Kezia Dugdale Got Just 5,217 Votes 1642


The Labour Party is being remarkably coy about releasing the actual result of its Scottish accounting unit leadership election, giving only a percentage. The entirely complacent unionist media is complicit in what amounts to a deception. The stunning truth is that in a one person, one vote election among the entire membership of the Labour Party in Scotland plus trades union supporters, Dugdale won with 5,217 votes (out of a claimed electorate of 21,000, many of whom do not exist or could not be arsed to choose between two right wing numpties).

UPDATE: A second Labour figure just rang me to assure me my information – which was from a good source – is wrong. She would not give the actual figure and only said it was “higher”. I offered to take down the post and publish an accurate figure if she would give it, but this was declined.


Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

1,642 thoughts on “Kezia Dugdale Got Just 5,217 Votes

1 23 24 25 26 27 55
  • John Spencer-Davis

    KOWN
    22/08/2015 7:58am

    This test is a bit New Age for my liking. Some good questions, and some completely off the wall ones (e.g. “You have to be near water”; “Plants and animals have consciousness”), talk of chakras, psychic abilities, etc.

    This looks better to me.

    https://psychology-tools.com/empathy-quotient/

    Kind regards,

    John

  • fred

    “Duh, did it not occur to these geniuses desperate to do anything to stop Corbyn, that this was going to happen? I could see immediately I knew that they were chucking people’s votes out that it would end up with judicial review.”

    Didn’t it occur to people in the internet encouraging non Labour members and even members of other parties to pay £3 to get a vote for the Labour leader this would happen.

    “If Corbyn happens not to be elected, he could mount another legal challenge for judicial review on the grounds that legitimate people who wanted to vote for him have been prevented from doing so.”

    I don’t think he would do that, if he would he wouldn’t be fit to be leader of the Labour party anyway.

  • John Spencer-Davis

    Fred
    22/08/2015 10:02am

    Members of other parties I can agree with. On the other hand, you have to state on your registration as a supporter that you agree with the aims of the Labour Party. If you are not a member of the Labour Party, but you are not a member of any other political party or pressure group fundamentally opposed to Labour then so what? The Labour Party made the rules, I didn’t. Now that they are working against the neo-con ideologues they’ve suddenly discovered they don’t like them after all. Bloody cheek, I think.

    Suppose there were ten thousand voters excluded from the election for reasons (e.g. “You retweeted something by Ken Loach!”) that would not stand up under judicial review, and Corbyn lost by nine thousand votes? Would he be entitled to mount a legal challenge or not? Certainly he would. Why should he lie down, and why should people who want to see him leader lie down, and be kicked by neo-cons who think they know better than the rank and file of the Labour Party and ordinary left-wing sympathisers in the country?

    Kind regards,

    John

  • fred

    @John

    It doesn’t matter if a Labour leader has the support of a load of people on the internet, what matters is that they have the support of the Labour party members, the other MPs and Labour candidates, the councillors, the trade unions, the people who work for the party. Nobody who launched a judicial review because they lost would ever have that support.

    There was a good piece in the Guardian Thursday.

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/20/jeremy-corbyn-is-no-trotskyist-tom-watson-insists

  • John Spencer-Davis

    22/08/2015 10:48am

    This is speculation, of course. I actually think Corbyn will win comfortably anyway. You seem very certain of what you say, and I beg leave to doubt it.

    Suppose Corbyn lost, and a judicial review found that he had legitimate grievances, and the election was ordered to be re-run, and he won. Stranger things have happened. Then what?

    BTW yes I like the article.

    Kind regards,

    John

  • Mary

    Bravo to Nick Kollerstrom for standing up.

    Inland Revenue & Taxes for War
    August 21, 2015

    I like the Inland Revenue. They have just accepted my argument put to them, about not paying tax revenue, to a government that terrorises other nations by bombing them.

    I don’t normally earn enough to pay tax, however last year I was late in making out my tax form, and thereby accrued a fine of thirteen hundred pounds.

    To a demand for payment, I replied:

    /..

    http://terroronthetube.co.uk/inland-revenue-taxes-for-war/

  • John Spencer-Davis

    Dreoilin
    22/08/2015 11:10am

    Actually that’s fair enough. It’s very curious, but the noun “empath”, meaning “person who experiences strong empathic feelings towards others”, does not appear to be a dictionary definition.

    Dictionaries talk about psychic perception, which I don’t happen to think exists.

    It also recalls Spider Robinson’s brilliant debut science fiction novel Telempath.

    Kind regards,

    John

  • John Spencer-Davis

    Mary
    22/08/2015 11:05am

    This is an extraordinary story. I refuse to believe that the Inland Revenue has cancelled a demand for payment on the grounds that payment would be funding terrorism. Just think of the precedent that that would set.

    I’ll run this past my wife, who is a tax consultant.

    Kind regards,

    John

  • fred

    “Suppose Corbyn lost, and a judicial review found that he had legitimate grievances, and the election was ordered to be re-run, and he won. Stranger things have happened. Then what?”

    Then the Labour party would split into two and neither would ever get into government again.

    Supposing Corbyn wins the election and one of his opponents seeks a judicial review on the grounds most of the people who voted for him weren’t even Labour Party members? That’s an equal possibility.

  • Resident Dissident

    JSD – the requirement for registration as a supporter is not to be a supporter of parties opposed to Labour – rather than a member of such parties. All those Left Unity supporters who registered are clearly liars.

  • Kempe

    ” I refuse to believe that the Inland Revenue has cancelled a demand for payment on the grounds that payment would be funding terrorism. ”

    They haven’t. He doesn’t owe any tax. It’s the fine for non-payment they’ve cancelled. I guess fining someone for not paying the tax they don’t owe is too Kafkaesque even for HMRC.

  • John Spencer-Davis

    Fred
    22/08/2015 11:36am

    The Labour Party split into two before, if you recall. It split into the Labour Party and the Social Democratic Party, and Labour survived (well, sort of) and got back into government.

    Well, that’s the Labour Party’s problem. The rules were apparently fine until they meant Corbyn looked like winning, now apparently they are not fine. Do you seriously imagine that there would be all this fuss if Corbyn were not standing, or did not look like winning?

    Kind regards,

    John

  • John Spencer-Davis

    KOWN
    22/08/2015 11:52am

    Tough luck, buddy. Deal with it. And keep your whiny bullshit to yourself. 😉

    Warm regards,

    John

  • John Spencer-Davis

    Kempe
    22/08/2015 11:47am

    Thanks, well spotted. I did not say tax – I said a demand. I think what must have happened is:

    – the rules permit discretion in cancelling this fine because he does not owe any tax. (I have just confirmed this with my wife). It states within the letter that the time for appealing the demand has expired, therefore he owes it. Either that was wrong, or they can cancel it because he’s being so awkward.

    He’s being reckless by saying it’s for the reasons he gives. He could get other people in trouble by saying that.

    Kind regards,

    John

  • Anon1

    I haven’t looked it up but “empath” would suggest something more than someone who experiences empathy, perhaps a mental disorder.

    What we have on this blog is neither empathy nor empaths though. I would like to introduce a new term, the “false empath”, used to describe those who pretend to be empethatic but really have ulterior motives at play. Thus excessive empathy for the Palestinians is a good cover for kicking the Jews and Israel. The empathy cannot be genuine as it is only ever directed towards the victims of those the false empath intensely dislikes, eg the West, Israel etc. The victim is really a tool, suggesting more of a psycopathic tendency in the false empath. The blog comments section generally rewards false empathetic behaviour and fosters the whole pretense that it is empathy being expressed, empathy being a good thing.

  • Mark Golding

    Herbie
    22 Aug, 2015 – 9:18 am – Thanks – Dr David Kelly – I have no explicit palpable evidence that David took his own life yet 50 small arrows point in another direction. I refuse to put those small arrows back in the sheath and I sincerely hope that Janice and Rachel Kelly can now lead us to the truth from their intimate knowledge of David’s mind and the actions of those expediting dark actors

  • Mary

    The exact opposite of an empath is a sociopath: one who does not have any empathy or feelings for others.

    How many of the Z trolls on here are sociopaths?

  • Mary

    LOL indeed.

    On Medialens today.

    LOL: Louise Mensch takes Twitter swipe at Corbyn campaign – and hits herself
    Former Tory MP claims searches paint damning picture of Labour leadership candidate’s supporters – but they turn out to be from her own search history
    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/22/louise-menschs-bid-to-smear-jeremy-corbyn-backfires?CMP=share_btn_link
    22 August 2015

    …Referring to the options that then appeared underneath, she wrote: “Twitter’s autocomplete on Liz Kendall MP. This is the sewer that is Jeremy Corbyn’s support.”

    But it was soon pointed out to her that they weren’t suggested searches – they were Mensch’s own search history….

  • Mark Golding

    The British Government has invited Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, as head of the Israeli Government, to visit the UK in September.

    Is that September 11th I wonder. Such an annoyance having to keep one’s eye on his [Netanyahu] minders considering Bibi is ‘Bungee-jumping With a Loose Rope’ while his muscle is looking to outwit decent comrades in the intelligence corps.

1 23 24 25 26 27 55

Comments are closed.