Is Ed Miliband living on borrowed time?

First topic message reminder :

Hi stu

Heaven Help the UK if it does happen I just hope none of those that voted Ukip better not come crying to me when they find out that Ukip are more far right than the Tories, as I will have NO sympathy for them in fact my reply will be "Hell Slap it into You" plus the rest of us will have to pay for your STUPIDY.

Know how to describe the liberal left now Penderyn,

It's interesting that Mr Ware (he of Rochester flag waving van driving tweet fame) objected to his registration number and house number being publicised, but was then happy to take (presumably) some coin from the Sun (he's also a Tory voter) to appear in public.

I thnk what he wants GW is to be able to take the right wing 30 pieces of silver, but for it not to know to the wider public I just hope that HMRC ask him to pay tax on his 30 pieces of silver.

I'm willing to bet he's everything The Sun accused Thornberry of accusing him, as the occupant, to be.. if you get me.

Let us hope his wife has picked the colours for number 10.

Now we all knoiw why EWd Miliband has kept his cards close to his chest after last Mondays "DODGY DOSSIER" from the Tories based on assumption & Tory LIES about what the Labour party what they would do if they got into gov't in May 2015.

But within an hour the dossier was proved to be a tissue of blatant Osborne & Camerons LIES, so I hope you all underrstand now why Ed did not come out with his plans for gov't any earlier.

Redflag wrote:Now we all knoiw why EWd Miliband has kept his cards close to his chest after last Mondays "DODGY DOSSIER" from the Tories......

I hope you all underrstand now why Ed did not come out with his plans for gov't any earlier.

I hope that too. Not sure what the fair-weather friends will say.

#EM4PM - that's what I say.

I will second & third thart thought boatlady, if the UK public has any sense at all they will vote for Ed Miliband for PM to make sure they get a fair just and honest gov't.

Most sensible people will Redflag.

Praise indeed from an unexpected quarter – Peter Oborne of ‘The Spectator’.

Ed Miliband is the most accomplished opposition leader since the war

Oborne explains that while he is a Conservative journalist, his job is to tell the truth and put political prejudices to one side, which leads him to conclude that Ed Miliband is a man of incredible accomplishment and bravery, whose efficacy is demonstrated by the ferocity of the press backlash against him: “I have followed Mr Miliband with growing admiration as Labour leader. I think he has been the greatest leader of the opposition since something like Attlee, I mean certainly since World War Two, in terms of sheer achievement. The country is screaming out for a conviction politician and we’ve got one in Ed Miliband.”

Oborne adds that he is uncomfortable with the extent that big business is funding the Tories, adding: “If you want a hedge fund manager-run Britain, vote Conservative”.

As you can imagine, this hasn’t gone down too well with those die-hard Tories who have been driven to post comments under the article:-
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/02/peter-oborne-ed-miliband-is-the-greatest-opposition-leader-since-the-war/

It seems that every time the supposedly 'weak' Ed Miliband takes on vested interests, he wins. Now Lord Fink has admitted that he has used tax avoidance.

We have to resist the temptation to sing, "Things can only get better."

sing it anyway OW and we will all join in.

That is one song stuart we will be able to sing loud and proud on the 8th May 2015.

Or how about this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtKADQnjQmc

with some apologies for the dated fashion

no apologies needed boatlady.

With the current abundance of advice being heaped upon Ed Miliband from the Tory Party, how can he possibly lose?

I know I'm going to regret posting this - but here goes.
I'm reading lots of comments on Ed Miliband that refer to him as sneaky, deceitful, traitorous etc - and I don't get it at all.

I know he ran against his brother in the election for the Labour leadership but I'm not aware of any skulduggery involved in that, and I haven't heard any other factual reports of him telling lies or engaging with any dirty tricks.

Is this just a smear campaign or is there evidence out there that Ed is not to be trusted?

Your spot on boatlady it is just a smear campaign against Ed Miliband, as for entering the leadership contest along his brother & others does that mean because I have bought a lottery ticket you can not because you might win and I will not.

boatlady wrote:-
I know he ran against his brother in the election for the Labour leadership but I'm not aware of any skulduggery involved in that

On ‘The Daily Politics’ last Wednesday, that Murdoch stooge Andrew Neil used the “knifed his brother in the back” phrase, which should be challenged every time we hear it. David and Ed Miliband were both members of the last Labour government. You can argue that David held a more senior position (foreign secretary) or that he was older, but primogeniture counts for nothing in the Labour Party; it isn’t run like a hereditary monarchy and David had no automatic right to succeed Gordon Brown. David is very much a Blairite, Ed is slightly more left-wing, so members of Labour’s electoral college (MPs and MEPs, party members and members of affiliated unions) were given a clear choice (and three other candidates to choose from – Abbott, Balls and Burnham).

The quickest way I counter this smear (and it fits into a tweet) is by saying that two brothers went for promotion and one of them got the job. That hardly constitutes fratricide. At this point in any exchange with a Tory, the goalposts will probably be moved and it will be alleged that Ed was chosen by trade union leaders. That’s a lie, of course; thousands of individual members of unions affiliated to Labour cast their votes by post. The union block vote was abolished in 1993.

Had David been chosen as leader, you can be sure that he would have been subjected to a similar smear campaign as Ed has had to endure from the Tories and their media poodles. I seem to recall that they had already lined up a photo of him carrying a banana.

The right-wing smearathon will run from now until early May, becoming increasingly shrill as the date of the general election approaches. Currently the Daily Wail describes the Miliband household as having the wrong sort of kitchen.

YCMIU © a very old "friend" 2010

So, I haven't missed anything important - he really might well be the decent bloke I and many others believe him to be.

Just having a bit of trouble getting my head round the really vicious comments I'm reading

I think Ed Miliband knew what was coming and was ready for it boatlady, but when he is our PM he will prove what a bunch of LIARS   the Tories and the right wing press really are so maybe in the future people will not believe a word they say.

That was brilliant - made me laugh out loud.

Sorted out the men from the boys, I felt

bobby wrote:It was nice to see the uncomfortable look on Osborn's face when he realized he had been hoodwinked.

Your spot on Bobby imagine a sneaky Tory been hoodwinked by a Labour Chancellor it proves that Labour are starting to get there act together it just remain for Ed Miliband to hoodwink Davy boy into doing the TV head to head debates.

Bloody hell, the latest from Rachel Reeves, in the Guardian:

"If she became secretary of state for work and pensions, Reeves said she would immediately issue guidance to Jobcentre staff making it clear that staff would not be rewarded for the numbers of sanctions they distribute."

The paucity of ambition beggars belief. This is the best this useless cow can offer?

Politicians of whatever hue are forced to speak in "soundbites" because idle reporters won't bother themselves with reasoned argument.

By definition, it would seem to me that a "Job Centre" whose primary activity results in punishing the unemployed for not having a job has failed us completely.

So it's the Guardian's fault? Rachel Reeves doesn't have the power to offer better solutions because of journalists? That makes no sense.

Well it was your claim so if you don't know how to answer it perhaps you ought to think more before posting.

ghost whistler. You seem to have a ‘thing’ about Rachel Reeves. That’s your prerogative, or maybe problem, but please don’t use misogynistic language such as ‘cow’ when referring to her or anyone else on this forum. Thanks.

Surely it’s a good thing that Jobcentre staff will no longer be rewarding people for sanctioning claimants? I can’t see your objection. If that was the only policy which Rachel Reeves has for changing the sociopathic regime of Iain Duncan Smith at the DWP, then maybe you would have a point, but I suspect that it isn’t. We’ve discussed elsewhere until we’re blue in the face what Ms Reeves did or didn’t say about the benefits bill, and unless you can come up with some fresh evidence I don’t see the point of revisiting that.

This thread is supposed to be about Ed Miliband. Apparently he’s got one and a half kitchens, which is probably more acceptable to most people than being the Tory Party chairman with three names and a capacity to tell lies only matched by his boss.

I have a 'thing' because social security is the most important issue to me and she is the labour prospect for that portfolio.

Oh yes it's a good thing alright.

But you massively miss the point. It's going nowhere near far enough.

Even Jack monroe is saying she's had enough of your chums.

“The big savings to be had are by tackling the root causes of the benefits bill,” she said. “If every young person who can work is working and if people are paid a wage that they can afford to live on, so they don’t have to draw down on housing benefit and tax credit, then that’s going to save a lot more money than all the talk in the world about shirkers and scroungers.”

Little quote there from the actual interview - seems reasonable to me - of course it's not the second coming or the beginning of heaven on earth - but then I'm sort of an adult and don't necessarily need that

Though another sort of adult might prefer everything to be IN CAPITAL LETTERS, with salient points underlined and the whole in purple ink for emphasis.

bobby wrote:Red, Ed Miliband needs to prove the lies in order to become our next PM. Ed Balls did a good job on the right wing Tory show "The Andrew Marr Show". He wouldn't allow himself to be silenced by Marr and simply kept talking until his point was made, also he outwitted Gideon Osborne by getting him to shake his hand in agreement to a TV debate between the Chancellor v Shadow Chancellor. It was nice to see the uncomfortable look on Osborn's face when he realized he had been hoodwinked.

Bobby it will be even nicer to see him squirm at the lecturn when he cannot answer the questions or defend his policies since 2010, the first 3 years he flatlined the Economy making things worse rather than better but did not admit it I think Ed Balls will make mincemeat of him in the debate because there is nothing he can say to defend his policies not unless he does the usual LIE or blame the Labour party.

boatlady wrote:“The big savings to be had are by tackling the root causes of the benefits bill,” she said. “If every young person who can work is working and if people are paid a wage that they can afford to live on, so they don’t have to draw down on housing benefit and tax credit, then that’s going to save a lot more money than all the talk in the world about shirkers and scroungers.”

Little quote there from the actual interview - seems reasonable to me - of course it's not the second coming or the beginning of heaven on earth - but then I'm sort of an adult and don't necessarily need that

The Labour party have also said if everyone is in a full time job with decent wages there will be no need for them to claim working tax credits or housing benefit hence cutting the benefits bill by so much, plus there will be more money going into the treasury in tax from those people on the living wage something the Tories do not want to do, as they want to keep us under the thumb and allow there donors to become fatter & richer.

boatlady wrote:....it's not the second coming or the beginning of heaven on earth - but then I'm sort of an adult and don't necessarily need that

Well noone asked for a second coming so that's a silly straw man.

A pro capitalist pro corporate pro banksterism pro big business as usual party such as Labour aren't going to be in any position to tackle the root causes of why people claim benefits. They don't have a policy comparable to the Basic Income idea which would go a long way to alleviating the need for benefits and much of the benefit system. Not only that but nowhere is she promising to remove sanctions, axe the Work Programme and shut down the mess that is Universal Credit which, as i have expleined, she could have scotched long ago.

I have no faith in Labour at all when, again as I have explained, they have sided with the Tories. Noone here seems to care about the 130 million quid stolen via sancions from claimants wrongly penalised for refusing to participate in IDS's bungled workfare proposal. In fact I have yet to hear Labour pledge to ban workfare altogether, along wihe zero hour contracts.

She has no answers. At all.

OK - don't vote Labour then.

boatlady wrote:OK - don't vote Labour then.

Why do you support benefit sanctions?

ghost whistler. Now you’re just trolling and way off the topic of the thread. Knowing that boatlady has done a lot of work in the voluntary sector, I am 100% certain she doesn’t support benefit sanctions, and you’re just making mischief to suggest that she does. Most of us here would probably like Labour to be more left-wing, but we also know that the party has to take at least 10 million voters with it. Maybe you’re too young to remember what happened in 1983.

Clearly you don’t like social democracy, and this thread would be the appropriate place for you to express your opinions on it:-
https://cuttingedge2.forumotion.co.uk/t431-is-social-democracy-the-best-system-of-government-or-does-it-just-make-capitalism-appear-acceptable