Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
DJ Barry Hammond

Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

Also just a reminder folks that only one side of the house calls for their colleagues to be deselected in a public domain, and it ain’t the opposition side

 

DQ_c_iXX0AAUIod.jpg

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/corbyn-ally-angela-rayner-passionately-10763442

Just because they aren’t calling for it in public doesn’t mean it isn’t going on. As Angela Rayner reveals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, MattP said:

Sorry but this is so delusional I don't even know what to say, to claim Momentum has no power after the results of the NEC election last week is beyond laughable. 

 

Of course it's the members who'll decide the candidates, no one I don't think is denying that. That's the perfect way to pull off the deselections.

   

At least she was honest.

What I mean is momentum had no power until the membership decided to give them the power. The membership have decided. Democracy in action. You really need to stop moaning about momentum like it's Somme secret society - it is the members wishes that the party be taken left as per momentum. It's not a secret.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, MattP said:

She's probably on the list after the "shit or bust" comment. 

I don’t disagree that they should select MPs to fit an ethos or that momentum should have the involvement that it does, it’s completely their choice and right. 

But let’s not pretend that it’s not happening, because that just gives the impression that it’s underhand and not above board. If they can lie about this, what else will they lie about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Strokes said:

I don’t disagree that they should select MPs to fit an ethos or that momentum should have the involvement that it does, it’s completely their choice and right. 

But let’s not pretend that it’s not happening, because that just gives the impression that it’s underhand and not above board. If they can lie about this, what else will they lie about?

My understanding is that each branch selects it's candidate. Nobody will be deselected as such, it's just if you don't agree with the view of the members you probably won't be selected again. Only the right wing media thinks this is somehow a bad thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, toddybad said:

What I mean is momentum had no power until the membership decided to give them the power. The membership have decided. Democracy in action. You really need to stop moaning about momentum like it's Somme secret society - it is the members wishes that the party be taken left as per momentum. It's not a secret.

 

13 minutes ago, toddybad said:

My understanding is that each branch selects it's candidate. Nobody will be deselected as such, it's just if you don't agree with the view of the members you probably won't be selected again. Only the right wing media thinks this is somehow a bad thing.

Glad we've clarified this.

 

So Momentum had no power until they got power and serving members of parliament won't be deselected unless they are deselected.

 

I'm not Mystic Meg but I'd hazard a guess serving moderate MP's also aren't keen on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MattP said:

 

Glad we've clarified this.

 

So Momentum had no power until they got power and serving members of parliament won't be deselected unless they are deselected.

 

I'm not Mystic Meg but I'd hazard a guess serving moderate MP's also aren't keen on it.

What does 'moderate' MP even mean? Did you mean mps that don't represent their party members' beliefs?

Labour is a party of over 500,000 members. 

It is a left wing party.

If you don't represent the members of the party why should you be selected as a candidate? Just to keep you happy? It's nothing to do with being moderate and everything to do with you trying to spin it as somehow a far left takeover. It is the members taking their party back. 

You're a parody of yourself sometimes.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, toddybad said:

What does 'moderate' MP even mean? Did you mean mps that don't represent their party members' beliefs?

Labour is a party of over 500,000 members. 

It is a left wing party.

If you don't represent the members of the party why should you be selected as a candidate? Just to keep you happy? It's nothing to do with being moderate and everything to do with you trying to spin it as somehow a far left takeover. It is the members taking their party back. 

You're a parody of yourself sometimes.

Moderate has a clearly defined definition. The press and MP's themselves don't seem to have a problem describing themselves or others as this.

 

If the members decide to take the party a new way that's their choice, but don't then make denials that they'll be making deselections.

 

I'm still dubious on these membership figures as well, no doubt there are a lot but when you see the results of the elections last week I'm not sure it's as big as they tell us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MattP said:

Moderate has a clearly defined definition. The press and MP's themselves don't seem to have a problem describing themselves or others as this.

 

If the members decide to take the party a new way that's their choice, but don't then make denials that they'll be making deselections.

 

I'm still dubious on these membership figures as well, no doubt there are a lot but when you see the results of the elections last week I'm not sure it's as big as they tell us.

I suspect the number of members that are actually active is probably a lot lower but I can believe the figure for paid up members just bearing in mind the crowds Corbyn can pull. Even if you don't like his politics your got to give the guy credit for getting people interested in politics again (I.e. The young).

 

There might not be deselections. Corbyn had never denied that the members will select the candidates but there's no way of knowing who will be selected until votes happen. Bear in mind longstanding mps still have personal relationships with their branches and members.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎21‎/‎01‎/‎2018 at 11:08, toddybad said:

What I mean is momentum had no power until the membership decided to give them the power. The membership have decided. Democracy in action. You really need to stop moaning about momentum like it's Somme secret society - it is the members wishes that the party be taken left as per momentum. It's not a secret.

 

Didn't Corbyn say the other day that he wanted to take the centre ground? How can he do this and allow momentum to take the party left?

 

As long as Labour seeks to satisfy it's own far left activists rather than the British public they'll be in opposition. Nobody wants Socialism. Nobody!!

 

As others have said - we have the most shambolic Government in living memory. Rather than take advantage of this, Labour are pandering to the views of a tiny minority of momentum members and is allowing them to define the debate.  How is that different to the Conservatives pandering to the views and wishes of their own tax-dodging donors?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a strange one for me, how can you justify charging a white working class person £40 for a ticket but a multi-millionaire Asian or Black person would get a £10 discount because of their skin colour, surely it would be better to charge a ticket price relative to the income of the person wanting to go?

 

http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/leicester-news/tories-accuse-labour-racism-over-1096236

Quote

 

The Tories are accusing Labour of racism in a row over how much activists will be charged to hear Jeremy Corbyn speak, the Mail has reported.

The Labour leader is due to speak at an event in Loughborough on February 17.

 

However the Tories have raised concerns that black and minority ethnic (BAME) Labour members will be charged £30 to attend while other white members will must pay £40, according to the Mail.

North West Leicestershire Tory MP Andrew Bridgen said the tiered charges showed Labour were abandoning white, working class people.

Labour said it was simply subsidising BAME members to improve representation.

A Labour spokesman told the Mail: “The basic price of a conference pass is the same for all members but, at the request of our East Midlands Regional Board, the party will subsidise part of the cost of this year’s conference pass for BAME members to encourage attendance and improve representation.”

Mr Bridgen told the Mail : “This is racism.

“In effect, Labour is levying a tax on the basis of the colour of a person’s skin.

“It shows their contempt for the white working class.”

Conservative vice-chairman James Cleverly said: "Discriminating against people based on the colour of their skin is totally wrong and Mr Corbyn must end this practice now."

 

Anyone on here going?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MattP said:

This is a strange one for me, how can you justify charging a white working class person £40 for a ticket but a multi-millionaire Asian or Black person would get a £10 discount because of their skin colour, surely it would be better to charge a ticket price relative to the income of the person wanting to go?

 

http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/leicester-news/tories-accuse-labour-racism-over-1096236

Anyone on here going?

 

I probably would have but I wouldn't go now, as a matter of principle.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MattP said:

This is a strange one for me, how can you justify charging a white working class person £40 for a ticket but a multi-millionaire Asian or Black person would get a £10 discount because of their skin colour, surely it would be better to charge a ticket price relative to the income of the person wanting to go?

 

http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/leicester-news/tories-accuse-labour-racism-over-1096236

Anyone on here going?

It is strange one and I don't tend to agree with positive discrimination but let's be honest, there's an article because the Tories are trying to score a political point rather than because white members are up in arms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, toddybad said:

It is strange one and I don't tend to agree with positive discrimination but let's be honest, there's an article because the Tories are trying to score a political point rather than because white members are up in arms.

 

Of course the Tories are using as an opportunity for point scoring, but that shouldn't detract from the fact that it is wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

Of course the Tories are using as an opportunity for point scoring, but that shouldn't detract from the fact that it is wrong.

Ive got no intention of using it for point scoring, i would say the same whoever it was. 

I can understand the intention but it does more harm than good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Ive got no intention of using it for point scoring, i would say the same whoever it was. 

I can understand the intention but it does more harm than good.

 

It's not just that it's wrong, it's also a huge gaffe for a party that is struggling to retain the white working-class vote.

 

It just feeds the perception that 'foreigners' get preferential treatment.

Edited by Buce
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

It's not just that it's wrong, it's also a huge gaffe for a party that is struggling to retain the white working-class vote.

 

It just feeds the perception that 'foreigners' get preferential treatment.

Is that a commonly held perception? I'm not sure it is. In what ways are foreigners perceived to get preferential treatment?

 

-----

 

I think there is a case for positive discrimination but arbitrarily lowering ticket prices for a Corbyn gig is not the way to do it. They could have at least lowered the price in exact proportion to the difference in wages between white and BAME people in order to make some sort of substantive point. Just slicing a tenner off the price is asking for trouble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Rogstanley said:

Is that a commonly held perception? I'm not sure it is. In what ways are foreigners perceived to get preferential treatment?

 

-----

 

I think there is a case for positive discrimination but arbitrarily lowering ticket prices for a Corbyn gig is not the way to do it. They could have at least lowered the price in exact proportion to the difference in wages between white and BAME people in order to make some sort of substantive point. Just slicing a tenner off the price is asking for trouble.

 

Well, I didn't say commonly, but yes I think there is a perception among the white working-class (encouraged by right-wing tabloids) that immigrants receive preferential treatment regarding housing, benefits, jobs etc. I'm not saying these things are true (they have been debunked many times) but - to be blunt - it is a demographic that largely doesn't delve beyond the tabloid headlines, as we saw with the Brexit vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...