The Politics Thread

[Guest]

What is it with JC walking around surrounded by Females of all ages, coulours and sizes?

[IrememberBobHazell]

I suppose he is trying to get away from the allegations of  misogyny. That just leaves anti-semitism, lack of leadership, intimidation by his supporters of other candidates, making up policy on Trident on the hoof, links to the IRA in the 1980's etc etc.

 All the above and the  determination to cling onto power despite the odds and despite the opposition and consequences to his own party  leads me to worry about his judgement. Mrs Thatcher was no angel but she knew when she was beaten, this guy doesn't even know the way to the shaving cabinet.

[Alf Bentley]

On 7/22/2016 at 09:53, Captain... said:

An excellent deconstruction of what is wrong with Corbyn. The issue as I see it is that whilst JC doesn't have enough support to win a general election he still has a huge amount of support and in the unlikely event of a successful coup by Smith he will lose a huge chunk of support within the party and the electorate. Effectively labour are making themselves unelectable by this in fighting. Whilst I can't disagree with any of your criticisms of Corbyn I don't feel like he has had a chance to lead the party and having every step he's taken undermined by his own party. I would like to have seen him have a couple of years leading the party his way with their full support and if he had been unable to improve his popularity ratings then you can have a leadership campaign. If he is going to fail you have to let him fail on his terms and expose him as unelectable to his supporters. Then put up a candidate that appeals to Corbynistas, they have still failed to take on board what makes Corbyn so popular.

 

A fair point that a leader would normally be given more than 9 months to prove themselves (though the Tories only gave IDS 2 years). I don't think that it's fair to suggest that he's been "undermined by his own party" at every step. A few Blairite ultras went to the backbenches to carp at him from the off - but he can hardly complain about that, when that's precisely what he's done to them continuously for 30+ years! Many others who didn't share his views joined his shadow cabinet, buckled down and tried to make it work.

 

I think there are 2 reasons why the rebellion against Corbyn came so quickly:

1) His performance during the referendum campaign, which was abjectly poor (if you're being generous) or cynically destructive (if you're not - and I'm not). For years now, Labour has mainly been a pro-EU party. There have been specific criticisms, but the vast majority of MPs and party members would have supported Remain. In contrast, the Campaign Group (the hard left faction to which Corbyn belonged for most of his parliamentary career) has always seen the EU as a fundamentally neo-liberal institution and has wanted out. Corbyn went through the motions, addressing a few pro-Remain rallies, but kept his mass media involvement to a bare minimum, so that the referendum campaign became all about Dave v. Boris/Nigel. The minute we voted Leave, Corbyn was calling for the PM to activate Article 50 ASAP, before the government had even had a chance to work out what its stance would be for negotiations with a 2-year time-limit.

2) It became at least a possibility (and remains so) that the Tories could call an early general election this autumn. This obviously set alarm bells ringing and injected a much greater sense of urgency into the majority of MPs who were unhappy at his performance as leader. Corbyn's failure to impress uncommitted voters - indeed, his apparent lack of interest in doing so - encouraged such alarm, together with poor polling, poor doorstep response and some frankly bizarre policy priorities. At a time like this - arguably the most critical period in politics for 70 years, with post-Brexit Britain to be built - Labour simply cannot afford to allow Corbyn the time to "fail on his terms" and be "exposed as unelectable to his supporters" (many of whom don't care about electability in the first place)

 

I should make clear where I stand here. I'm not some apologist for Blair, who did some very good things and some very bad things. I like some of Corbyn's policies. I'm impressed that he's managed to mobilise so much interest (though I'm dubious about the motives of some of the far left agitators and of the depth of understanding/commitment of the Facebook "JC is the new Messiah" crew). If even a significant minority of those 500,000 members were to retain an active, democratic, broad-church commitment to the Labour Party, that would be brilliant...but I suspect that for many the commitment is to Corbyn the man/Messiah or to a far left list of policies. So, I wonder how much real support within the party would be lost if Corbyn is deposed - some, but probably a lot less than you think. Research suggests that many Corbynistas were previously Greens or unaligned.

 

Last year, I started off favouring Burnham to be leader, but he came across poorly. Kendall is too Blairite for my liking and I'd always found Yvette Cooper to be unpleasantly cynical (though I've changed my mind as she's come across a lot better recently). By the end, although I'm not a Campaign Group type, I'd have reluctantly voted Corbyn, as at least I expected him to change the terms of the public debate. He hasn't. He parrots a few different slogans and vague aspirations, but has not successfully presented a viable alternative to Tory policies. In fact, he seems to have no interest in converting those who voted for other parties in 2015 or who are unaligned. He just wants to build a big party to support his personal/political platform, with no concern as to how those policies are perceived by non-believers. His interest is in presenting a "pure socialist platform". He doesn't mind if none of it is ever implemented. I wonder how many Corbynistas are out there converting non-believers?

 

Trident is a classic example of his approach - and I say that as someone who (probably) supports a unilaterist approach. There is at least a case for unilateralism, given the vast expanse, the opportunity costs in terms of other ways of spending that money, the uselessness of nukes against our major current threats (terrorism, climate change), the damage that can be done with conventional weapons (see Syria) and the distinct possibility that cyber-warfare will render such weaponry useless against potential "big power" threats in the future. However, it is obvious to anyone with half a brain that a unilateralist policy is a massive vote-loser....unless you conduct a massive, successful campaign for it. Most voters either support the retention of a nuclear deterrent or support multilateral disarmament. Many of them would see unilateral nuclear disarmament as dangerously reckless or loony left pacifism. If Corbyn wants to promote unilateralism as a policy, he HAS to conduct a massive campaign to win the public over. Has he done that? Of course not! He'd be quite happy to just ensure that unilateral nuclear disarmament becomes Labour Party policy (it isn't currently - he was speaking against his own party policy), so that he can preach a pure sermon to the converted. The fact that no effort was made to win the public over would be incidental. The fact that it would lose his party votes and prevent them from ever gaining power and implementing ANY Labour policies would be acceptable "collateral damage" to his narcissistic mission.

[Buce]

British workers see biggest fall in wages in developed world:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36903032

[The Horse's Mouth]

On 23/07/2016 at 08:43, FIF said:

What is it with JC walking around surrounded by Females of all ages, coulours and sizes?

he's a p.i.m.p

[Guest]

surprised they haven't got a TV show. Pimp your MP.

[Rincewind]

On 7/23/2016 at 08:43, FIF said:

What is it with JC walking around surrounded by Females of all ages, coulours and sizes?

Quite. He should portray the image the media have given him. Very disrespectful of him.

[Darkon84]

On ‎21‎/‎07‎/‎2016 at 22:30, Alf Bentley said:

 

Corbyn won the leadership with 251,000 votes. To win a general election, Labour would need more than 10 million votes. So, for every vote he won as leader, he'd need about 40 votes to win power.

 

Unlike party members, who may never see anyone outside their own social circles, MPs regularly speak to a wide variety of constituents, so they tend to have a good understanding of what is and isn't of importance to constituents. In many cases, their job even depends on it - campaign on the wrong issues and they lose their seats. Dedicated activists who speak to a lot of constituents may have a similar level of understanding....but people who just vote in a leadership election don't.

 

Labour Party members and supporters now disproportionately come from the top socioeconomic groups (75%), are graduates (57%) and come from London & the South (47%).....whereas the people they are mainly meant to represent - and the voters they need to win over or not lose are almost the polar opposite: less well-off, lower prospects, living mainly in the Midlands and North. How much contact do these Corbynistas have with people in northern towns struggling to get by on low pay or zero-hours contracts, maybe grumbling about immigration and the EU? I've seen footage of pro-Corbyn rallies in London, Brighton & Bristol, but not in Rotherham, Nuneaton or Bury. It might do some of these "principled" Corbynistas some good to hop on a train and spend a few days canvassing on estates in Nuneaton, Bury or Rotherham, explaining how "decent" Corbyn is, and how his priorities are free immigration, no nukes and gender pay equality.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/07/middle-class-university-graduates-will-decide-future-labour-party

 

Of course, if winning power and changing people's life chances is of no interest, then none of this matters. There's no need for compromise, then, is there? I share many of the ideals of the Corbynistas. It's just that I'd prefer my political representatives to compromise to the extent required in order to gain power and implement at least some of the changes and improvements that I'd like to see. I reckon that's infinitely better than sticking rigidly to all your ideal policies and never getting to implement any of them, because you never win enough support to exercise any power.....because the 251,000 love you but you never get close to the 10m+ votes required to gain power.

 

If you're a narcissist, none of that matters: you can feel good about yourself in the knowledge that you never compromised your ideals....even as millions of people in a more vulnerable position suffer the consequences of the Tory government you effectively helped into power. If you're highly educated, from a higher social class and live in the South, you're much less likely to suffer the consequences anyway.

 

I think that Corbyn has some good policies on austerity, public spending, investment, house-building, skills and tax avoidance. But you never hear much about them, because he's such a rubbish communicator about anything other than his own virtue or the vaguest of principles ("decency", "fairness", "equality"). As for his appeals for loyalty and his supposed "principles".... This is a man who has spent decades fighting the leadership of his party and now he's calling for loyalty to the leader?!? This is a man who stresses that the views of party members should take precedence over those of MPs....and yet stands up opposing the replacement of Trident in blatant breach of the policy passed by the party membership last year! As it happens, I tend to agree with him on the issue, but he's a stinking hypocrite who argues against party policy whenever it suits him, but calls for other to be loyal to him and his mandate regardless. I see that under the "new, kinder politics", Angela Eagle has been advised by police not to hold any more open-access surgeries after a man was arrested for threatening to kill her. Not sanctioned by Corbyn, obviously, but there are some pretty abusive, hostile Corbynist memes pinging about Facebook, setting the mood.

 

A "decent" man leading a movement of idealists? No. I'm old enough to have encountered many of these hard left types in action in the 80s (the type leading Momentum): there's nothing decent, democratic or "newer, kinder politics" about them. Many of them are brutal power-grabbers with no respect for the opinions of others. I don't suppose they account for more than about 10% of the Corbynista movement (though they're clearly playing a leadership role). The other 90% are these Facebook/Twitter narcissists who seem to fill the world these days....feeling good about themselves because they've joined all the others demanding perfect idealism via social media and protest meeting....never mind who actually ends up in power. The party should send each of them a mirror so that they can sit at home admiring themselves, chanting "I'm so decent! I'm so pure!"...then all the Corbynistas could meet together at rallies, chanting "We're so decent! We're so pure!" as the Tories rack up large majorities and rip up the lives of those who most need the help of the Labour Party.

 

28 minutes ago, Rincewind said:

Quite. He should portray the image the media have given him. Very disrespectful of him.

You obviously won't listen to anyone on here whom you know is right-leaning, and you won't pay attention to any media regarding him, so perhaps a long time Labour supporter's opinion may hold weight? Alf's post which I've quoted above is one of the finest posts I've ever seen on here and in my opinion, perfectly sums up the situation with JC

 

Any excuse to re-post and re-read Alf's post is a good one anyway

[Guest MattP]

3 hours ago, Rincewind said:

Quite. He should portray the image the media have given him. Very disrespectful of him.

When have the media ever said he doesn't walk aroud with women of all ages, colours and sizes?

 

 

[Jon the Hat]

24 minutes ago, MattP said:

When have the media ever said he doesn't walk aroud with women of all ages, colours and sizes?

 

 

I think Ken is confirming that he concurs with the position of JC's team that this is all a media plot to discredit a wonderful leader.

[Rincewind]

21 hours ago, Darkon84 said:

 

You obviously won't listen to anyone on here whom you know is right-leaning, and you won't pay attention to any media regarding him, so perhaps a long time Labour supporter's opinion may hold weight? Alf's post which I've quoted above is one of the finest posts I've ever seen on here and in my opinion, perfectly sums up the situation with JC

 

Any excuse to re-post and re-read Alf's post is a good one anyway

Politics is in a right mess now with in house fighting from both parties and full of career politicians. Corbyn does not have the glitzy smile or charisma to attract the majority of Labourites who now have their own houses 2.4 kids and everything that goes with it. Long gone are the manufacturing factories which was the core of the vote.

Is it not the role of the opposition to attack the party in power and not their own members. We have even had Labour MP's praising Tory speeches. How crazy is that?

[Thracian]

22 minutes ago, Rincewind said:

Politics is in a right mess now with in house fighting from both parties and full of career politicians. Corbyn does not have the glitzy smile or charisma to attract the majority of Labourites who now have their own houses 2.4 kids and everything that goes with it. Long gone are the manufacturing factories which was the core of the vote.

Is it not the role of the opposition to attack the party in power and not their own members. We have even had Labour MP's praising Tory speeches. How crazy is that?

Where do you come from? There's so many generalisations in there and most are questionable at the very least.    

[Darkon84]

1 hour ago, Rincewind said:

Politics is in a right mess now with in house fighting from both parties and full of career politicians. Corbyn does not have the glitzy smile or charisma to attract the majority of Labourites who now have their own houses 2.4 kids and everything that goes with it. Long gone are the manufacturing factories which was the core of the vote.

Is it not the role of the opposition to attack the party in power and not their own members. We have even had Labour MP's praising Tory speeches. How crazy is that?

 

What are you getting at there? Write with some damn conviction, man!

Did you read Alf's post I quoted? What do you think of that? Do you think the points Alf raised are valid as to why people are turned off from JC and why there is (rightly so) plenty of scrutiny on him and Labour MP's losing confidence in him?

[Alf Bentley]

Excellent article here from Owen Jones, who is falsely pigeon-holed as an unthinking lefty: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jul/27/mass-membership-labour-social-movement-community

 

Points out how Labour has had a massive growth in membership (from 190k to 500k+ within 2 years) but that this has not yet produced a social movement looking outward to the people it needs to represent.

Meanwhile, it doesn't have a great strategy for winning power either (if this even matters to Corbynistas). So a false dichotomy is made between being a social movement and winning power via elections....but Lab is doing neither yet!

 

Jones produces some excellent stats about the nature of the party membership, which partly explains the problem: predominantly middle-class professionals with degrees living in London & the South and university towns. Surprisingly, too, half the membership is also aged over 55 (I'd assumed that most of the new influx were young). The membership is particularly high in university towns and in London, and particularly low in working-class areas of the Midlands and North, where Lab needs to win support. The stat about Oxford is particularly instructive: massive growth in Labour membership in student areas, but not in working-class areas.

 

Labour has an amazing opportunity, suddenly having this massive party membership. The Tories would kill to have a similar influx, as their party membership is much smaller and older. But it will serve absolutely no purpose for Labour if the vast majority of those 500,000 members are just attending rallies slapping one another's backs for being right-on, or sending tweets/memes slagging off anyone who doesn't worship Corbyn - including critical left-wingers. Jones presents some good ideas for giving more of a grassroots leadership role to shopfloor union members and for getting members active in the community. It would certainly be an eye-opener for those who see anti-Corbyn leftists as beyond the pale, if experienced activists took them in hand knocking doors around working-class housing estates, so that they had to deal with potential Lab voters who wanted immigration cut, UK out of EU, didn't rate Corbyn etc.

[norwichfox]

Glad I'm at the wrong end of my lifespan, the future looks fcuking bleak from where I'm sitting, le Cow MKII will probably find a way of pulling out of Brexit, as a virtual (would never "sign up" or "subscribe" to a political party) Lifelong labour supporter (up to the point where Millie's Band was elected leader), also a lifelong detester of everything Tory and no longer have a "virtual" political affiliation anywhere, all I've done in elections of recent years is to vote against somebody rather than for somebody. Corbyn is a complete and utter joke that will ensure Le Cow MKII will be in power till It'll no longer matter to me.

[Thracian]

On 7/29/2016 at 13:58, norwichfox said:

Glad I'm at the wrong end of my lifespan, the future looks fcuking bleak from where I'm sitting, le Cow MKII will probably find a way of pulling out of Brexit, as a virtual (would never "sign up" or "subscribe" to a political party) Lifelong labour supporter (up to the point where Millie's Band was elected leader), also a lifelong detester of everything Tory and no longer have a "virtual" political affiliation anywhere, all I've done in elections of recent years is to vote against somebody rather than for somebody. Corbyn is a complete and utter joke that will ensure Le Cow MKII will be in power till It'll no longer matter to me.

 

 

There's a lot more for you, the UK and Europe to worry about than the current demise of the Labour party. Latest events and reports from Turkey paint a bleaker picture than even I'd imagined at this stage.

 

And if you think Britain's Brexit was not only a surprise but a fairly emphatic representation of people's dissatisfaction with the EU, you should see what polls in other countries say.  

 

We're setting the trend, we're not the exception.

 

Now, at least to me, the EU looks certain to implode.

 

It needs to either immediately and dramatically reform or we need to give our final notice PDQ and build new trading and co-operative alliances rapidly (Incuding some on the European landmass but elsewhere as well).      

 

The "Cow Mark 11" you mention will probably turn out to have as difficult a job as any UK Prime Minister since the last World War and, as a native resident, I sure hope both she, and a lot of other countries' top politicians, get it right.

 

But that's hardly a comfortable thought given their track record thus far because there's no time to waste.

 

To think, only weeks ago, people were pretty dismissive about my warnings about Turkey.

 

I only wish I'd been 100% wrong, instead of more right than I ever expected or wanted to be and, even then, in a far shorter time scale.

 

We're very close if not already at crisis point.

 

But don't expect the powers that be to mention it. They'll cover anything up if it suits...and already have done in relation to some aspects, according to what I've read.

 

Indeed the ability of the state to manipulate people's minds is staggering. The evidence is all around us if we choose to look.    

    

     

 

 

 

  

[Guest]

The sky's falling

 

Erdogan is a bad man

 

Costock Fox shits in the woods

[Thracian]

On 7/28/2016 at 10:07, Darkon84 said:

 

You obviously won't listen to anyone on here whom you know is right-leaning, and you won't pay attention to any media regarding him, so perhaps a long time Labour supporter's opinion may hold weight? Alf's post which I've quoted above is one of the finest posts I've ever seen on here and in my opinion, perfectly sums up the situation with JC

 

Any excuse to re-post and re-read Alf's post is a good one anyway

 

 

Couldn't agree more and, indeed, much of me thinks Alf would perhaps be a far better leader of the Labour Party than anyone who's done the job these last few decades because he does seem to stand for something while also being able to analyse the consequences - and that's coming from someone who now has so little time for Labour and its aspiring/controlling(?) bunch of Marxist/Communist Trades Union bully boys.

 

Even on disarmament I'd love to agree.

 

I just don't believe in people as much as Alf seems to so unilateral disarmament has no chance - nor any other kind really.

 

Having basically supported Trident because it does present something of a deterrent (for all that I seriously doubt we'll ever use it) and it also employs a sizeable number of (valued by me) Scots, I seriously wonder if the money could be better spent even if it was retained as a military commitment which I actually think is vital just now for various reasons.

 

In the end it depends on the perceived enemy. With sustained communication, more inclusion, and a good deal of genuine goodwill, I really don't think either Russia or China are, or need to be, such an enemy.

 

I just hope I'm not wrong on that count and would certainly wish to remain militarily insured whatever!  I'll smile with and be friends with most folk but unguarded trust? Not a chance.    

 

   

 

    .

 

    

[Rincewind]

Thought you might like a poem my sister has done. Pretty much my thoughts too..

 

 

Thought you might like my new poem Ken Duddle

Mirror, mirror on the wall,
who's the fairest of them all?
Jeremy Corbyn or Owen Smith?
Worzel Gummidge or The Dark Lord Sith?
One's gonna build a nuclear bomb.Prett
Other won't launch it if it's done.
Reinstate the NHS
or flog it off to who pays best?
“I'll tax the rich and feed the poor”
“I'll tax them too and feed them more”
Billions here and billions there,
it's magic money from thin air.
The EU vote was quite divisive
Jeremy was indecisive
He wanted out but said “vote in”
Was party pressure creeping in?
Owen though, insists we're wrong,
in the EU you belong!
“You'll have to take the vote again”
(and again until we say remain?)
The MP's now are so remote,
democracy don't mean our vote,
they care for us not one jot
it's just a cushy, well-paid job.
So while they try to pick their boss
they cannot even see their loss
we're so fed up with what they say
we're off to vote Theresa May.

[Thracian]

On 8/2/2016 at 11:05, Rincewind said:

Thought you might like a poem my sister has done. Pretty much my thoughts too..

 

 

Thought you might like my new poem Ken Duddle

Mirror, mirror on the wall,
who's the fairest of them all?
Jeremy Corbyn or Owen Smith?
Worzel Gummidge or The Dark Lord Sith?
One's gonna build a nuclear bomb.Prett
Other won't launch it if it's done.
Reinstate the NHS
or flog it off to who pays best?
“I'll tax the rich and feed the poor”
“I'll tax them too and feed them more”
Billions here and billions there,
it's magic money from thin air.
The EU vote was quite divisive
Jeremy was indecisive
He wanted out but said “vote in”
Was party pressure creeping in?
Owen though, insists we're wrong,
in the EU you belong!
“You'll have to take the vote again”
(and again until we say remain?)
The MP's now are so remote,
democracy don't mean our vote,
they care for us not one jot
it's just a cushy, well-paid job.
So while they try to pick their boss
they cannot even see their loss
we're so fed up with what they say
we're off to vote Theresa May.

Your sister should contribute more often!  

[Webbo]

I put the US version of this in the POTUS thread so here's the UK version..

 

http://uk.isidewith.com/

 

 

 

Right-Wing Libertarian

Your political beliefs would be considered moderately Right-Wing Libertarian on an ideological scale, meaning you tend to support policies that promote free market capitalism and smaller government.

[Strokes]

6 hours ago, Webbo said:

I put the US version of this in the POTUS thread so here's the UK version..

 

http://uk.isidewith.com/

 

 

 

Right-Wing Libertarian

Your political beliefs would be considered moderately Right-Wing Libertarian on an ideological scale, meaning you tend to support policies that promote free market capitalism and smaller government.

Right-Wing

You political beliefs would be considered moderately Right-Wing on an ideological scale, meaning You tend to support policies that promote economic freedom and a society based on morals and values.

[Rincewind]

Decent article by Jon Ashworth. MP for Leicester South

 

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/08/every-day-theresa-mays-mask-slips-little-further

[Claridge]

1 hour ago, Rincewind said:

Decent article by Jon Ashworth. MP for Leicester South

 

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/08/every-day-theresa-mays-mask-slips-little-further

Hope its correct

[Guest MattP]

Let's hope so.

 

Not only is it the right thing to do but it will be a vote winner in the eyes of the public, unfortunately I suspect rather than see the government actually do something Conservative Ashworth probably has it wrong.