|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2020 15:49:50 GMT
He’s not purged a single antisemite from the party. And it’s as divided now as it’s ever been...... But he has lanced the main boil of the Party and removed him. Left a lot of people gutted too, so 3 out of 4 already isn't bad. A purging could be on the cards following the implementation of recommendations. It is divided you're right, just waiting for the disciples to come round to the idea of an electable leader and Labour will be well on their way. The glorious centre shall return once more. Hilarious as that may sound in your head it’s just meaningless waffle. He hasn’t removed anyone from the party......
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Nov 14, 2020 16:23:30 GMT
He’s not purged a single antisemite from the party. And it’s as divided now as it’s ever been...... But he has lanced the main boil of the Party and removed him. Left a lot of people gutted too, so 3 out of 4 already isn't bad. A purging could be on the cards following the implementation of recommendations. It is divided you're right, just waiting for the disciples to come round to the idea of an electable leader and Labour will be well on their way. The glorious centre shall return once more. 😁 If the glorious centre Means a return to a charmless Blair like figure in starmer Than I’ll take boris or corbyn
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2020 16:51:40 GMT
But he has lanced the main boil of the Party and removed him. Left a lot of people gutted too, so 3 out of 4 already isn't bad. A purging could be on the cards following the implementation of recommendations. It is divided you're right, just waiting for the disciples to come round to the idea of an electable leader and Labour will be well on their way. The glorious centre shall return once more. 😁 If the glorious centre Means a return to a charmless Blair like figure in starmer Than I’ll take boris or corbyn The lack of self awareness from centrists is frightening. Tone deaf and patronising on Brexit, the sense of entitlement and smug moral superiority oozes from every pore. Politically they offer jack shit......
|
|
|
Post by ColonelMustard on Nov 14, 2020 17:39:03 GMT
😁 If the glorious centre Means a return to a charmless Blair like figure in starmer Than I’ll take boris or corbyn The lack of self awareness from centrists is frightening. Tone deaf and patronising on Brexit, the sense of entitlement and smug moral superiority oozes from every pore. Politically they offer jack shit...... And their ruthlessness in pursuit of that Jack Shit (power for the sake of it) is second to none. The radical centre.
|
|
|
Post by RedandWhite90 on Nov 14, 2020 19:45:55 GMT
😁 If the glorious centre Means a return to a charmless Blair like figure in starmer Than I’ll take boris or corbyn The lack of self awareness from centrists is frightening. Tone deaf and patronising on Brexit, the sense of entitlement and smug moral superiority oozes from every pore. Politically they offer jack shit...... I think that's my headstone quote sorted.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Nov 14, 2020 19:48:25 GMT
The lack of self awareness from centrists is frightening. Tone deaf and patronising on Brexit, the sense of entitlement and smug moral superiority oozes from every pore. Politically they offer jack shit...... I think that's my headstone quote sorted. Well let’s hope you won’t need it anytime soon
|
|
|
Post by RedandWhite90 on Nov 14, 2020 20:09:53 GMT
I think that's my headstone quote sorted. Well let’s hope you won’t need it anytime soon You and me both on that one boss.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2020 20:25:45 GMT
The lack of self awareness from centrists is frightening. Tone deaf and patronising on Brexit, the sense of entitlement and smug moral superiority oozes from every pore. Politically they offer jack shit...... I think that's my headstone quote sorted. You can have that one for free fella.....
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Nov 14, 2020 22:11:27 GMT
😁 If the glorious centre Means a return to a charmless Blair like figure in starmer Than I’ll take boris or corbyn The lack of self awareness from centrists is frightening. Tone deaf and patronising on Brexit, the sense of entitlement and smug moral superiority oozes from every pore. Politically they offer jack shit...... I think that's just wrong on so many levels! There is a large slice of irony in describing centrist Labour party members as lacking self awareness! If anything, they are far more aware of England's position as a right-wing country, their place in it and what they need to do to get elected. Far more so than Labour's left, as epitomised by Corbyn, which will never get elected in this country, no matter how much their actual policies might benefit ordinary working people, which is also sadly ironic. The right and their supportive press is far too effective at scaring voters into thinking a left-wing Labour party is effectively reds under the bed, will take all their money in taxes and waste it. I do wonder if Labour's Left ever thinks "why do we never win elections, why is it only ever non-threatening centrist Labour that wins elections these days?" So really it comes down to a simple choice: do you want someone who you wholeheartedly support shouting from the sidelines with little chance of ever putting into practice the policies you think will help the ordinary man, or do you want someone who you may not wholeheartedly support but has a genuine chance of enacting some policies which will benefit ordinary people more, or do you want the Tories, who, as the free meals fiasco has perfectly demonstrated, will rarely do much to help your average person? Seems an easy choice to me. I see that as a pragmatic and sensible approach to getting a government which might actually be able to put in place policies which benefit more ordinary people more of the time. If that's smug and self entitled, I'll need to get a new dictionary! And politically they clearly offer a lot more potentially in practical legislative terms than does a party which is never going to get elected.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2020 22:22:51 GMT
The lack of self awareness from centrists is frightening. Tone deaf and patronising on Brexit, the sense of entitlement and smug moral superiority oozes from every pore. Politically they offer jack shit...... I think that's just wrong on so many levels! There is a large slice of irony in describing centrist Labour party members as lacking self awareness! If anything, they are far more aware of England's position as a right-wing country, their place in it and what they need to do to get elected. Far more so than Labour's left, as epitomised by Corbyn, which will never get elected in this country, no matter how much their actual policies might benefit ordinary working people, which is also sadly ironic. The right and their supportive press is far too effective at scaring voters into thinking a left-wing Labour party is effectively reds under the bed, will take all their money in taxes and waste it. I do wonder if Labour's Left ever thinks "why do we never win elections, why is it only ever non-threatening centrist Labour that wins elections these days?" So really it comes down to a simple choice: do you want someone who you wholeheartedly support shouting from the sidelines with little chance of ever putting into practice the policies you think will help the ordinary man, or do you want someone who you may not wholeheartedly support but has a genuine chance of enacting some policies which will benefit ordinary people more, or do you want the Tories, who, as the free meals fiasco has perfectly demonstrated, will rarely do much to help your average person? Seems an easy choice to me. I see that as a pragmatic and sensible approach to getting a government which might actually be able to put in place policies which benefit more ordinary people more of the time. If that's smug and self entitled, I'll need to get a new dictionary! And politically they clearly offer a lot more potentially in practical legislative terms than does a party which is never going to get elected. You’re entitled to your opinion of course. And no mention of the campaign from both the PLP and the media from day one of Corbyn’s leadership to undermine him. But you want unity and for everyone in the party to pull together now I take it? Before you get too excited let’s see how Starmer does in the next election, at the moment he’s getting a free pass from the MSM......
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Nov 14, 2020 22:40:42 GMT
I think that's just wrong on so many levels! There is a large slice of irony in describing centrist Labour party members as lacking self awareness! If anything, they are far more aware of England's position as a right-wing country, their place in it and what they need to do to get elected. Far more so than Labour's left, as epitomised by Corbyn, which will never get elected in this country, no matter how much their actual policies might benefit ordinary working people, which is also sadly ironic. The right and their supportive press is far too effective at scaring voters into thinking a left-wing Labour party is effectively reds under the bed, will take all their money in taxes and waste it. I do wonder if Labour's Left ever thinks "why do we never win elections, why is it only ever non-threatening centrist Labour that wins elections these days?" So really it comes down to a simple choice: do you want someone who you wholeheartedly support shouting from the sidelines with little chance of ever putting into practice the policies you think will help the ordinary man, or do you want someone who you may not wholeheartedly support but has a genuine chance of enacting some policies which will benefit ordinary people more, or do you want the Tories, who, as the free meals fiasco has perfectly demonstrated, will rarely do much to help your average person? Seems an easy choice to me. I see that as a pragmatic and sensible approach to getting a government which might actually be able to put in place policies which benefit more ordinary people more of the time. If that's smug and self entitled, I'll need to get a new dictionary! And politically they clearly offer a lot more potentially in practical legislative terms than does a party which is never going to get elected. You’re entitled to your opinion of course. And no mention of the campaign from both the PLP and the media from day one of Corbyn’s leadership to undermine him. But you want unity and for everyone in the party to pull together now I take it? Before you get too excited let’s see how Starmer does in the next election, at the moment he’s getting a free pass from the MSM...... I'd love the Labour Party to pull together and be united. Can't see it happening and that's another reason they struggle to get elected. I've already said elsewhere I don't expect Starmer to be able to overturn an 80 seat majority. Not least because the Tories will probably have dumped Bluffer by then for someone less incompetent. But also because I don't think there are enough big hitters in the shadow cabinet. However, he'll have a better chance than a Corbyn-led Labour party would, as was sadly demonstrated in December. It gives me no pleasure to say that, it's just an acknowledgement of the reality sadly (at least, as I see it). Another ten years of the Tories I think, heaven help us all!
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Nov 15, 2020 7:28:34 GMT
Starmer is really pulling a fast one over his supporters
Spent his life as a human rights lawyer working for the defence When opportunity strikes becomes the country’s chief prosecutor
Happily joined the shadow cabinet spent his time in and on the media backing his leader whilst doing everything he could to undermine him
Stood as party leader on a unifying mandate and as soon as he’s elected starts a year of the long knives
Now the coup de grace this morning he is putting pressure on the government to make illegal the alleged miss information about the covid vaccine
Now I have previously on this board said id have this vaccine as soon as possible But what is the former human rights defence lawyer doing trying to suppress the freedom of speech the fundamental human right
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Nov 15, 2020 9:13:46 GMT
😁 If the glorious centre Means a return to a charmless Blair like figure in starmer Than I’ll take boris or corbyn The lack of self awareness from centrists is frightening. Tone deaf and patronising on Brexit, the sense of entitlement and smug moral superiority oozes from every pore. Politically they offer jack shit...... Well, if anyone should recognise smug, moral superiority I guess it would be you.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Nov 15, 2020 9:38:48 GMT
Starmer is really pulling a fast one over his supporters Spent his life as a human rights lawyer working for the defence When opportunity strikes becomes the country’s chief prosecutor Happily joined the shadow cabinet spent his time in and on the media backing his leader whilst doing everything he could to undermine him Stood as party leader on a unifying mandate and as soon as he’s elected starts a year of the long knives Now the coup de grace this morning he is putting pressure on the government to make illegal the alleged miss information about the covid vaccine Now I have previously on this board said id have this vaccine as soon as possible But what is the former human rights defence lawyer doing trying to suppress the freedom of speech the fundamental human right As if working as a human rights lawyer within a nationally and internationally agreed system of law is a bad thing! You do know how the law works, right? The fact that we have a system where someone is entitled to a defence, regardless of what they may or may not have done, is one of the fundamentals of living in a civilised society. Presumably, any action to limit misinformation may also need to be scrutinised and ultimately challenged legally and will also require both prosecution and defence lawyers to do their best in any case that is brought! Conflating the actions of a defence team with those of the defendant is a bit silly. Whereas routinely making up false stories as a journalist (which eventually led to being sacked) as Bluffer's only job outside of politics is a worthy comparison Every cabinet/shadow cabinet member supports their leader. I'd love to see your evidence for Starmer "doing everything he could to undermine him"! Compare and contrast this with Gove and May or Bluffer and Gove, for example, the latter declaring that Bluffer "was not up to the job" when he first tried for the leadership. If only the country had listened, we probably wouldn't be in the absolute hole we currently are.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Nov 15, 2020 9:40:03 GMT
The lack of self awareness from centrists is frightening. Tone deaf and patronising on Brexit, the sense of entitlement and smug moral superiority oozes from every pore. Politically they offer jack shit...... Well, if anyone should recognise smug, moral superiority I guess it would be you. Just no need for that.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Nov 15, 2020 9:48:26 GMT
Starmer is really pulling a fast one over his supporters Spent his life as a human rights lawyer working for the defence When opportunity strikes becomes the country’s chief prosecutor Happily joined the shadow cabinet spent his time in and on the media backing his leader whilst doing everything he could to undermine him Stood as party leader on a unifying mandate and as soon as he’s elected starts a year of the long knives Now the coup de grace this morning he is putting pressure on the government to make illegal the alleged miss information about the covid vaccine Now I have previously on this board said id have this vaccine as soon as possible But what is the former human rights defence lawyer doing trying to suppress the freedom of speech the fundamental human right As if working as a human rights lawyer within a nationally and internationally agreed system of law is a bad thing! You do know how the law works, right? The fact that we have a system where someone is entitled to a defence, regardless of what they may or may not have done, is one of the fundamentals of living in a civilised society. Presumably, any action to limit misinformation may also need to be scrutinised and ultimately challenged legally and will also require both prosecution and defence lawyers to do their best in any case that is brought! Conflating the actions of a defence team with those of the defendant is a bit silly. Whereas routinely making up false stories as a journalist (which eventually led to being sacked) as Bluffer's only job outside of politics is a worthy comparison Every cabinet/shadow cabinet member supports their leader. I'd love to see your evidence for Starmer "doing everything he could to undermine him"! Compare and contrast this with Gove and May or Bluffer and Gove, for example, the latter declaring that Bluffer "was not up to the job" when he first tried for the leadership. If only the country had listened, we probably wouldn't be in the absolute hole we currently are. I never said people shouldn’t have a defence I just have a major trust problem with poachers turned game keeper I sure even you must admit starmers stance on brexit undermined corbyn’s election chances even if you agreed with it I note you failed to mention anything on starmers purge Or his attempt to remove the right of freedom of speech What is your opinion on freedom of speech should the government have the right to silence a anti vaccine debate
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Nov 15, 2020 10:03:53 GMT
As if working as a human rights lawyer within a nationally and internationally agreed system of law is a bad thing! You do know how the law works, right? The fact that we have a system where someone is entitled to a defence, regardless of what they may or may not have done, is one of the fundamentals of living in a civilised society. Presumably, any action to limit misinformation may also need to be scrutinised and ultimately challenged legally and will also require both prosecution and defence lawyers to do their best in any case that is brought! Conflating the actions of a defence team with those of the defendant is a bit silly. Whereas routinely making up false stories as a journalist (which eventually led to being sacked) as Bluffer's only job outside of politics is a worthy comparison Every cabinet/shadow cabinet member supports their leader. I'd love to see your evidence for Starmer "doing everything he could to undermine him"! Compare and contrast this with Gove and May or Bluffer and Gove, for example, the latter declaring that Bluffer "was not up to the job" when he first tried for the leadership. If only the country had listened, we probably wouldn't be in the absolute hole we currently are. I never said people shouldn’t have a defence I just have a major trust problem with poachers turned game keeper I sure even you must admit starmers stance on brexit undermined corbyn’s election chances even if you agreed with it I note you failed to mention anything on starmers purge Or his attempt to remove the right of freedom of speech What is your opinion on freedom of speech should the government have the right to silence a anti vaccine debate No, you said he'd spent his life as a human rights defence lawyer then became the country's chief prosecutor, as if that was a sign of opportunism. Aside from someone wanting to better themselves in their career, an aspirational approach I would have thought a dyed in the wool Tory such as yourself would support all too readily, the DPP role is, amongst other things, to decide on whether prosecutions should go ahead or whether they should be stopped, based on passing the (quite high) evidential test. I think you should start on Starmer's wikipedia entry and read through his legal career. Seems fairly balanced to me, but see what you think. Please provide where you think Starmer has "done everything he could to undermine" Corbyn. Freedom of speech is a very difficult area. In theory, it'd be lovely if anyone could say anything and all the nonsense/hate crime/bullshit etc would be flagged up and rapidly dismissed for the crap that it is, but that's sadly not the case. It is influential and quite dangerous. I don't have the answer, but I do worry about the proliferation of this kind of social media internet crap - as Trump has shown eventually you just deny anything you don't like the sound of as 'fake news' and millions of people swallow it up unthinkingly...
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Nov 15, 2020 10:20:17 GMT
I never said people shouldn’t have a defence I just have a major trust problem with poachers turned game keeper I sure even you must admit starmers stance on brexit undermined corbyn’s election chances even if you agreed with it I note you failed to mention anything on starmers purge Or his attempt to remove the right of freedom of speech What is your opinion on freedom of speech should the government have the right to silence a anti vaccine debate No, you said he'd spent his life as a human rights defence lawyer then became the country's chief prosecutor, as if that was a sign of opportunism. Aside from someone wanting to better themselves in their career, an aspirational approach I would have thought a dyed in the wool Tory such as yourself would support all too readily, the DPP role is, amongst other things, to decide on whether prosecutions should go ahead or whether they should be stopped, based on passing the (quite high) evidential test. I think you should start on Starmer's wikipedia entry and read through his legal career. Seems fairly balanced to me, but see what you think. Please provide where you think Starmer has "done everything he could to undermine" Corbyn. Freedom of speech is a very difficult area. In theory, it'd be lovely if anyone could say anything and all the nonsense/hate crime/bullshit etc would be flagged up and rapidly dismissed for the crap that it is, but that's sadly not the case. It is influential and quite dangerous. I don't have the answer, but I do worry about the proliferation of this kind of social media internet crap - as Trump has shown eventually you just deny anything you don't like the sound of as 'fake news' and millions of people swallow it up unthinkingly... So you don’t know if it’s right or not to ban anti vaccine discussion And yet again nothing about starmers statement about wanting to unite the Labour Party whilst asking for there vote And then doing the exact opposite when the daft fuckers voted for him
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2020 10:29:52 GMT
Well, if anyone should recognise smug, moral superiority I guess it would be you. Just no need for that. It’s fine. Being a one man member of the Boris Johnson fan club up in Scotland takes its toll after a while......
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Nov 15, 2020 10:32:07 GMT
No, you said he'd spent his life as a human rights defence lawyer then became the country's chief prosecutor, as if that was a sign of opportunism. Aside from someone wanting to better themselves in their career, an aspirational approach I would have thought a dyed in the wool Tory such as yourself would support all too readily, the DPP role is, amongst other things, to decide on whether prosecutions should go ahead or whether they should be stopped, based on passing the (quite high) evidential test. I think you should start on Starmer's wikipedia entry and read through his legal career. Seems fairly balanced to me, but see what you think. Please provide where you think Starmer has "done everything he could to undermine" Corbyn. Freedom of speech is a very difficult area. In theory, it'd be lovely if anyone could say anything and all the nonsense/hate crime/bullshit etc would be flagged up and rapidly dismissed for the crap that it is, but that's sadly not the case. It is influential and quite dangerous. I don't have the answer, but I do worry about the proliferation of this kind of social media internet crap - as Trump has shown eventually you just deny anything you don't like the sound of as 'fake news' and millions of people swallow it up unthinkingly... So you don’t know if it’s right or not to ban anti vaccine discussion And yet again nothing about starmers statement about wanting to unite the Labour Party whilst asking for there vote And then doing the exact opposite when the daft fuckers voted for him I don't think anyone is proposing to "ban anti-vaccine discussion", are they? They may well be discussing proposals to ban incorrect, false, misleading or wrong vaccine information, in much the same way that certain social media companies now highlight unproven and misleading info when put out, see Trump as an example. As I said, it'd be lovely if internet bollocks was seen for what it was and ignored, but as Starkiller demonstrates daily, some folk lap this stuff up and regurgitate it out quite happily and others get drawn in. Sadly, it's quite dangerous - getting back to anti-vaxxers, we've already seen an increase in measles cases and deaths in this country, almost directly related back to Dr Andrew Wakefield's disastrous campaign about MMR. Starmer's statement? I approve of his ambition to unite the Labour Party - a disunited one will never get elected. Who wouldn't want to unite their party behind him/herself as leader? I don't really see your point here! Presumably, those who voted him as leader saw him as the best opportunity to do that, and the best opportunity to challenge for election to government. My personal feeling is that he's moving the party to a position where it will appear electable again. I can see why that might not appeal to you, but, as a leader, that's his job! Please provide why you think Starmer "did everything to undermine Corbyn".
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Nov 15, 2020 10:36:20 GMT
So you don’t know if it’s right or not to ban anti vaccine discussion And yet again nothing about starmers statement about wanting to unite the Labour Party whilst asking for there vote And then doing the exact opposite when the daft fuckers voted for him I don't think anyone is proposing to "ban anti-vaccine discussion", are they? They may well be discussing proposals to ban incorrect, false, misleading or wrong vaccine information, in much the same way that certain social media companies now highlight unproven and misleading info when put out, see Trump as an example. As I said, it'd be lovely if internet bollocks was seen for what it was and ignored, but as Starkiller demonstrates daily, some folk lap this stuff up and regurgitate it out quite happily and others get drawn in. Starmer's statement? I approve of his ambition to unite the Labour Party - a disunited one will never get elected. Who wouldn't want to unite their party behind him/herself as leader? I don't really see your point here! Presumably, those who voted him as leader saw him as the best opportunity to do that, and the best opportunity to challenge for election to government. Please provide why you think Starmer "did everything to undermine Corbyn". Well if you don’t think that starmers refusal to accept brexit And continual campaigning for another referendum didn’t undermine corbyn than fair enough But hundreds of thousands of northern voters thought differently
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Nov 15, 2020 10:57:48 GMT
I don't think anyone is proposing to "ban anti-vaccine discussion", are they? They may well be discussing proposals to ban incorrect, false, misleading or wrong vaccine information, in much the same way that certain social media companies now highlight unproven and misleading info when put out, see Trump as an example. As I said, it'd be lovely if internet bollocks was seen for what it was and ignored, but as Starkiller demonstrates daily, some folk lap this stuff up and regurgitate it out quite happily and others get drawn in. Starmer's statement? I approve of his ambition to unite the Labour Party - a disunited one will never get elected. Who wouldn't want to unite their party behind him/herself as leader? I don't really see your point here! Presumably, those who voted him as leader saw him as the best opportunity to do that, and the best opportunity to challenge for election to government. Please provide why you think Starmer "did everything to undermine Corbyn". Well if you don’t think that starmers refusal to accept brexit And continual campaigning for another referendum didn’t undermine corbyn than fair enough But hundreds of thousands of northern voters thought differently How often do you need to read that Labour didn't "refuse to accept Brexit". I'd get it if you were saying this about the LibDems! They did propose a second confirmatory referendum, eventually, some three years after the initial vote. That was Labour's position based on what we subsequently knew after several years of farcical stalemate in parliament, the gradual unravelling of most of the Brexiteers promises and attempts at negotiation! How does the Shadow Cabinet minister for Brexit (Starmer) undermine that of his Leader, given both of them will no doubt have discussed that position all along? I suspect the reality is that you don't like Starmer because he's currently doing better than Bluffer and offers more of a threat to the Tory government than a Corbyn-led Labour Party would ever do. I wouldn't worry. I can't see him over-turning an 80 seat majority. Polls currently put the two parties on parity, give or take. So, if the Covid disaster, all the U-turns, having policy dictated by footballers and all the infighting in No 10 doesn't persuade people that the opposition might be a better alternative for the country, I think it's safe to say we're stuck with the Tories for another decade at least! As I've said many times, England is essentially a right-wing country, that's the default position for most people.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Nov 15, 2020 12:08:41 GMT
Well if you don’t think that starmers refusal to accept brexit And continual campaigning for another referendum didn’t undermine corbyn than fair enough But hundreds of thousands of northern voters thought differently How often do you need to read that Labour didn't "refuse to accept Brexit". I'd get it if you were saying this about the LibDems! They did propose a second confirmatory referendum, eventually, some three years after the initial vote. That was Labour's position based on what we subsequently knew after several years of farcical stalemate in parliament, the gradual unravelling of most of the Brexiteers promises and attempts at negotiation! How does the Shadow Cabinet minister for Brexit (Starmer) undermine that of his Leader, given both of them will no doubt have discussed that position all along? I suspect the reality is that you don't like Starmer because he's currently doing better than Bluffer and offers more of a threat to the Tory government than a Corbyn-led Labour Party would ever do. I wouldn't worry. I can't see him over-turning an 80 seat majority. Polls currently put the two parties on parity, give or take. So, if the Covid disaster, all the U-turns, having policy dictated by footballers and all the infighting in No 10 doesn't persuade people that the opposition might be a better alternative for the country, I think it's safe to say we're stuck with the Tories for another decade at least! As I've said many times, England is essentially a right-wing country, that's the default position for most people. Well we agree on something at least the sooner boris is gone the better
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Nov 15, 2020 12:22:44 GMT
You’re entitled to your opinion of course. And no mention of the campaign from both the PLP and the media from day one of Corbyn’s leadership to undermine him. But you want unity and for everyone in the party to pull together now I take it? Before you get too excited let’s see how Starmer does in the next election, at the moment he’s getting a free pass from the MSM...... I'd love the Labour Party to pull together and be united. Can't see it happening and that's another reason they struggle to get elected. I've already said elsewhere I don't expect Starmer to be able to overturn an 80 seat majority. Not least because the Tories will probably have dumped Bluffer by then for someone less incompetent. But also because I don't think there are enough big hitters in the shadow cabinet. However, he'll have a better chance than a Corbyn-led Labour party would, as was sadly demonstrated in December. It gives me no pleasure to say that, it's just an acknowledgement of the reality sadly (at least, as I see it). Another ten years of the Tories I think, heaven help us all! Objectively speaking, whatever your views Corbyn would have definitely won the election if it wasn't for the Labour Party centrists trying to undermine him from Day 1. It's all there to see now. No-one can realistically argue that this isn't the case. When you think he had most of his own party working against him plus the media making him out to be nothing better than a child killer every day, trumped up anti-semitism charges from the Israeli lobby, then he did incredibly well in terms of popular votes, it was only his own party that stopped him from getting over the line. I say that as someone who had great scepticism about Corbyn from Day 1
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Nov 15, 2020 12:24:39 GMT
Well, if anyone should recognise smug, moral superiority I guess it would be you. Just no need for that. You’re right that was cruel.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Nov 15, 2020 13:43:41 GMT
I'd love the Labour Party to pull together and be united. Can't see it happening and that's another reason they struggle to get elected. I've already said elsewhere I don't expect Starmer to be able to overturn an 80 seat majority. Not least because the Tories will probably have dumped Bluffer by then for someone less incompetent. But also because I don't think there are enough big hitters in the shadow cabinet. However, he'll have a better chance than a Corbyn-led Labour party would, as was sadly demonstrated in December. It gives me no pleasure to say that, it's just an acknowledgement of the reality sadly (at least, as I see it). Another ten years of the Tories I think, heaven help us all! Objectively speaking, whatever your views Corbyn would have definitely won the election if it wasn't for the Labour Party centrists trying to undermine him from Day 1. It's all there to see now. No-one can realistically argue that this isn't the case. When you think he had most of his own party working against him plus the media making him out to be nothing better than a child killer every day, trumped up anti-semitism charges from the Israeli lobby, then he did incredibly well in terms of popular votes, it was only his own party that stopped him from getting over the line. I say that as someone who had great scepticism about Corbyn from Day 1 We'll have to agree to disagree. I don't think, objectively speaking, that that is the case. I think that ignores the fact that a large swathe of the electorate, rightly or wrongly, bought into the thinking that Corbyn was/is a lefty/Marxist/terrorist sympathiser who would tax them till the pips squeaked. There are probably other slurs/allegations too which were routinely brought up by the right-wing press and the Tory Party. You also need to take into account the fact that the overwhelming majority of voters were sick and tired of hearing about Brexit all day every day and just wanted it to be over and done with, regardless of the consequences. Cummings understood that. For all his unpleasant faults, he reads the public very well. To claim that Corbyn would have won the election if it hadn't been for Labour Party centrists is, in my opinion, far too simplistic a conclusion. I don't think he would ever have won against Bluffer running on a "I'll stop you having to hear about Brexit anymore" ticket. I suspect nobody would, given Labour's position on Brexit, but they may well have done better than Corbyn's Labour. They could hardly have done worse! You described him as not getting over the line...having delivered the worst election result for decades, it'd be safer to say he could barely see the line, let alone get over it! You also have to remember that England is essentially a right-wing country. I mean, the Bluffer was too scared to do an interview with Andrew Neil, has a long history of dodgy comments on race, is a proven liar and philanderer, got sacked from his job for lying, Gove described him as "not fit for the job" and yet enough folk voted to give him an 80 seat majority! Thankfully, there appears to be a large slice of buyer's regret on Bluffer these days and people seem to have seen him for what he actually is: a lazy, bumbling clown, not the waggish, eccentric, loveable old Etonian toff our class-obsessed society still seems to need to elevate to positions of authority so they can tug their forelocks in obedience to...! But anyone who says the choice was one of the poorest in years is not far off the mark in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2020 16:58:01 GMT
Objectively speaking, whatever your views Corbyn would have definitely won the election if it wasn't for the Labour Party centrists trying to undermine him from Day 1. It's all there to see now. No-one can realistically argue that this isn't the case. When you think he had most of his own party working against him plus the media making him out to be nothing better than a child killer every day, trumped up anti-semitism charges from the Israeli lobby, then he did incredibly well in terms of popular votes, it was only his own party that stopped him from getting over the line. I say that as someone who had great scepticism about Corbyn from Day 1 We'll have to agree to disagree. I don't think, objectively speaking, that that is the case. I think that ignores the fact that a large swathe of the electorate, rightly or wrongly, bought into the thinking that Corbyn was/is a lefty/Marxist/terrorist sympathiser who would tax them till the pips squeaked. There are probably other slurs/allegations too which were routinely brought up by the right-wing press and the Tory Party. You also need to take into account the fact that the overwhelming majority of voters were sick and tired of hearing about Brexit all day every day and just wanted it to be over and done with, regardless of the consequences. Cummings understood that. For all his unpleasant faults, he reads the public very well. To claim that Corbyn would have won the election if it hadn't been for Labour Party centrists is, in my opinion, far too simplistic a conclusion. I don't think he would ever have won against Bluffer running on a "I'll stop you having to hear about Brexit anymore" ticket. I suspect nobody would, given Labour's position on Brexit, but they may well have done better than Corbyn's Labour. They could hardly have done worse! You described him as not getting over the line...having delivered the worst election result for decades, it'd be safer to say he could barely see the line, let alone get over it! You also have to remember that England is essentially a right-wing country. I mean, the Bluffer was too scared to do an interview with Andrew Neil, has a long history of dodgy comments on race, is a proven liar and philanderer, got sacked from his job for lying, Gove described him as "not fit for the job" and yet enough folk voted to give him an 80 seat majority! Thankfully, there appears to be a large slice of buyer's regret on Bluffer these days and people seem to have seen him for what he actually is: a lazy, bumbling clown, not the waggish, eccentric, loveable old Etonian toff our class-obsessed society still seems to need to elevate to positions of authority so they can tug their forelocks in obedience to...! But anyone who says the choice was one of the poorest in years is not far off the mark in my opinion. 2019 no, Brexit put pay any chance of that. 2017 he absolutely would have, there are a couple of dozen duplicitous snakes in the PLP that put pay to it. The same arseholes now preaching unity under Starmer, that’s if they didn’t jump ship and get a peerage as a sweetener......
|
|
|
Post by ColonelMustard on Nov 15, 2020 19:56:56 GMT
In terms of the plp and Labour machine Corbyn got over 12 and over 10 million votes virtually single handedly. More than single handedly, with most of those actively working against him.He came up against Brexit in 2019 through little fault of his won. But he also put Labour in their best financial situation for generations. As Labour hadnt got over 10 million since 2001 and Milliband lost Scotland, Starmer throwing all of that away is a very bold strategy. Purely relying on national tiredness with the Tories. We'll have to see how it plays out.
|
|
|
Post by ColonelMustard on Nov 15, 2020 20:06:32 GMT
On Labours finances. The recent NEC election had about 130,000 people vote in them. The 2018 elections had 280,000. If the more than halving of the vote represents anywhere near a halving of membership, then Labour might be in the region a million quid a month down. Those wealthy donors better be striding into shot, screen right, very soon indeed.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2020 20:08:19 GMT
On Labours finances. The recent NEC election had about 130,000 people vote in them. The 2018 elections had 280,000. If the more than halving of the vote represents anywhere near a halving of membership, then Labour might be in the region a million quid a month down. Those wealthy donors better be striding into shot, screen right, very soon indeed. And the warmonger Luke Akehurst got the most votes. An absolute travesty, but not a surprise......
|
|