Corbyn's aim is to put off for as long as he can the time when he has to state his own personal preference. He is still basically a protest politician, and is uncomfortable in any other role. Mrs May is the opposite, a purely pragmatic approach, but lacking any vision or core beliefs.
I think Corbyns' aim is pretty much the same as Boris Johnson - he wants to be PM. I remember him after the last election sounding off that Labour was ready to form a government, when it was laughably obvious they had no majority whatsoever to do so. Since then as you say, he has done a sterling job sniping from the bushes of opposition, but he hasn't exactly set himself up as Prime Minister material. He also has this annoying trait many leavers have that he could negotiate a better Brexit than Teresa May. Better how exactly? It's a negotiation, you offer one thing and they offer another, and you both end up with less than you want. In this case the UK is arguing from a position of weakness - we've told them we want to go, so they will have half an eye on future agreements.Plus the EU is a bigger bloc than the UK, and has a bit more muscle.People like Corbyn who think they can make that reality go away are kidding those around them, and probably themselves.
Corbyn reminds me of Neil Kinnock- he was always calling for a general election. Like Kinnock, he has baggage; in Kinnock's case his CND membership, in Corbyn's case his lifelong opposition to the EU. And they both display bravado when a clinical approach is called for. His young followers will not be so keen if his feeble performance enables no-deal Brexit.
Happiness is settling down to a large cod and small chips, smothered in salt n vinegar. Then digesting it whilst having youtube on the tele undisturbed. Mrs Elfs is out for the evening.
Another fantastic advert for the FA Cup tonight, live on the BBC. Two Reserve sides, playing in front of an empty stadium. Danny the Cvnt Murphy is commentating, so I turned straight off
One thing the last couple of days has shown the people of this country; Our Parliament is not fit for purpose. In most of the rest of Europe elected politicians meet in a circular chamber, modern and functional and not elaborately decorated. Daily business is conducted with the minimum of formal procedure and almost no pompous pomp and ceremony. Occasionally tempers will fray and arguments will be had I expect, but I very much doubt that their politicians carry on like what I have seen this week in our excuse for an elected house. The British House of Commons does not respect or love the principles of democracy. It is entirely enthralled by ridiculous centuries-old quirks and pantomime which date back to long before the days when the people of this country had the right to vote at all. They behave like a bunch of zoo animals from the 18th Century, whooping and waving their order papers like drunken aristocrats beying for blood at a cock fight. That bloated toad of a Speaker thinks he's up for an Oscar in a period drama. The front benches behave with all the maturity of eight year old bullies in a playground, and the rest of the house sits there waiting for a chance to say three words before they are shouted down with hysterical derision. For f**k's sake, this is 2019. There was never any mention of parliamentary approval being required for Brexit on the referendum voting slip. MPs have hijacked the process and ruined it in their blind arrogance and contempt to the electorate, whom they openly regard as nothing more than ignorant plebs. They are the cause of all the uncertainty and all of the distress that flows from it. Parliament should be ashamed of itself. They obviously have no idea how utterly ridiculous, out of touch and clownish they appear to the British people, and the peoples of every modern democracy in Europe. Our elected house is supposed to govern this great country, not behave like a Punch and Judy show. Shame on all of them. The Houses of Parliament should be turned into a museum (which it is already in everything but name) and our politicians should meet and work in a Parliament building fit for purpose in the 21st Century and beyond - not a crumbling edifice to Victorian Vanity surrounded by wigs and costumes out of the bloody dark ages. Our elected representatives are there to make critical decisions and good law for the people of this country, not to be another Ye Olde English tourist attraction. It's behavior like this that makes me wonder if I wouldn't prefer this country to be governed from Strasbourg and Brussels rather than from an antiquated, preening and privileged Wesminster Freak Show.
Well worth watching Marcelo Bielsa’s press conference about “Spygate” yesterday. Before playing Derby, Bielsa watched everyone of their 51 previous games He said he does this routinely for all of Leeds’ opponents, as he feels “guilty” if he is not prepared sufficiently.
Henry Winter makes an excellent point today - instead of punishing Bielsa, the FA shoould get him to St George’s Park to talk with English coaches.
Its sounds like there was a lot more to the car crash involving Prince Philip than was originally suggested. A mum and 10 month old baby were in the other car, and were left badly shaken. Both airbags were activated. A man of 97 - regardless of who he is - should not be behind the wheel of a car. Professionally, I have known of some very, very serious cases involving fatalities caused by elderly drivers to innocent third parties. I would hate to think how slow the reflexes are of a 97 year old, or how poor the eyesight is.
Silly old bugger. It's not as though they need to drive. If I'm still around at 80 I'll take a driving assessment, possibly earlier, and will stop if there are any doubts. You probably heard the interview with an eyewitness, it was clearly the Dof E's fault.
I watched this story for about 20 minutes, there was an obvious reluctance to mention the other car in the accident, coupled with a concentration on mentioning how much Philip enjoys getting behind the wheel of a car. Wtf does he not have a chauffeur to drive him around? That aside, the most important thing was that nobody was injured.
A very refreshing interview on Politics Live. Not the Tony Blair one, the one afterwards, with the young Tory MP. Twice Neil tried to catch him out by quoting things he'd said when he was younger, and his reply was, "Yes, I know, I was wrong then, I've learned a lot since then. I got it wrong". Would that there were more like him.
I was concerned about the reporting of the Duke of Edinburgh's car accident. The report I saw on the BBC assured the audience about six times that the Duke was uninjured, before mentioning that the two people in the other car had been injured, albeit apparently not seriously. It is only by the grace of God that those people aren't dead. If they had been killed, would the BBC have mentioned that before the multiple reassurances that the Duke was unharmed? The Royal Family are figureheads, important (but not essential) components of our rather quaint establishment and a great tourist attraction. Their lives and indeed their state of health is not more important than yours or mine.
Would Her Majesty (for whom I have the greatest respect) feel comfortable if Prince Philip were driving any of her grandchildren on the main roads? I think not.
