The Copeland disaster for Corbyn

The problem with Corbyn is not actually Corbyn at all, it's the rest of the world. Lets face it he's had little to no support from the media and has been fighting a continual battle with his own MPs. Corbyn is by no doubt a true socialist and a true working class advocate as well as advocate for those who are not in work, however the voters no longer side their political belief system to their actual circumstances it is like they have lost the thread and make their own choice decisions. It goes to say

when there is a reaction it doesn't mean there will always be a reaction. Unless you happen to be an MP born in the wrong era, who has become disconnected not with your core supporters but with the public in general. The truth be said, Corbyn is too honest for his own good he does not practice the dark art of wearing a sheep skin misdirection and double speak in order to act the way he wants to act. He is transparent, obvious and to this extent has lost the political football. Like John Prescott would never of been a Prime Minister, Corbyn is the same, I'd have him in my cabinet but he'd never be in the driving seat.

Recently two Labour seats had by-elections, Copeland and Stoke-on-Trent. The news is now how spectacularly Labour lost Copeland and there is good reason. The facts of Copeland are staggering, it had been held by labour since 1935 so would be the typical safe-seat by any standard, it underwent a mid-term by-election and the normal running majority should of been in the region of 2000 votes. But this was not all, the elected candidate for Copeland was Gillian Troughton a former doctor, councillor, and pro-nuclear (unlike Corbyn) advocate. She also ran with the subject of NHS cuts and the loss of a NHS hospital in Copeland, in many respects Gillian was the ideal person and if there every had been a safe bet to put your money on, without actually going to Copeland and feeling the water, this was it. However, the Tories produced an earth shattering win and a hell of a demoralising loss for Labour. Their lead is now 2000 plus votes against the 2000 previous loss and they won against the backdrop of NHS cuts and a hospital loss. So the question on everyone's lips is how the hell did they do it? Given Gillian's background this is a disaster. Unfortunately there has been a somewhat feeble excuse given, Corbyn doesn't like nuclear so the voters didn't vote Gillian in.  I don't believe this.

In order to be a politician it is necessary to implement the dark art of spin. The success of any government gaining power has been by their ability to say one thing but do another. Corbyn's straight talking is a clear sign of his unwavering concrete socialist views, unfortunately the world is not black and white it is many shades of grey. An example can be seen in Trumps inauguration speech, when this was being aired it was surprising how much he said was clearly socialist in sound but at the same time it is just as clear this man is a Republican. Perhaps voters are not politically savvy, perhaps they don't understand nearly every politician wears a sheeps skin. Corbyn doesn't and this is a problem. You can't win an election unless you can persuade voters from all parties to vote for you, effectively stealing votes.. The sad thing is voters no longer identify with any specific party, the middle ground is bigger than it has ever been and the need to court the media is imperative. Fact, sometimes you must shake hands with the Devil whether you like it or not. And Jeremy Corbyn just will not.

If Corbyn can't adapt and change to the voter climate he will not lead Labour to a win and if he has no self insight it is the country he must represent not just his core socialist voters he would step down. I don't like saying this and hate myself, but it has been way too long now and the loss of Copeland is the last sign for me.

When the boss isn't any good, what do you do?

There have been many times when I have thought I'd be a better boss than my own boss, which is probably one of the reasons I moved into middle management. And being a persistent bastard who just kept going for every single job internally advertised. It's a fact the more interviews you do the better you get at them and combat interview performance anxiety. However, passing an interview and doing the actual job are very different things. Further to this, you can guarantee in some organisations old adages tend to be persistent and true. The phrase "dead man's shoes" comes to mind. So it is, bosses who manage to get promoted and climb the ladder and then stay sat in their post for decades on end, may well of done great or enough to pass the interview, but as the years pass their poor decisions have likely had an ever mounting cumulative expense that climbs ever upwards.

My boss is a woman, I have no problem with this, she has been doing her job at least 25 years perhaps even 30 years, she has not moved into any other position other than the one she occupies now. Although her title may have changed and inevitably the job has changed as new working practices and IT have developed, yet she is still there. She is good at some things but catastrophic in others. Her ability to communicate and have the soft touch with staff on a one to one basis is above average and she has a sense of humour which is good. However, she is a poor decision maker in many other respects which has cost efficiency, time, work and a great deal of money.  In an example, yesterday I attended a meeting with her and three other managers. She had to raise a certain issue which another department of three different managers needed to be aware of. The meeting took one hour and during this time non of us did any work. She sat and did most of the talking and I spoke just once or twice. However the bottom line to this meeting was only two people needed to attend and it should not of been any longer than twenty minutes at most. Given her poor decision making ability and propensity to chat it seems an awful lot of expense is lost from either obstructive choices or wasted time. Which of course has never really been examined because if it was she would no longer be still sat in her chair.

My boss's boss has also been sat in his chair the same amount of time and together they have worked all these years. He comes across as someone who doesn't go out of his way to work more than he has to work. He will let his closest managers, the senior management team do the hard graft and ride the crest of a wave. He clocks in at a specific time and goes at a specific time. He keeps an eye on  finances. Due to this penny pinching trait the division is not in the best of positions. At a skeleton staff and the bones are so bare the lost or absence of any employee has a deeply bad affect on those who are left. His great plan is to allow the slow drip loss of employees and never replace them. For this probably means praise by the director of the company. When he talks of the organisation's ever improving performance in the back of my mind I want to shout liar. When I asked him directly if he expected one person to do two person's job during an job interview (and the person who left was a  talented workaholic) his reply was to say he expected the new appointee to be even better.  It is like he says things to save face and would not in any circumstances confess or agree to any kind of failure.  Perhaps he feels he must put on a brave face and try to impress everyone because of his pay grade, which is even more than an MP.  I purposely threw the interview and knew I didn't want to work directly for him and this characteristic is about hiding the truth and self importance more than any thing else.

So this still leaves me in the middle management job I do very well. At the same time knowing I am better than those who are sat above me. Knowing as and when I lose staff I am responsible for doing my best to work with what I have left even when those remaining staff members are complaining about work levels. I have always hated the fact someone else has got there before me, or I have been judged because I didn't achieve the exams grades society expected. Through my determination of self education I've reached this point here and yet I can't help still being frustrated at those who manage me for being not as good as I am, for not putting in the hours as I do, for not having the same work ethic or abilities.

In the end, the only person I need to prove myself to is myself. But I know one thing, I'm not going to overtly go out of my way to help the bosses upstairs and be their sycophant.  I have witnessed this behaviour in other managers my own grade. So I practice the soft art of keeping stoom.

A president without presidential behaviour

Donald (Duck) Trump took a press conference on his own, on Thursday 16.02.17. and he let his dislike of the media be known. His conference sounded like a man who was bitter at being misrepresented, yet at the same time had no self recognition of his own misrepresentation of facts. He he has no self insight into what his actions may well do to himself let alone to others. I am not an American so my opinion may be considered less worthy, but it is a shame because I am a lover of politics and probably know more about American politics than some of those very people who live and breath in that country. Further I do have an opinion and don't think the car crash Trump presidency is one which just affects America. It affects the planet, the world and certainly the UK as well. Therefore I will give my viewpoint and stand by the opinion his term will not last and can not last a full six months

I ask however, why does Trump take a news conference on his own when the scrutiny and spotlight should mean he fact checks everything he says and gets it right. The answer is likely because he loves attention and self advertisement. Or he believes his job is at threat and it is in a defensive stance, by re-asserting what he has done he appeases the hardest of Republican supporters and Trump supporters alike doing everything he can to justify himself.

• The constant jibbing of his predecessors poor governance. There is no surprise in this tactic, it seems to be a common one used by those in power until there becomes a time when it is so old in the tooth it is no longer applicable. But in Trump's case there is a certain delight in damning the last US President and the mess the US was in. The thing is, the US still is in a mess and as each day continues with Trump as president there may well be a bigger mess at the end of his autocracy.

• The repeal of Obamacare, is a blatant defiance of the Democrats as Trump states they are not Republican supporters. This is not an answer, this is a man attacking the healthcare of poorer Americans because they don't support him, there is no compassion he simply does not care for this healthcare plan and considers it is too expensive. However, in tarring all those with the same brush he also hasn't considered whether a proportion of those same Obamacare recipients are actually Republican voters, for in my experience there will likely be. The thing with this healthcare it was neutral to politics and political persuasion, non of the applications requested details of who the recipients voted for.
• 
  
• In another attack Trump chastises Hillary Clinton on giving away 20 per cent of American uranium and states Hillary had a reset of the plastic button. I had to google this point as it sounds a particularly vindictive statement and probably one which would be a national security threat. So in a reasoned question would any American government give away 20 percent of it's Uranium to any other country? The answer has to be no, surely not. The answer given by by Vox.com is:

1. The mines, mills, and land the company holds in the US account for 20 percent of the US’s uranium production capacity, not actual produced uranium. 
2. The State Department was one of nine federal agencies and a number of additional independent federal and state regulators that signed off on the deal.
3. President Obama, not Secretary Clinton, was the only person who could’ve vetoed the deal.
4. Since Russia doesn’t have the legal right to export uranium out of the US, its main goal was likely to gain access to the company’s uranium assets in Kazakhstan.
5. Crucially, the main national security concern was not about nuclear weapons proliferation, as Trump suggests, but actually ensuring the US doesn’t have to depend too much on uranium sources from abroad, as the US only makes about 20 percent of the uranium it needs. An advantage in making nuclear weapons wasn’t the main issue because, as PolitiFact notes, “the United States and Russia had for years cooperated on that front, with Russia sending enriched fuel from decommissioned warheads to be used in American nuclear power plants in return for raw uranium.”

• Other countries have been taking and advantage of the US for decades. And Trump has repealed the transatlantic trade agreements, which by the way would of led to a great advantage to American companies for it allowed them to sue governments when they failed to win contracts due to those governments own laws. For example an American tobacco company could sue a government which had laws against tobacco advertising or tobacco logos which may have prevented the company from getting a foothold. Such as happened in Australia.

• Repeatedly Trump indicates he gets his news from TV, and no doubt the most informative TV will be the staunchly Republican, Fox News. Yet in the same instance Trump chastises CNN and says CNN spout out hatred of him. Trump is taking this pretty personally and it's evident during the news conference he does not have the capacity to see there should be different sides to any news story as there are many different truths/perceptions.

• Flynn was doing his job and Trump has no interest in Russia. Trump likes Putin because he phoned him and congratulated  him on gaining office. Trump considers the whole Russian thing as a ruse and more than this believes the belligerent attitude of news companies against him are doing their best to make it more difficult to make deals with Russia. Trump's intention is clear, he wants to do some kind of deal with Russia and he refuses to be pulled into debate about Russian aggression against American defences. Trump effectively has rose tinted glasses when it comes to Russia.

•  The news is fake. So much of the news is fake. He then goes on to say how he hates fake news yet the biggest generator of fake news especially from the White House is the spurious opinion which comes straight out of his own mouth.  Trump was challenged in this saying his calling it fake news was disrespecting the reporters and the news. What Trump doesn't understand is the networks decide what their own news is and what takes precedents not what he thinks.

• The chastising of the news media for leaks from the White House. News which Trump considers to by highly classified. However, what Trump consider is he can not prevent other world leaders from leaking the conversations he's had with them. This will get back to the US no matter what. Additionally, when Trump has had conversations which verge on the illegal and immoral it is these he does not want the media reporting on, because they give him bad publicity. A reporter says the leaks are real but the news is fake referring to how Trump perceives news. Trump doesn't back away from still calling it fake news. This is the kettle calling the pot black, in the instance of Hillary giving away American Uranium and it been clearly misleading, this is a prime example of Trump fake news.

• Funnily enough Trump does not like to be interrupted, when taking a question about anti-Semitism he takes it as an affront and tells the correspondent to "shut-up" for Trump will not answer any more. In the meantime any correspondent who comes forth with an easy and sympathetic question he will say it was a "nice question" and gladly answer it. Usually it's because it was an easy question and didn't require him to think. For of all the things in the world, thinking is something Trump doesn't like to do for himself.

What is obvious from the news conference is Trump likes the sound of his own voice, he likes to interrupt overly long questions and not give the questioner any more time than necessary. Particularly if the question is talking too long. Trump gets bored to listening to someone else so talks over them, and converts an answer to suit his self. Simply he doesn't answer the question.  In may well be an element of his narcissistic behaviour kicking back in.
 
What Trump doesn't understand and will probably never understand, the mark of any good leader is the ability to answer the most difficult questions not the easy ones, and those difficult questions will come from sources unsympathetic to your own cause. A truthful and well thought out response is then recognised by all who hear it.

Arrogant arsehole Donald Duck Trump.

If there is one witless moronic and arrogant arsehole it has to be Donald Trump. There is little doubt in my mind this man has been raised from a position of privilege all his life but more than this he has never needed to mentally apply himself and his a weak individual. There must be more people out there than just myself who see his behaviour and find it hits a prehistorical emotional point. One of complete dislike and to the point of wanting to do physical damage to him.

For his poorly applied tanning spray and his down-the-nose look on everybody, strutting chin of self importance and robotic physical movements all point to someone who is sadly so full of himself he should be locked in a padded room and never given access to a mirror. Not to mention allowed near a woman, ever again.

Only a moron would think he can accuse all the media of being bias, well all the media which doesn't see or accept his unproven unevidenced points of view. It is known he avoids taking questions from the liberal press because they are too probing and accusatory. Questions which would make him uncomfortable to answer, because he just simply doesn't have any answer and they do not accept the bullshit which comes out of his mouth.

Lets take for instance the recent loss of Michael Flynn, US national security advisor. It is known Flynn had spoken to the Russians and assured them sanctions would be moved. However, he had done this in the capacity of a private citizen before Trump was president. Michael Moore has said it is unlikely anything Flynn did was done without Trump's knowledge. When considered this makes sense. Trump has echoed his liking of Putin as a strong leader and business man, probably because he thinks Putin is like him, a man who is self-made (although Trump never is self-made) and a man who is rich both in wealth and power. So it is exceedingly plausible this thought is true, it just makes sense. Just as it makes absolute sense Flynn fell on his own sword, he simply had not choice in the matter. If he didn't then it may well of resulted in Trump immediately being impeached or the heavy weight of the need for truth being centred on him. As it is he is already under a lot of suspicion and no doubt there are a number of unhappy Republican senators with Trump. He stands up and talks like a moron using such words as if he is speaking to a school of primary children or even nursery children. His language must be seeking the naive and uneducated Republican masses, the very masses who believe the world centres only around America and no one else. Trump says the right things to his core highly right wing people, but not just those ones as well, he has touched the sentiment of those electors who are fed up with politics. Yet how can these voters justify voting for someone as self-centred and narcissistic as Donald Duck Trump? Their sense and sensibilities must be getting trailed each and every day. When there is so much media evidence this man should not be allowed to control an ice cream stall let alone a country his presidency can not be sustained. For each day of each week which goes past sees yet another dilemma as he does his best to show he is king of the world and doesn't give a shit.

Now is the time for the media and the press to step up and put the highest level of scrutiny on the highest office in the world, every second and every hour of every day.

Trump can't read

Well the latest theory to hit the headlines is Trump cannot read. Yep, the President of the greatest (allegedly) country in the world doesn't know his ABC and has never read a book. How many republicans are turning in disgust they have voted into office an illiterate ignoramus? In fact it is so serious it is funny and not funny at the same time. While Russia plays high level chess in it's arms alliance with Syria there is Trump getting all his news from watching TV. It is assured he also doesn't have critical thinking skills and has also never read a report in his life. This reminds me a little of Phillip Green the barrow boy who scammed Woolworth employees of the pension fund and let the company go bust. What they both have is enough money to buy people who can read reports then tell them what they want to know. Of course there is nothing Trump doesn't know in his little mind, in reality he's as thick as they come and holds the lives of every American in his small hands. This would be a great time to believe in a non existent spiritual entity, like Santa Claws or the tooth fairy because America you are going to need every bit of help you can get.

Trump - not in his right mind

There was more than just a shiver when Trump got elected president. It is nothing to do with his inability to spell, but rather with his unofficially diagnosed malignant narcissism. Something which has been in and out of the papers constantly during his first and second weeks of office. But in reality it does not take much think here is a person who is not right in the head. The obnoxious way in which

he walked to the inauguration ceremony was sickening. It was the body language of someone incredibly smug with themselves, someone who had little in the way of self dignity. If such a person were just walking along the street like this he'd be open to getting assaulted. It was slimy, and again his actions were mirrored yet again in the sickening display of his first dance with the first lady. In this case her body language was of a woman who had been coerced to dance with the most disgusting man in the world. All I could think is Melania (third wife by the way) must of been on drugs the night she conceived, or hypnotised. Or perhaps Donald or Donny as those close to him like to call him. Donny, so it is said has a large stash of rohypnol under the bed, that's how he does it. The second impression I get is she's a gold digger and had hit the jackpot, it stands to reason a beautiful woman who came from Slovenia a poverty stricken country. She's ironically an immigrant to the USA who has gained citizenship only after ten years, and by chance marriage to an orange celebrity who is so tight he probably applies his own fake sun tan cream. In fact it is doubly ironic because everything about Trump's heritage is foreign, he might of been born in the good old US of A, but his mother was Scottish and his father German. His personal family history isn't American, it is European, he was born in America which is as far as it goes. How can a man with so little in the way of being actually American tell real fellow American's they need to keep the foreigners out. He is less American than 99.99 percent of actual American's.

Donny doesn't act like a president. It's one of the most obvious things about him. He acts more like a spoilt thug brought up in the slums who has made it big and everybody around him must genuflect. He has an element of histrionics about his behaviour as well. The juvenile habit of using social media to disrespect other people and to publicly rant and rage is of someone who doesn't care about being judged by those people around him. His personal wealth has meant there has never been a need to curb his behaviour. Unfortunately it has also meant he's had no time for self reflection on his behaviour. For him it is number one who counts and no one else. We can see this in his current attempt to ban people from 7 Muslim countries from entering the US. The countries he has his own businesses or interests in are not included. The biggest prime example must be Saudia Arabia. It's common knowledge of the 19 terrorists which attacked America on 9/11 that 17 of these came from Saudi Arabia. In terrorism terms Saudi is the genesis point of all terrorist funding as well as being one of the biggest customers for buying arms from the Western world. To which the UK can be pretty much an embarrassing participant. The word is 'selective.' This is someone who certainly cares about his own business interests even while in office as president and one thing we can guarantee over the next four years is a repeat display of ensuring his businesses are not affected by any decisions he makes. Even as president of the US of A, he cares more about his on empire and no doubt we'll see him milking the country for his own benefit.