Dr The Singh Posted 12 August 2015 Posted 12 August 2015 Firstly, I'm not your mate and would never dream of mating with you. I didn't personally attack you, I commented on the threads which you start, have you looked at them yourself? Your featured sentence which I've highlighted means nothing at all. I suggest you go back to starting threads about large Penises as you're not very good at communicating in sensible topics. . Mating and large penises in one post, that's amazing Molly
inckley fox Posted 12 August 2015 Posted 12 August 2015 The increasingly popular argument that people voted Tory instead of Labour because the latter weren't left wing enough is so ridiculous I don't really know where to start with it. The delusion from the far left has reached new levels with Corbynmania attached to it. I'm sure would-be left-leaning voters didn't protest-vote for the Tories, just as I'm sure that the Labour Party aren't going to triumph next time round by winning back all of those who are clamouring to get behind Corbyn. The centre ground will remain the one-size-fits-all electoral option and, for as long as the Press largely backs centre ground candidates and rails against the far left or far right, that's unlikely to change. Even if, as some think - with a degree of justification, in places - that a lot of people agree with the likes of Corbyn more than they tend to think. That said, Labour did such a lousy job of rallying its core support and winning those floating left-and-right-of-centre voters at the last election, that Corbyn may be more of a step sideways than backwards. There's no doubt that the SNP strategically re-badged itself as the Party of the Left north of the border, while a lot of traditional Labour support simply didn't turn out. So I'd disagree with you, to a small extent, inasmuch as they will recover some votes in some places by switching to the left, even though it's likely they'll lose votes elsewhere in the same movement. But equally, I've never bought the argument, proposed by Blair and co., that Labour lost the last election because of their move to the left. The loss of faith in the previous Labour government, the failure of Miliband to connect with the electorate on a personal level and the failure of him, and the likes of Balls, to present themselves as a competent, viable alternative would all be higher up the list. And I still believe IDS blew his chance of taking the Tories back to their traditional ground because of his personality and how it fared up against Blair, and the fact that he didn't know how appropriately to deliver the 'quiet man' line in his conference speech. I doubt substance had too much to do with it. In short, if Corbyn reinstates Clause 4 he may lose some votes, but if he screws up eating a bacon sandwich he'll lose even more.
inckley fox Posted 12 August 2015 Posted 12 August 2015 A far bigger portion than any other? Once people have left college they see labour for what they are. Tax,waste,tax,waste Not quite everyone. They won 3 out of the last 5 elections and I doubt that was all down to spotty little students with berets and Ban the Bomb badges. This might be what the Daily Mail tells you, but it's no more reliable a simplification than the Mirror telling you that a Tory victory spells five more years of the needy being roundly shafted. There's nothing necessarily left wing about wasting tax payers' hard-earned cash, just as there's no guarantee that a Conservative government will be worse for healthcare, education etc. Both may have happened to a large extent in the past but I know plenty of intelligent left-wingers who get incredibly worked up about wasteful spending, and plenty of intelligent right-wingers who highly value healthcare and education. It doesn't have to be a straight choice between the two. Even Red Ken referred to himself as a monetarist, didn't he?!
Guest Bilo Posted 12 August 2015 Posted 12 August 2015 Not quite everyone. They won 3 out of the last 5 elections and I doubt that was all down to spotty little students with berets and Ban the Bomb badges. This might be what the Daily Mail tells you, but it's no more reliable a simplification than the Mirror telling you that a Tory victory spells five more years of the needy being roundly shafted. There's nothing necessarily left wing about wasting tax payers' hard-earned cash, just as there's no guarantee that a Conservative government will be worse for healthcare, education etc. Both may have happened to a large extent in the past but I know plenty of intelligent left-wingers who get incredibly worked up about wasteful spending, and plenty of intelligent right-wingers who highly value healthcare and education. It doesn't have to be a straight choice between the two. Even Red Ken referred to himself as a monetarist, didn't he?! There's a lot of truth here. Wasteful spending or pie-in-the-sky economics only damage the credibility of the left, and it's something we need to avoid.
inckley fox Posted 12 August 2015 Posted 12 August 2015 There's a lot of truth here. Wasteful spending or pie-in-the-sky economics only damage the credibility of the left, and it's something we need to avoid. Definitely. But it's not necessarily the case that Corbyn won't address this problem more effectively than Burnham, Kendall etc. The biggest problem for Corbyn is probably people like Danczuk assuring everyone that the plot to oust him will begin on day one, and to me this says far more about the Labour Party - who have gone through pretty much a decade now of trying to undermine their leaders - than it does Corbyn's credentials as leader. If Corbyn doesn't work out for Labour, then there's nothing stopping them calling on Kendall or Chuka or David Miliband and saying - 'okay, let's try something else then'. I don't want to draw too many comparisons to what the Tories did with IDS, but there are at least a smattering of parallels there. On the other hand, if they refuse to give Corbyn his crack of the whip when such a large percentage of the party's members are behind him (if they are behind him) they'll be at war with the left until the end of time and, in doing so, will show themselves to be precisely the last sort of party any right-thinking person would wish to see in power. Perhaps that will be the case if they present Corbyn as their candidate to the electorate as well, but a leader is easier to replace than an entire parliamentary party. Obviously something has changed in Danczuk since his GMB days. Maybe it came when he was presiding over the collapse of Urban Visions Ltd. But at some point his choice might have to be between the sorts of policies he supports and the Labour Party. He's an elected MP and entitled to make such a decision, but as a Labour Party member he has to do his job for whoever his fellow members elect. And whether they go for Corbyn or not, it would do no harm for some of the dissenters to remember that electorates choose their governments, not party factions.
Guest Bilo Posted 12 August 2015 Posted 12 August 2015 Definitely. But it's not necessarily the case that Corbyn won't address this problem more effectively than Burnham, Kendall etc. The biggest problem for Corbyn is probably people like Danczuk assuring everyone that the plot to oust him will begin on day one, and to me this says far more about the Labour Party - who have gone through pretty much a decade now of trying to undermine their leaders - than it does Corbyn's credentials as leader. If Corbyn doesn't work out for Labour, then there's nothing stopping them calling on Kendall or Chuka or David Miliband and saying - 'okay, let's try something else then'. I don't want to draw too many comparisons to what the Tories did with IDS, but there are at least a smattering of parallels there. On the other hand, if they refuse to give Corbyn his crack of the whip when such a large percentage of the party's members are behind him (if they are behind him) they'll be at war with the left until the end of time and, in doing so, will show themselves to be precisely the last sort of party any right-thinking person would wish to see in power. Perhaps that will be the case if they present Corbyn as their candidate to the electorate as well, but a leader is easier to replace than an entire parliamentary party. Obviously something has changed in Danczuk since his GMB days. Maybe it came when he was presiding over the collapse of Urban Visions Ltd. But at some point his choice might have to be between the sorts of policies he supports and the Labour Party. He's an elected MP and entitled to make such a decision, but as a Labour Party member he has to do his job for whoever his fellow members elect. And whether they go for Corbyn or not, it would do no harm for some of the dissenters to remember that electorates choose their governments, not party factions. My prediction is that they won't try to oust him from Day One. You're quite right to say it'd be suicide, as well as undemocratic given the party members will have elected him, and the PLP shouldn't be that daft. They've already made two critical errors - one in nominating him to broaden the debate and the other in allowing the £3 voters. Both of which look likely to bite the party on the backside, and you'd hope they'd be more measured this time around by taking the 'give him enough rope to hang himself' approach so there doesn't appear to be any alternative. There'll be noises made for party unity and appeals made to get behind him, but in reality they'll be waiting for the right excuse. Bad poll results, flurry of negative headlines, embarrassing faux pas made, failure to achieve unity in the PLP and other challenges will all form part of the evidence and make it easier to justify a vote of no confidence or leadership challenge within a few months to a year. Given how he struggled to achieve nomination, I can't imagine it taking all of the above for a serious leadership contender to challenge his authority - which already looks as though it'll be weak from Day One given how a number of MPs have expressed doubt as to his leadership credentials, primarily because there isn't a shred of evidence to suggest he's even capable of leading anything other than a protest movement. In short, I'd be genuinely stunned to see him last till 2020. I'd say he has a massive job to stay on till the EU Referendum in 2017 if he's elected, let alone anything else. The parallels between Labour now and the Tories between 1997 and 2005 are uncanny. A bruised and struggling party wondering how to counter a government that looks difficult to topple, all too often asking the right questions but coming up with entirely the wrong answers. The Tories were hoping to go back to their core values with IDS and Howard, one of whom never even made it to a General Election and the other got trounced by a party haemorrhaging votes due to the Iraq War.
Sir Fynwy Posted 12 August 2015 Posted 12 August 2015 http://m.sputniknews.com/analysis/20150811/1025628905/Jeremy-Corbyn-Britain-politics.html
Strokes Posted 12 August 2015 Posted 12 August 2015 http://m.sputniknews.com/analysis/20150811/1025628905/Jeremy-Corbyn-Britain-politics.html
johnny the fox Posted 12 August 2015 Posted 12 August 2015 . Mating and large penises in one post, that's amazing Molly The guy loves me and is in denial...
Buce Posted 12 August 2015 Posted 12 August 2015 The guy loves me and is in denial... What part of she's a female do you not understand?
Strokes Posted 12 August 2015 Posted 12 August 2015 What part of she's a female do you not understand? I'm not convinced.
Strokes Posted 12 August 2015 Posted 12 August 2015 So, what's your theory? Frank to be/ moosebreath. 'She' seems a bit too familiar, I'm not the only one who has thought this.
Buce Posted 12 August 2015 Posted 12 August 2015 Frank to be/ moosebreath. 'She' seems a bit too familiar, I'm not the only one who has thought this. Interesting. So, Moose is a girl?
Strokes Posted 12 August 2015 Posted 12 August 2015 Interesting. So, Moose is a girl? Maybe, or..........
Strokes Posted 12 August 2015 Posted 12 August 2015 I hope the party implodes. I don't, but if they do I hope a decent strong party come to the fore. Any party in power unopposed would be dangerous.
davieG Posted 12 August 2015 Posted 12 August 2015 Labour leadership: Huge increase in party's electorate 1 hour ago From the sectionUK Politics Labour received more than 160,000 applications to vote in its leadership contest in the final 24 hours of registrations, the party has said. The number of applications via trade unions more than doubled and the number of party members and £3 registered supporters also rose. It takes the potential total electorate in the leadership contest to 610,753. Labour says checks are still taking place on all new members to weed out non-party supporters. In other developments: The registration deadline to vote in the contest was extended after the party's website crashed Three leadership contenders complained about a lack of data on voters from party HQ Backbench MPs called for the contest to be paused amid fears it was being "infiltrated" by rival groups The Labour Party has sharply increased in size since May's general election, with tens of thousands of people either becoming full members or registered supporters, driven to a large extent by a social media campaign by supporters of left wing MP Jeremy Corbyn. Data concerns The latest figures, tweeted by the party, are of 189,703 affiliated union members, 121,295 registered supporters and 299,755 members. Labour said all the numbers were subject to change as it continued to verify all the applications. In figures released by Labour on Tuesday, the total was 444,000. At the general election Labour had just over 200,000 full members. It appears some unions waited until the final day to present their voter applications. Details of the new supporters signed up through trade unions will be handed to all four campaigns in 10 days' time. But Mr Corbyn's rivals fear his campaign will already have access to the data, giving him an advantage when it comes to canvassing for votes. That is because most of those who registered through trade unions are thought to be Corbyn supporters. 'Chaos' All four campaigns are understood to have raised the issue at meeting with party officials on Tuesday, where they sought assurances that there would be a "level playing field", sources say. The Liz Kendall, Andy Burnham and Yvette Cooper campaigns followed this up with a letter to party HQ asking for the data to be released as soon as possible. Labour leadership contest Labour leadership candidates (l-r): Yvette Cooper, Jeremy Corbyn, Liz Kendall, Andy Burnham Who are the candidates? Andy Burnham, Yvette Cooper, Jeremy Corbyn, Liz Kendall Dates: Ballot papers will be sent out on 14 August; voting can take place by post or online. They must be returned by 10 September. The result is announced on 12 September Who can vote? All party members, registered supporters and affiliated supporters - including those joining via a union What is the voting system? The Alternative Vote system is being used so voters are asked to rank candidates in order of preference How does it work? If no candidate gets 50% of all votes cast, the candidate in fourth place is eliminated. Their second preference votes are then redistributed among the remaining three. If there is still no winner, the third place candidate is eliminated with their second preferences (or third in the case of votes transferred from the fourth place candidates) redistributed. It is then a head-to-head between the last two candidates At-a-glance profiles of the four contenders Backbench MPs Graham Stringer, Barry Sheerman, John Mann and Simon Danczuk have meanwhile called for the process to be halted. Mr Stringer predicted the party would be subjected to the "chaos of legal process". He told LBC: "I think if the election isn't paused that would be a shame and I think probably that people will take legal action because the rules are not being implemented properly." Mr Mann said it was a "free for all". Labour has dismissed such fears, saying "robust" measures are in place to "weed out" bogus applications. Another MP, Diane Abbott, told BBC News claims of infiltration by members of other parties were "silly", saying Labour was "bending over backwards" to ensure no foul play. Ballot papers will begin to be sent out on Friday, and the result announced at a special conference on 12 September. After the deadline passed, Mr Corbyn tweeted support for Labour's "robust selection system in totally new circumstances" and said the party had to united and defeat the Conservatives in 2020.
Guest Bilo Posted 12 August 2015 Posted 12 August 2015 I don't, but if they do I hope a decent strong party come to the fore. Any party in power unopposed would be dangerous. Who will that be? The SNP, who couldn't care a hoot about any voter south of the border? UKIP, whose hard-right immigration rhetoric alienates untold voters? The Lib Dems, who've been a car crash for five years? The country needs a strong Labour Party in opposition, and as a viable alternative government, now more than ever.
johnny the fox Posted 12 August 2015 Posted 12 August 2015 What part of she's a female do you not understand? sorry thought molly was a bloke..
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.