Jeremy Corbyn moves Labour party head office to Kensington ultra rich enclave

Still some turning out is good for them. If 30% of a group turn out to vote for you and 0% turn out to vote for Tory that is still a gain.

Try again.

what would you like to see change? Thought you would be over the moon with Corbyn?

Sorry what? That requires all people on welfare voted labour, and there being at least 30% of a constituency on welfare.

Can always find a cheaper office. This is a PRIME PROPERTY. Multi-Multi million pound office block! Why not go to Hackney?

Labour is a joke, cannot wait for more benefit cuts.

The vast majority on welfare, tax credits, immigrants vote Labour. Even if they have low turn outs this will still see them get more votes from them than go Tory.

Sorry what? You think low turn out matters? Not when you import millions of them does it.

Yes but there aren't enough of them to win an election, so that renders your point as false.

Most immigrants can't vote at all. As I said.

The people saying you have no point are a little peculiar really. You do; you talk about ending in equality before spending millions of pounds on a new HQ.

I mean if they moved into a reasonably nice area, with good transport links as well, fine. But this is not just that it is Kensington. I mean come on, if you are trying to prove you are not the same Westminster elite/London bubble types who preach equality, high tax and high immigration from ivory towers and then move in to Kensington is doesn't help.

Well, let's hope he'll feel the pressure to dress more sensibly.

There is enough to make a difference. After 12 years say of it there certainly is enough to swing a few your way.

You tell em Boris;
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-claims-labour-opened-up-the-borders-because-immigrants-are-more-likely-to-vote-for-a6717936.html

The stats for you;
http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/pressArticle/83

As I said, you were wrong. You are so rude and arrogant; no wonder you are alienated. Your silly "try again" statements that aren't even true show how up yourself you are. Some advice for you from your other thread;

http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=3208653

If you wish to fit in with people perhaps;
1) learn some manners?
2) Get off this high horse you have.You say that you are "smarter than everyone else and never afraid to let them know". Well look at the story you tell-in reality you aren't very smart and your obnoxious comments only draw attention to it so everyone knows.

Assuming it's being done with party money it's up to them how to spend it. If they feel like this is the best way then so be it. I'm sure there's good reasons to have it somewhere within easy access of Parliament, the main media hubs the like.

Great, a quote from an opposing politician, it must be true. No ounce of bias whatsoever.



Most immigrants can't vote.

https://www.gov.uk/voting-in-the-uk/general-elections

You seem to be completely ignoring the long term implications-eventually they can if not their children definately will be able to. try again.

Not all those on welfare vote Labour, a lot more now vote UKIP, and there are many that vote Tory, LibDem and Green.


There's absolutely nothing to suggest that because Labour got a new office they no longer want to fight inequality.

They are a bunch of champagne socialists preaching from ivory towers though who are happy to waste public money and employ people on zero hours contracts which is according to themselves exploitation and generally evil.

You haven't shown any substantial evidence yet. And from your points it's also clear that you don't even know who is and isn't allowed to vote in a GE.

IT is clear that you don't understand the statistics given to you as well as the way their children vote, how immigrants do vote in blocks, etc.

Your arguments are based on hypotheticals and political bias. So please, try again.

As you can see my name is James,
From a very very young age I was revered by my peers, my teachers referred to me as a genius and was told that I would be the future Prime Minister.
However upon hitting the age of about 14, I guess I got complacent, began drinking, smoking (anything i could roll), and shagging (anyone that was willing). Before long I found myself alienated, and disenfranchised from society as a whole. I suppose the alienation was from an intellectual snobbery, I was smarter than everybody else and was never afraid to let them know. Don't get me wrong, I wasn't a nerd or anything, I could never fit in with them, nor could I fit in with anyone else properly. Everyone would be in their cliques and I would just roam about finding "temporary accommodation" within other friend groups, I tended to find girls easy, I found people in general rather easy, despite getting beaten up quite often the majority of the time I would talk my way out of one.
This carried on from the age of 14 until just after my 17th birthday, I still drink (a lot less than before but still more than any other 17 year old I know), smoke (just tobacco mostly) and am in a committed relationship and yet I still feel alienated. I guess that could be due to unemployment but I am at the moment very close to getting a 5 year course which would set me up for life. There are times where I miss the past, but then there are others when I am enveloped in regret. So, ask me anything.

No because you can't be a socialist without living in a cave using a common barter system

Assuming it's being done with party money it's up to them how to spend it. If they feel like this is the best way then so be it. I'm sure there's good reasons to have it somewhere within easy access of Parliament, the main media hubs the like.

Please, try again in your life. For a drug taking child you seem to hold yourself in very high esteem. I shall take the advice of myself, Boris Johnson, other intelligent people over some guy who has probably had his mind turned to mush due to substance misuse at such a young age. From the above thread you made.

If that party money is paid for by the public that could be a hard sell. "High guys, we had to get a new HQ so we chose Kensington. Other areas are well located, have good transport links, etc etc but we wanted to be in the most expensive and posh area possible. Very posh wasn't enough, we had to go all out with money you donated to get ourselves into a HQ as far away from you lot as possible".

I agree with you it is their choice how to spend it, but I just think that this may well highlight for many some of the problems with Labour at the moment.

On a personal level I'm glad since I resent Labour (or what Labour has become-what Labour is supposed to stand for is admirable). Nothing could top them voting in Corbyn but give them credit they are still trying. Every little helps.

It's primarily funded by members and trade unionists choosing to contribute, not the public. They do get some money for being in opposition but there are restrictions on how this is allocated - it won't have gone to these offices. We don't even know how much they're paying or why they moved so it seems a bit silly to try and second-guess it from no information.

Deferring the argument is one way of showing how little a leg you have to stand on. Like I said, your stance is riddled with hypotheticals and political bias. The decision for mass immigration was an ideological one not a political one, and it seems to be working, it's improving the economy and helping organisations like the NHS to prosper. I don't know if you've ever met any immigrants in you life, for some reason I somewhat doubt it, or you're just riddled with prejudice. But there's nothing to say that immigrants vote in blocks any more than any other demographic. Young people tend to vote for more left wing parties, does that also mean that teen pregnancies were engineered by Labour?

As too many have had to mention already, Labour are paying for the office with their own money and it's their own prerogative as to what they decide to do with it. The implication that one must slum it to be a socialist is very immature I must say.

I mean if they moved into a reasonably nice area, with good transport links as well, fine. But this is not just that it is Kensington. I mean come on, if you are trying to prove you are not the same Westminster elite/London bubble types who preach equality, high tax and high immigration from ivory towers and then move in to Kensington is doesn't help.