter, not LibDem. If you do so genuinely holding left leaning liberal views you're presumably also an idiot. Frankly conservatives voting for Conservatives right now are no less idiotic.

jk

That's very kind of you, thank you.  I think it's more to do with a mental-health wobble though tbh, really feeling the cabin fever while spending far too much time on here again just now.  I hope to be getting out more and dropping out of the 'top 40' again after the next one.

We're looking at the same evidence and your hypothesis is just as valid as mine of course, but I really can't see that myself.

Let's stick to present-day politics.

In my view, the Tory party no longer exists, since it has become UKIP, a single issue party that will do other stuff in order to stay in power. 

The Labour party was in danger of no longer existing, however has miraculously risen again after the debacle of the last election, and is staging a slow but encouraging come-back as a more centre party than previously. The other parties (including the Lib Dems but excluding the SNP who are not relevant to me) represent protest votes of various sorts, and so are less attractive as far as I'm concerned.

Since I'm a federalist (read, extreme remainer) who believes in fiscal prudence in the context of values admirably presented by Starmer, there isn't really anywhere for me to go, other than emigrating to somewhere more rational.

I hope that's a bit clearer than my previous post.

Honestly, no. I'm still completely baffled but if it makes sense to you I suppose the failure is my end. 

Jk

And here's another example of what a fine woman she is.

https://metro.co.uk/2015/11/09/a-labour-mp-was-very-angry-she-couldnt-get-a...

I mean why shouldn't an MP abuse their privelidged position by writing an intimidating 'don't you know who I am' letter on Commons headed notepaper to settle a purely personal matter?

And what's wrong with a 'down to earth' northern lass spending £195 on a ridiculous pair of novelty heels for a night out on the lash in Manchester? Surely it only proves how in touch with her constituents she is.

You've never heard the expression "we wear our wealth" then?  

If a woman with a job wants to spend money on shoes that's up to her. 

If that's the worst you can find, basically a bit of a storm in a teacup over shoes, then well done.  

We've a prime minister who is a second generation wife beater with 7 kids to various women and can't keep it in his pants long enough to keep any of his 3 marriages going.  

But he is dead posh so that's ok.  

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4023082/amp/Nicky-Morgan-attacked-...

Of course, it usually applies to pirates and gypsies doesn't it.

And if a man with a job wants to drink out of a £200 mug then that's up to him I presume?

Actually it's the bit about abusing your privelidged position that's salient.

So that gives any Labour MP carte blanche to do as they like?

BTW, Boris wasn't PM when she did this so she can't really use him as an excuse.

And she's dead common so bringing the commons into disrepute with 'unparliamentary' language is just fine.

Clearly parliament couldn't function if everyone just hurled foul mouthed abuse at each other but as long as it's only your team who does it then it's ok I suppose.

Boris spends that much on a tie.  Still looks scruffy.  

Its not about teams.  I have respect for Major for example.  Blair was a liar.    

You call it “foul mouthed abuse” I call it calling a spade a spade.  

Scum is very accurate for the current lot.  They’ve floated to the top but they aren’t the cream.  

You really are missing the point aren't you. If she wants to dress like a slapper on a hen night then that's up to her, but abusing her position as an MP to write intimidating letters to resolve her own personal disputes doesn't exactly speak volumes for her integrity.

Still I'm sure you can find another example of some tory scum doing something or other completely unconnected which gives her a free pass to do whatever she likes.

I’m not saying she has a free pass.  It was the wrong thing to do and she got a bollocking for it.  I’m saying you were being judgy about the shoes and the money.  I’m also saying it was 5 years ago and that’s all you can find?  

You sound quite judgy about gypsies too.  

Major only seems respectable in comparison to the current shower. Were his (non)actions re Srebrenica and Milosevic worthy of respect?

Lots of people on UKC are judgy about gypsies.

I've just been out for a drink with a couple of gypsy mates and even they are judgy about gypsies.

Fair point.  

I agree some Tories are scum, so are some Labour party members. Just like everyone in society. There are plenty of Tories who join to do good, you may disagree with the way they want to achieve the goal, but actions should be judged by intention and outcome. Suggesting people are intrinsically good, or evil because they support a particular political party negates the fact that everyone has free will and consciousness developed from their unique lived experience. 

Your point is valid when applied to the population as a whole, but the Tory party aparatus seems to favour the ruthless and those without empathy.  There seem to be a larger proportion of such types in the set of Tory M.P.s than the other parliamentary parties, and an even higher proportion than historically after Johnson kicked out several of the more principled ones (and replaced them with sycophants) over their stand against no-deal brexit.

Thanks for the Nye Bevan reminders yesterday. The same tory politicians opposed the formation of the NHS of course.

Some tory politicians do display a heart sometimes but sadly the majority just obey the whip and by doing nothing on shameful matters deserve to be called names (as any politician of any party would) .

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54642788

Such shameful votes are coming thick and fast

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-food-standards-mp-vot...

The people who vote for a party headed by Alexander Boris F*ckbusiness  Picaninnies-with-Watermelonsmiles de Pfeffel Johnson don't like rude people?

Have you ever tried looking at the policies? 

On a slightly more sordid personal level, there is also the small matter of the libel damages paid to Major (in the '80s) and to Edwina Currie (in the '90s) when they each sued publications that had accused them of marital infidelity.  Of course we now know that while John Major was pushing his "Back to Basics" family-values campaign, he was also having an extra-marital affair with Edwina Currie.

Still seems like a paragon of virtue compared to the current shower though.  In the same sort of way that Trump is currently making George W Bush look like an um..  very stable genius.

Sadly, many of them would view that language as fair game, but would be appalled at a woman using the word scum in parliament. Double standards I know. Did you see question time last night : one of the studio audience said ‘Johnson has done a marvellous job of sorting Covid’. She’s the type who would disapprove of the word scum. 

I didn’t realise until this morning that it was Chris “Man of Letters” Clarkson that she called scum. My MP, you may not be surprised to hear than I did not vote for him.

The man is a perfect example of the modern Tory, loyal to power not principle. Not a care for his constituents, but working very hard on a political career based on extreme sycophancy.

To be honest, I would reprimand Angela Rainer, for use of such mild language.

It may not have been acceptable parliamentary language but it is hardly massively offensive. You can't call an opposition MP a liar but you can say that they are economical with the truth and everyone knows what is meant. 

This is exactly why many people hate Blair, and the damage he did, not just to the Labour party but to politics as a whole.

I am 100% into making all MPs accountable for their behaviour in the House and in office. Across the board and in proportion to the behaviour in question.

Any Tories still with me?

Society (for) cutting up men 

Just had a lovely listen to Dennis Skinners most memorable moments. (Sorry about the Sun) That is a man that says it straight

youtube.com/watch?v=bLxWrp-rEeg&

Mean, Median or Mode?

😉

Dennis was kicked out of the house quite a few times but I suspect never unless he wanted to be, then his point would get more coverage. He knew parliamentary procedure inside out.

Selaine Saxby, Conservative MP for North Devon here, in a subsequently deleted Facebook post written in response to criticism of the government and praise for those stepping up to feed hungry children over half-term:

"I am delighted our local businesses have bounced back so much after lockdown they are able to give away food for free, and very much hope they will not be seeking any further government support."

Scum.

https://westcountrybylines.co.uk/tin-eared-tone-deaf-selaine-saxby-gets-it-...

....and another scummy decision perfectly timed for maximum idiocy.

"Headteachers across England received emails from the Department for Education on the eve of half-term informing them that their allocations of laptops for disadvantaged pupils had been slashed by around 80%.

The blow comes just two days after the government used its Covid-19 emergency powers to impose a new legal duty on schools to provide a remote education to any pupil unable to attend lessons because of the pandemic."

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/oct/24/englands-schools-to-recei...

One poster makes the rather strange admission that he's a "left wing lib-dem" who, feeling disenfranchised, often votes Tory and suddenly, as if it logically follows, we have this generalisation to all left wing lib-dems.

It isn't logical, and it isn't true. Most left wing lib-dems will have a reason for not being Labour supporters - labour's tendency to centralise, funding by union vested interests, opposition to fair votes, and vacillation on Brexit for four. It's just possible that some would vote blue rather than red, especially when comparing the strengths of individual local candidates, but I very much doubt it happens often.

Martin

You may post on my behalf

Labour is very good at the northern heartland, but hasn't really understood how to appeal to anyone outside the cities in the south. Given that no central party has thrived in the last hundred years, there must surely be an opportunity, especially in the context of the upwelling of community feeling caused by the pandemic, the guaranteed fiasco of the Brexit process, and the utter failure that is Tory social messaging.

The school lunch debate is just unbelievable, although predictable. In political terms of the sort obvious to JRM for example, should government be responsible or should communities rally round. Seemingly it's beyond the wit of any of them to understand the massive social messaging own goal they have so effortlessly achieved.

Also I am wondering if the Civil Service is putting the knife into central office with the laptops email, in retaliation for the attacks on them.

I think it's about time for a change of strategic adviser...

No more than some Labour folk are 'scum'.  All depends on your point of view.

Can you provide an example, to help balance the debate?

Eric Joyce

I doubt anyone would argue with that, regardless of their point of view. Not in the category by virtue of political persuasion or policy therefore not really a good example.

Sorry, he just sprung to mind.

No need to apologise. But thanks all the same.

I’m genuinely fascinated why the term gets attached to the Tories. They seem either unconcerned, or unable, in their inability to sell their policies as being socially compassionate.  And before anyone starts attacking me, I’m not defending them.

I’m always surprised that the Conservatives don’t usually throw a load of money at the NHS thus cutting off one of Labour’s favourite avenues of attack.

Having said that they keep winning elections so maybe there’s some advantage to being ‘the nasty party’.

They are the party of low taxes (which they provide by cutting things like this).  People vote for that in droves.

Yes but low taxes and more money for the NHS would make a Labour government even less likely than it usually is.