Originally Posted by gynn (Post 934098)

After a year as Labour leader, what are everyone's views on Ed Miliband's performance as Labour leader?

No doubt Mancie sees him as the potential saviour of the country, rescuing us all from a fate worse than another term of Tory rule. And jaysay will say he is just as bad as his predecessor, plotting to plunge us all into another decade of doom and gloom.

As a neutral, I have to say that he worries me. He reminds me of that boy with the lisp in the corner of the playground who struggled to make friends. He found it hard to live in the shadow of his handsome brother, who always had loads of girl friends, and he turned out to be the one who told teacher he saw us smoking behind the bike sheds. The class sneak.

Am I being unfair?

Originally Posted by Eric (Post 934117)

Gliding effortlessly from a question about the performance of a politician to smoking behind the bike sheds seems more than a little wierd:confused:;)

Originally Posted by Eric (Post 934117)

Gliding effortlessly from a question about the performance of a politician to smoking behind the bike sheds seems more than a little wierd:confused:;)

However, as a neutral and a foreign observer, but one who does try to keep in touch with what is going on in British politics, Ed Miliband seems indistinguishable from a Canadian Liberal. There aren't enough right-wing votes to keep the tories in power; and there are not enough democratic socialist votes to elect Labour. For either one to gain and hold power, they must attract an increasing number of voters in the center. (The Lib-Dems seem more bent on commiting political suicide than contending for office.) And, your politicians, even more than ours, see gaining and holding power as much more important than governing the country.

Maybe it all stems from Thatcherism: destroy the working class, and you will destroy Labour. Although it seems the bitch didn't take into account "New Labour," a party which any Canadian Liberal would feel comfortable voting for.

Originally Posted by gynn (Post 934098)

After a year as Labour leader, what are everyone's views on Ed Miliband's performance as Labour leader?

No doubt Mancie sees him as the potential saviour of the country, rescuing us all from a fate worse than another term of Tory rule. And jaysay will say he is just as bad as his predecessor, plotting to plunge us all into another decade of doom and gloom.

As a neutral, I have to say that he worries me. He reminds me of that boy with the lisp in the corner of the playground who struggled to make friends. He found it hard to live in the shadow of his handsome brother, who always had loads of girl friends, and he turned out to be the one who told teacher he saw us smoking behind the bike sheds. The class sneak.

Am I being unfair?

Originally Posted by gynn (Post 934098)

He reminds me of that boy with the lisp in the corner of the playground who struggled to make friends. He found it hard to live in the shadow of his handsome brother,

Am I being unfair?

Originally Posted by gynn (Post 934098)

what are everyone's views on Ed Miliband's performance as Labour leader?

Originally Posted by accyman (Post 934315)

i cant believe the labor mp's are happy with him yet none speak out.Is labor still run under the Blair way as in you dare speak out and your fired?

Originally Posted by gynn (Post 934119)

I was trying to be allegorical. :(

Originally Posted by Eric (Post 934327)

was being merely pedantic;):D

Originally Posted by spignific (Post 934371)

He's performance as been average considering how bad things are in the country.Cant see anyone being that stirred by him.Having said that recently he as been so RIGHT.
Instead of backing public worker strikers,he told them it would not do anyone any good.I aint aginst strikers but a fair few are are doing it about pensions,not jobs.the public wont back them. ANYWAY I SAY GET G JONES IN FOR PM :D

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 934410)

According to the Obs he's struggling to hold onto his seat, nevermind become PM:D

Originally Posted by Less (Post 934413)

Link please.

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 934422)

It was front page spread in the Obs yesterday Less

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 934439)

News | Accrington Observer - menmedia.co.uk

There you are Sir Less:D

Originally Posted by Less (Post 934443)

Thank you, I wouldn't like anyone suggesting you just make these things up as you go along.
:)

Originally Posted by Less (Post 934443)

Thank you, I wouldn't like anyone suggesting you just make these things up as you go along.
:)

Originally Posted by cashman (Post 934317)

They have to be reasonably happy wi him, cos all the front runners were dummys.:rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 934134)

Seems a bit of a nonentity to me but, to be honest, I doubt there'll ever be a Labour leader who fits in with the views of Accyweb traditional Labour voters. There seems to be a yearning for a proper left wing socialist Labour leader like Michael Foot (the man who couldn't get Labour into power in a thousand years). If just such a leader was elected, it'd be interesting to see just how long it was before the howls of protest emerged on here from traditional Labour voters about the left wing socialist policies that were being implemented - ie, a liberal, inclusive attitude on immigration, an emphasis on rehabilitation rather than punishment for criminals, an embracing of politically correct attitudes (think Harriet Harman) and more. And if you think those aren't left wing Labour attitudes, I suggest you talk to any left wing socialist member of the Labour party. Socialism's about far more than just economic policies!

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 936840)

I've asked it before and I'll ask it again. Could someone explain which Labour leader WOULD suit the views of the "traditional Labour/socialist" types on here - and I'm talking ordinary voters here, not party members.

Because, from reading through their views, they'd want someone who has left wing/socialist views on preserving the NHS, benefits, the welfare state, a fair deal for the ordinary working man etc. Yet, they'd also want someone who has right wing, dare I say it Tory views on immigration, law and order, political correctness etc. Does such an animal exist? I certainly don't think so!

Originally Posted by gynn (Post 936826)

Well the spotlight has been on Ed Miliband this week, with the Labour Party Conference and his keynote speech which, in the words of his colleagues, gave him a chance to become better known to the wider public.

I watched his speech and found him completely unconvincing. His line that "I'm not Tony Blair, I'm not Gordon Brown, I'm my own man" just didn't have any impact whatsoever.

It showed one thing that I suspect most Labour supporters knew already, and everyone knows now.

They chose the wrong Miliband. :(:(:(

Originally Posted by g jones (Post 937765)

Having met Ed and coming from inside (Whips office) most of what is written is the opposite of the truth. Lazy journalism and journalists with a narrative.

Ed is the first politician since Margaret Thatcher to have a steel back as opposed the glass backed politicians in between. "I am not seeking a consensus" was the most important subtext he said.

The Party is moving to the right on many issues. Responsibility is about two things, localism at it's lowest form. I know from speaking to him he wants to tackle Labour's scourge, welfare where it moves toward an insurance scheme, those that pay get the most out - even Maggie wasn't that radical. It is also moving to the left with the state willing to intervene to ensure we have a responsible society.

One leading Tory advisor has already stated that Red Ed has parked his tanks on our lawn (responsibility,localism) and we're still in a deep sleep. Even if we awoke we don't have an answer to his offer. That was spot on analysis of where we are.

In private and public he talks about immigration frequently and what we got right (points, marriage under 21) but where for the last 30 years the country has got it wrong. Rights have come along too easily opposing the Liberal and Liberal-Conservative traditions.

He is ruthless in a polite way. Really ruthless yet such is his stature he has never had to go beyond convincing people. I know it is within him to make the biggest sacrifice's without looking backward.

He is so down to earth and so in touch for a leading politician it is frightening. My conversation with him on Hyndburn lasted 60 seconds. He knew everything I or anyone else was going to say on the easy issues, housing and jobs, and the difficult issues, welfare and immigration.

No other leading politician in the House of Commons has his leadership skills, determination or clarity of purpose. By a country mile I might add. No-one could lead the Labour Party like he has over the last 12 months navigating from the meltdown of Brown/Blair, the remnants within the PLP and wider Labour movement, orchestrate change and have barely a word of criticism laid against him from those on the inside, particularly the New Labourites.

Here is someone who jousted against his brother. Who from a poor position won. Whose charm and powerful assessment of UK PLC will see off Cameron when the Tories realise their mistake, like David Miliband, was to grossly underestimate Ed Miliband.

Commentators willing to seek a fork in the road from the herd have made reference to something different, an offer to Britain that is something I have heard all my life from people. A yearning for responsibility. A reward for effort. That everyone can contribute and those that wish not to do these things, the state intervenes in a tough way.

An example this week. Hyndburn Labour Group rewrote procurement rules to favour responsible companies. Last week John Denham announced that presumption will be in favour of the complainant in trading standards cases and the wider consumer rights putting bad businesses on the back foot. I spoke to him last week about this and how we can protect people work hard.

Of course it will be about the economy and jobs where people are doubting the Tories have got it right already. Responsibility is cut across theme and is high on people's agenda.

None of this would have come about but for Ed Miliband who has a clear view in his own mind. Firstly reform and rebuild the foundations. There is no need to fight the next election next week despite what some might argue.

Ed Miliband is a person 'without any doubt' when it comes to the big picture. He knows what kind of society and economy he wants and he summed it up in another piece of subtext that people missed. I am not waiting for a consensus, "I am [simply] going to do it my way".

And David Miliband. If he would have won he would have won not with one member one vote but because his supporters had three and four votes each and those votes were of a higher value in the MP's and Labour Party sections.

'Banana Man' would have been sucked into this media narrative instead of Ed. He would have been accused of continuity. Of being more New Labour. Of being at the centre of the the Brown years. Of failing to stand up to Brown when he had a chance. David Miliband would have been damaged goods.

The turn the page candidate has caused the media a headache with the pre-scrited attacks so they have had to find other ways to attack him.

The problem for yesterdays's hack is tomorrows hack has seen the light and wants to write what he see's and it isn't the nonsense that Ed Miliband is the wrong person. That just maybe he is writing a new broad consensus for the next 30 years and the Tories deep down are seriously worried.

Originally Posted by gynn (Post 936826)

His line that "I'm not Tony Blair, I'm not Gordon Brown, I'm my own man"

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 937818)

Maybe you should be his Google Page Ranking man, Graham; you certainly do a good selling job on him!

He sounds great, but then again so did Blair...before he got in. I'm not suggesting that Ed (who seems a fairly decent sort) is anything like the aforementioned creep, but these days, people are cynical...very cynical...and he's got a hell of a mountain to climb to overcome that.

Originally Posted by Bernard Dawson (Post 937824)

You say that but the polls are showing a Labour lead, and have been for quite while. Not a massive lead, but nevertheless a lead. And as a party we haven't got out of first gear yet.

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 937829)

Yes, they are in the lead, but considering the unpopularity of the government spending cuts, and the fact that the voters haven't warmed to either Cameron or Clegg, you'd expect that league to be much, much bigger at this stage. As for getting out of first gear...an accurate prediction?...or just wishful thinking? ;)

Originally Posted by Bernard Dawson (Post 937830)

I think that's probably right.The poll lead at this stage is more down to the unpopularity of the Government. The poll lead probably should be greater, but that will come.

Originally Posted by Bernard Dawson (Post 937830)

I think that's probably right.The poll lead at this stage is more down to the unpopularity of the Government. The poll lead probably should be greater, but that will come.

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 937782)

Nice try Graham, there are those of us who would say well he would say that wouldn't he. My I ask who you supported in the Leadership race last year ;)

Originally Posted by Eric (Post 937867)

O come on. You guys of the "right" persuasion are continually bitching that the elected Labour folks who are members on here are all too often too silent ... that they don't answer questions. Now, when Graham comes on with a comprehensive post, you dismiss it in one line.:rolleyes: And what does it matter whom he supported in the leadership race? All that matters it that he supports the leader who was elected.

Originally Posted by Eric (Post 937867)

O come on. You guys of the "right" persuasion are continually bitching that the elected Labour folks who are members on here are all too often too silent ... that they don't answer questions. Now, when Graham comes on with a comprehensive post, you dismiss it in one line.:rolleyes: And what does it matter whom he supported in the leadership race? All that matters it that he supports the leader who was elected.

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 937925)

A couple of points, Eric - the lack of comment on those awkward subjects like Europe, immigration, political correctness etc from elected Labour folk has been remarked upon by far more than just the Accyweb Tory Tendency. In fact, I seem to recall that most of the criticism has come from mavericks like Gary, Cashy, myself and others. Secondly, very little criticism has been levelled at Graham on this score, as it's accepted that he may not always have the time, given his circumstances.

Incidentally, you may have noticed that Bernard did break cover on the EU the other day and proceeded to prove just how out of touch he is with the views of the ordinary voter on this issue. This may be why Accyweb Labourites tend to keep quiet on "those" subjects! ;)

Originally Posted by Eric (Post 937962)

That he stated his position doesn't make him out of touch with "the ordinary voter". At least, I haven't seen any recent opinion polls which suggest that.

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington (Post 937971)

I have just posted a link to the relevant info Steve........as well as voicing what I hear in the street everyday.......talking to friends, relatives and strangers.

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 937925)

A couple of points, Eric - the lack of comment on those awkward subjects like Europe, immigration, political correctness etc from elected Labour folk has been remarked upon by far more than just the Accyweb Tory Tendency. In fact, I seem to recall that most of the criticism has come from mavericks like Gary, Cashy, myself and others. Secondly, very little criticism has been levelled at Graham on this score, as it's accepted that he may not always have the time, given his circumstances.

Incidentally, you may have noticed that Bernard did break cover on the EU the other day and proceeded to prove just how out of touch he is with the views of the ordinary voter on this issue. This may be why Accyweb Labourites tend to keep quiet on "those" subjects! ;)

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington (Post 937971)

I have just posted a link to the relevant info Steve........as well as voicing what I hear in the street everyday.......talking to friends, relatives and strangers.

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 937976)

Same here, Margaret...practically everyone I know has a negative view on the EU, whether they want a semi-detached, trade only relationship or totally out.

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 937978)

...snap.

That's my experience too.

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 937973)

Let's home Graham tells Ed of the people he represents overwhelming desire for a referendum on the issue of E.U. membership.

:rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington (Post 937981)

Well, yes I hope he does tell Mr Miliband...not that, in the current situation, there is a lot that the Leader of the opposition can do about it....other than make promises he is unlikely to keep.( Things may be beyond repair by the time Labour are re-elected....or he may not be the Labour Leader anymore).

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 937975)

It must be hard, for someone who no longer lives here, to understand the madness we have to accept.

Eric, just imagine Canada's governed from Washington, and it'll help you comprehend the situation we're in.

Originally Posted by Eric (Post 938091)

Actually it's very hard to understand. Believe it or not, most of us this side of the pond ... those who use their brains, at least ... don't really think in terms of the EU ... or, if we do, it's only in terms of economic bailouts. We still think in terms of the individual nations of Europe. The idea of a United States of Europe hasn't quite made it accross the Atlantic. I know that there is a European Parliament; but it rarely makes the news.

And the only point I believe I was trying to make was that it wasn't in the interest of reasoned debate to ask for someone's opinion, and then damn them for giving it. It's as if debating had turned into baiting. If Bernard had said that he wasn't sure yet how he would vote if a referendum were held, would he have been labelled a "fence sitter"?

I fully understand the heat generated by the debate. After all, the future of your nation is at stake. Having said all that, I believe that if I were still there, I would be firmly in the "Let's get the hell out now" camp. Economic ties, yes; political union, no.

Originally Posted by Eric (Post 938091)

And the only point I believe I was trying to make was that it wasn't in the interest of reasoned debate to ask for someone's opinion, and then damn them for giving it.

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 938107)

Your criticism was over me saying that he was out of touch with the ordinary voter and that you hadn't seen any evidence to show this. I say that he is, on this subject anyway, and I believe there's plenty of evidence, both statistical and anecdotal to back that up,

However, I will concede that at least he had the bottle to come on here and put forward an unpopular point of view and stick to his guns in the face of heavy shelling. It is also refreshing to see someone putting forward the other side of the argument for a change...and he's a Stanley fan, so he's a good lad really. ;)

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 938107)

Your criticism was over me saying that he was out of touch with the ordinary voter and that you hadn't seen any evidence to show this. I say that he is, on this subject anyway, and I believe there's plenty of evidence, both statistical and anecdotal to back that up,

However, I will concede that at least he had the bottle to come on here and put forward an unpopular point of view and stick to his guns in the face of heavy shelling. It is also refreshing to see someone putting forward the other side of the argument for a change...and he's a Stanley fan, so he's a good lad really. ;)

Originally Posted by Eric (Post 938113)

I'm heading north today to sight in the guns for the upcoming hunting season ... we usually use pics of our Prime Minister as targets:D ... But the EU flag will do just as well. I'll put a few holes in it just for all those of you opposed to Europe.:uzi:

Originally Posted by g jones (Post 938568)

Current opinion polls are 51-49 and the pro EU seem to win on the clapometer at Thursdays QT when the issue was raised and discussed.

I wouldn't mind a referendum except for the fact that I am where the public are, split on the issue.

The political reality is the pro EU will win. Two reasons Cameron, Clegg, Miliband and Co believe it's right. Secondly the sensible anti EU arguments may well be hijacked by extremists over the course of the long debate. The anti EU lobby is unfortunately blessed by people with odd and nasel gasing views and a good anti EU campaign would need to park these people in a dark room. The Mail and the Express won't appeal to floating or unsure voters with it's hard line tone.

Like AV which had the sure to vote for out in front comfortably at the starting gun, the silent majority will make a late and safe decision delivering the pro EU a comfortable victory choosing concerns over jobs and support for a leaders consensus rather than fearful arguments quite possibly led by people considered eccentric.

What will damage the anti will be the unravelling of the Human Rights Act argument which hasn't really occurred but in short will portray anti EU campaigners as out of touch with the facts. The Pro EU campaigners have never stood their corner but if they did ...

Still not sure which way I would vote.

Originally Posted by g jones (Post 938584)

It would be a good debate I believe and bring out more truths than the Express/Mail hysteria. I thought the AV referendum was a good debate.

Bailouts: We would have to bail out countries. Ireland for example whether we are in or out. The Germans may complain about the 1000Euro cost to each german paid to Greece but you have to consider the dangers. In Germany's case the Deutschmark would ruin Germany such would be it's high value. World trade means we are all interdependent to a greater or lesser degree.

My EU concerns are based on localism v Globalisation and EU waste/subsidies.

I forgot to add previously as to why the pro EU will win any referendum is the support of business, CBI, FSB backing Cam,Clegg,Mili. They will have a very powerful jobs and growth argument and fund the pro EU campaign. The anti EU campaign has no leaders and no money.

Originally Posted by Tex (Post 938574)

Were things better before we joined the EU? Well things seem to have gone T**s up with other countries since we did. All i know is we seem to bailing out countries who joined the EU on a low valuation knowing they could get a bail-out. Who will be next after Greece? Spain, Italy.????

Originally Posted by g jones (Post 938675)

My personal view is mixed and a lot of my reasons can be traced back to the old left and now the green agenda.

However I have a clear opinion on the outcome which will be to stay in. I just believe one side has everything going for it and the other hasn't. Whilst it is a vociferous debate now between those interested there are a huge number of people who are ambivalent, who don't buy the 'it's obvious' argument from either side and whose vote will need to be won. Like AV most people will start from the position of 'I don't know a lot about it'.

If you could bet i would wager 54-57 in 43-46 out on the spreads. That's a lot of people wanting us out, just short of a majority. I could be wrong but it is 49-51 now and I can o my see it going one way.

Originally Posted by g jones (Post 938675)

My personal view is mixed and a lot of my reasons can be traced back to the old left and now the green agenda.

However I have a clear opinion on the outcome which will be to stay in. I just believe one side has everything going for it and the other hasn't. Whilst it is a vociferous debate now between those interested there are a huge number of people who are ambivalent, who don't buy the 'it's obvious' argument from either side and whose vote will need to be won. Like AV most people will start from the position of 'I don't know a lot about it'.

If you could bet i would wager 54-57 in 43-46 out on the spreads. That's a lot of people wanting us out, just short of a majority. I could be wrong but it is 49-51 now and I can o my see it going one way.

Originally Posted by g jones (Post 938567)

Current opinion polls are 51-49

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 938735)

I can see where you're coming from. You think that if an imminent referendum triggered the debate in earnest, established political figures would weigh in with a pro-EU approach and the middle-of-the-road British voter would fall into line.

A few years ago that theory might have held good, but we live in interesting times now. People have been lied to, deceived, patronised and taken for granted by all mainstream political parties once too often and we don't believe any of them anymore. So why should we believe them on the merits of the EU?

There won't be a referendum because the politicians are frightened of the possible result, but if there was, I would bet you a pre-match pint in the Oak Lea that the "out" vote would win it! ;)

Originally Posted by Eric (Post 938770)

I would be careful before you bet good beer. There are several things to consider. The vote would not be a fair one. Those in power can mobilize that power to promote their cause. They speak as "authority". They can claim they have a mandate, one given to them by the electorate in the last general election, to run the country in the best interests of Britain. They can also claim, with justification, that Britain does not have a history of plebicitary (yes, it is a word; got it from a great book by Sir Ian Kershaw;)) democracy. It just isn't part of the democratic tradition. What is most important is that they will attempt to frame the question without consulting the "antis".

From what I read on here; and from what I read in the press, it is my humble colonial opinion that those who are opposed to membership in the EU could perhaps base their position not on the economics of membership in the EU, but on things that are more intangible, more fundamental, more profound .... perhaps more visceral: the fact that Britain is a distinct society, and that this is what is under attack. Britain's uniqueness. There is a Canadian example. The Province of Quebec has held two votes on whether or not to remain in the Canadian Confederation. The votes were close, very close. And the point was not whether or not Quebec would be better off economically, it was about whether or not Quebec heritage and culture and language would be swallowed up in an "English" North America (ok, we'll forget about Mexico:D). Even though the votes went against the separatistes, they did win major concessions: French only signs for everything in Quebec; education in the French language; Quebec recognized as a "distinct society within Confederation" by the Federal govt. and the other nine provinces; control of immigration into the province ... and lots of other good stuff.

I think the point I'm trying to make in as little space as possible:rolleyes::D is that it is not just economics at stake. And government must be made to listen to that, and make it part of the question.

As an afterthought to this ramble: The People's Charter of 1838 (I think that's the right date; Sam Wignall beat it into my head just so that I wouldn't have to Google it:eek:) had six points ... only No. 6 was never adopted. Maybe it's time; then govts. would have to listen.

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington (Post 938772)

In my post number 81, I cited the fact that the question would not be a simple 'in or out'....it would be framed in such a way as to bamboozle the majority of those who would cast a vote....and you are right about the politicians mobilising the powers to skew the vote by their perceived 'authority'.
As for the plebiscite.......well isn't that just another posh word for a referendum ( from the latin plebis - being ordinary people, and scitum - decree........law of the common man).

I think that many people can see the EU's creeping political ambition. Trying to influence and take over areas of our lives that we feel we should have sovereignty over.

If we are going to allow Brussels to make the law, then why bother having a Parliament at all?

What worries me most, is the fact that whatever these faceless bureaucrats do, we have no right of redress...they are unelected. So they are, in effect, a law unto themselves.
They cannot be ousted no matter what they do.

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 938735)

I can see where you're coming from. You think that if an imminent referendum triggered the debate in earnest, established political figures would weigh in with a pro-EU approach and the middle-of-the-road British voter would fall into line.

A few years ago that theory might have held good, but we live in interesting times now. People have been lied to, deceived, patronised and taken for granted by all mainstream political parties once too often and we don't believe any of them anymore. So why should we believe them on the merits of the EU?

There won't be a referendum because the politicians are frightened of the possible result, but if there was, I would bet you a pre-match pint in the Oak Lea that the "out" vote would win it! ;)

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington (Post 938813)

I was only 28 when we last voted.......and I think at that time I could have been considered politically naive, but I always thought there was something other than trade behind the EEC(call it a gut instinct...or women's intuition). I never wanted to be part of this 'club'. It gives me no pleasure at all to be proved right

Originally Posted by g jones (Post 938786)

The out vote would win amongst traditional and socialist Labour voters (good reasons), right wing little englanders (daft reasons) and Mail and Express (daft reasons) readers

Originally Posted by gynn (Post 934098)

After a year as Labour leader, what are everyone's views on Ed Miliband's performance as Labour leader?

No doubt Mancie sees him as the potential saviour of the country, rescuing us all from a fate worse than another term of Tory rule. And jaysay will say he is just as bad as his predecessor, plotting to plunge us all into another decade of doom and gloom.

As a neutral, I have to say that he worries me. He reminds me of that boy with the lisp in the corner of the playground who struggled to make friends. He found it hard to live in the shadow of his handsome brother, who always had loads of girl friends, and he turned out to be the one who told teacher he saw us smoking behind the bike sheds. The class sneak.

Am I being unfair?

Originally Posted by gynn (Post 960229)

Four months on from posting the above, it seems nothing has changed. Miliband the Younger is completely and totally out of his depth, and PM Questions gives us embarrassing weekly reminders that he isn't up to it.

Senior Labour figures are starting to agree,

BBC News - Ed Miliband lacking strategy and energy - Lord Glasman

Any bets on a new Labour leader in 2012?

Originally Posted by Mancie (Post 960235)

But who would be the new leader?..

Originally Posted by cmonstanley (Post 960252)

labour dont want to peak to early, its a plan;):D

Originally Posted by gynn (Post 960229)

Four months on from posting the above, it seems nothing has changed. Miliband the Younger is completely and totally out of his depth, and PM Questions gives us embarrassing weekly reminders that he isn't up to it.

Senior Labour figures are starting to agree,

BBC News - Ed Miliband lacking strategy and energy - Lord Glasman

Any bets on a new Labour leader in 2012?

Originally Posted by cmonstanley (Post 960252)

labour dont want to peak to early, its a plan;):D