Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: big fat yorkshire pudding on February 18, 2019, 08:33:22 am
-
Looks to finally happen today. Could be a winner if they get it right with so many feeling a bit stuck in limbo on who to support.
-
Hope they pick up a few normal central Tories then could be a real force.
What lib Dems should be with a shit storm to the left and right??!
-
I think they have just handed the ERG a free hit
-
Momentum have made the Labour party toxic
-
Interesting. Will hopefully seen some from the other parties move over.
-
Aaaaand it's done. https://twitter.com/MikeSegalov/status/1097487967730483201
-
Traitors
-
Traitors
Why could they possibly have wanted to leave the Labour Party when there it abounds with such generosity of spirit?
-
Traitors
Why could they possibly have wanted to leave the Labour Party when there it abounds with such generosity of spirit?
Glynn,
Are you really so naive? They’ve stuck 2 fingers up at the Labour Party and to the electorate who voted for them on a Labour manifesto. Do they deserve “generosity of spirit”?
-
Traitors
Why could they possibly have wanted to leave the Labour Party when there it abounds with such generosity of spirit?
Glynn,
Are you really so naive? They’ve stuck 2 fingers up at the Labour Party and to the electorate who voted for them on a Labour manifesto. Do they deserve “generosity of spirit”?
You'd rather they'd have stayed then, would you?
They say they've left Labour exactly because of the sort of behaviour you're displaying. You're doing their justification for them.
PS Their constituents voted for them. They've still got them.
-
Traitors
Why could they possibly have wanted to leave the Labour Party when there it abounds with such generosity of spirit?
Glynn,
Are you really so naive? They’ve stuck 2 fingers up at the Labour Party and to the electorate who voted for them on a Labour manifesto. Do they deserve “generosity of spirit”?
You'd rather they'd have stayed then, would you?
They say they've left Labour exactly because of the sort of behaviour you're displaying. You're doing their justification for them.
PS Their constituents voted for them. They've still got them.
You’re totally wrong. I’d have rather they have left the party and called a by election. To just say their constituents voted for them is silly. Constituents vote for them to implement the party manifesto if elected to government.
-
It was no surprise but is this the first step of a new political map??,it was always coming this, and with rumours abound that Labour are planning to deselect a lot of mp's who are not left wing enough there may be more yet who jump ship..Of course brexit is again the sticking point for some as they are united on a peoples vote..Which will be at odds with other Labour mp's views..
However once again Labour are managing to damage there own party,the publics view of Corbyn isn't great as it is but when his own MP's start resigning the party whip because they don't recognise the party they joined then that's not good for future prospects
Of course it remains to be seen if any Tories resign and join them,but if they were going to then I suspect they would have today for maximum impact...Will be interesting to read what BST makes of today's developments...
-
Traitors
Why could they possibly have wanted to leave the Labour Party when there it abounds with such generosity of spirit?
Glynn,
Are you really so naive? They’ve stuck 2 fingers up at the Labour Party and to the electorate who voted for them on a Labour manifesto. Do they deserve “generosity of spirit”?
You'd rather they'd have stayed then, would you?
They say they've left Labour exactly because of the sort of behaviour you're displaying. You're doing their justification for them.
PS Their constituents voted for them. They've still got them.
You’re totally wrong. I’d have rather they have left the party and called a by election. To just say their constituents voted for them is silly. Constituents vote for them to implement the party manifesto if elected to government.
MPs are elected personally. Their choice of party affiliation is secondary. It's still only very recently that party names were even put on the voting slips. That's how British politics works, I'm afraid. Just because a lot of people don't understand that and think something else doesn't make the something else the truth.
What happens when a party changes policy between elections? That would then mean that all their MPs would then not be representing the manifesto they were elected on and therefore 'betraying' their constituents. Presumably you'd expect all of their MPs to have bye-elections and get a new mandate to reflect the change of policy..?
For example - if a Labour MP won his seat at the 1983 election on that election's manifesto of unilateral nuclear disarmament that he so passionately believed in that when that policy was ditched under Kinnock he resigned from the party on principle...according to you he should have a bye-election even though he's still maintaining the policy he was elected on and the rest of the Labour MPs who have 'betrayed' their constituents shouldn't have to!
-
Glyn, I agree with you. Need to lie down now!
-
It's a weird one as I have slightly more respect for these seven than the likes of Caroline Flint and Ian Austin who share the same views but haven't left as they know it would be the end of them politically as will be the case for this lot.
No socialists were lost from the Labour Party today.
-
Traitors
Why could they possibly have wanted to leave the Labour Party when there it abounds with such generosity of spirit?
Glynn,
Are you really so naive? They’ve stuck 2 fingers up at the Labour Party and to the electorate who voted for them on a Labour manifesto. Do they deserve “generosity of spirit”?
You'd rather they'd have stayed then, would you?
They say they've left Labour exactly because of the sort of behaviour you're displaying. You're doing their justification for them.
PS Their constituents voted for them. They've still got them.
Traitors
Why could they possibly have wanted to leave the Labour Party when there it abounds with such generosity of spirit?
Glynn,
Are you really so naive? They’ve stuck 2 fingers up at the Labour Party and to the electorate who voted for them on a Labour manifesto. Do they deserve “generosity of spirit”?
You'd rather they'd have stayed then, would you?
They say they've left Labour exactly because of the sort of behaviour you're displaying. You're doing their justification for them.
PS Their constituents voted for them. They've still got them.
You’re totally wrong. I’d have rather they have left the party and called a by election. To just say their constituents voted for them is silly. Constituents vote for them to implement the party manifesto if elected to government.
MPs are elected personally. Their choice of party affiliation is secondary. It's still only very recently that party names were even put on the voting slips. That's how British politics works, I'm afraid. Just because a lot of people don't understand that and think something else doesn't make the something else the truth.
What happens when a party changes policy between elections? That would then mean that all their MPs would then not be representing the manifesto they were elected on and therefore 'betraying' their constituents. Presumably you'd expect all of their MPs to have bye-elections and get a new mandate to reflect the change of policy..?
For example - if a Labour MP won his seat at the 1983 election on that election's manifesto of unilateral nuclear disarmament that he so passionately believed in that when that policy was ditched under Kinnock he resigned from the party on principle...according to you he should have a bye-election even though he's still maintaining the policy he was elected on and the rest of the Labour MPs who have 'betrayed' their constituents shouldn't have to!
I agree with Glynn, what is really disconcerting about all of this is that There is clearly an agenda from the extreme left to deselect all of the middle of the road favouring the left MP's and replace them with Extremists.
Not very good for Politics as there will Be no credible alternative to the Toriies for many years, unless
we go the way of Germany and have Coaltion Governments.
-
It's a weird one as I have slightly more respect for these seven than the likes of Caroline Flint and Ian Austin who share the same views but haven't left as they know it would be the end of them politically as will be the case for this lot.
No socialists were lost from the Labour Party today.
I don't respect Flint. If she cared about her constituency she'd get in a party that's pro-EU. Otherwise this regions f*cked.
-
How many more Labour MP's are about to jump ship? I am going for 150 Ish !
-
None I suspect.
-
There might be a few more, but it has only been a question of when, not if.
These 7 have been chuntering away below the waterline for some time.
Why they were Labour MP's in the first place is a mystery!
They were elected to the HoC on the Labour manifesto at the last election. Now it appears that they were only paying lip service to those policies.
For a comment on the perspectives of the 7, see this blog:
https://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.com/2019/02/what-you-need-to-know-about-seven.html
Why they think sitting as Independents in the current HoC is better than joining the Lib-Dems as a centre party is unclear.
Remember the SDP?
-
Their motives...Get rid of Corbyn,abbot, Mcdonnel and Momentum and get the Labour Party stable and re electable.
-
Which of Corbyns policies are so extreme to some people?
-
Which of Corbyns policies are so extreme to some people?
In a lot of ways it's not his policies but his attitude, style of leadership and making wrong choices at the wrong times. He set himself up with the new politics mantra but didn't follow through with it. He's an opportunist in some ways and people are seeing through that. Good campaigner, but still not a great leader.
Also I'm sick of this broad church malarky, the labour party is not that right now, just look how quickly they turn on people (often in their own party) with opposing views.
There's a few of his policies I personally don't like but wouldn't call them extreme either.
-
Their motives...Get rid of Corbyn,abbot, Mcdonnel and Momentum and get the Labour Party stable and re electable.
This This and this...Those of you who think we will see a Labour government with those people in charge are away with the fairies..Unelectable..
-
McDonnell would be more electable than Corbyn and would still deliver on the manifesto.
Abbot, unfortunately, has been attacked so much by the media that people do believe the craziest shit about her. Lies about "she can't count" etc are so petty, but it's the political climate we live in these days; more and more it's about image than what you have done, what you stand for and what your policies are.
-
She's not helped herself though in the past
-
It's the whole toxic atmosphere that has been cultivated by momentum particularly. The pack mentality of attacking dissenters. It's not a party I could vote for as a floater due to that (not that I could vote for any of them atm)
-
McDonnell would be more electable than Corbyn and would still deliver on the manifesto.
Abbot, unfortunately, has been attacked so much by the media that people do believe the craziest shit about her. Lies about "she can't count" etc are so petty, but it's the political climate we live in these days; more and more it's about image than what you have done, what you stand for and what your policies are.
I'm sorry but if there's one person less unelectable than Corbyn it's McDonnell..The party membership would love him though because he's even more left wing than Corbyn..But the party membership are not in tune with the voters..The only way you will see a Labour government is with a centre left leader,then they might pull themselves out of the mire..
-
Which of Corbyns policies are so extreme to some people?
Chris Leslie hit the nail on the head yesterday. He said something that I've been saying for the past 3 years.
He said that he had no issue with Corbyn's domestic policy. The issue was Corbyn's and Corbyn's inner circle's approach to foreign policy
Leslie got it bang on. Corby, Milne, McCluskey and a few others are steeped in an infantile black and white Marxist critique which I know well, because I shared it in the 80s before I grew up. It says that the world is divided into Aggressors and Victims. The Stronger and the Weaker. And it is your duty, always and everywhere to support the Weaker over the Stronger.
That is why you never, ever hear Corbyn directly criticise Putin. Or Hamas. Or Maduro.
Whereas the record is replete with Corbyn criticising Washington, NATO, the EU and Israel.
It's why Putin and Assad could freely gas civilians without a single word of direct criticism from Corbyn.
It's why Corbyn's response to Russian Intelligence officers using g nerve poison to try to assassinate people in Britain was that we shouldn't rush to judgement and we should send samples to Russia to let them investigate what had happened.
It's why Labour has been mired in the anti-Semitism issue, encouraged by a leader who has openly praised anti-Semitic art works and who refused for months to accept an entirely reasonable definition of anti-Semitism.
It's why Corbyn has been a supporter of Brexiters from day one, because his ideological world view is that a group of economically string capitalist economies are on the wrong side.
It is a stupidly naive, ideologically rigid and frankly, dangerous way to address complex problems. Labour will never be elected to power with a leader who views foreign policy through that lens.
But watch as Landsman and his mob go into overdrive painting anyone who dares criticise Corbyn as a secret Tory.
-
I'd like a centre left leader to take the reins if that's what makes the party more electable, as long as they keep the majority of socialist domestic policies outlined in the manifest and don't go back on increasing taxes for the rich and corporate world etc.
-
You need to address the mob mentality encouraged by momentum to make the party remotely electable
-
I thought an interview with 2 local labour party foot soldiers in the constituency of a MP who left Labour yesterday summed it up perfectly for me..
The first was a lady who while disappointed that the mp who she had spent hours posting leaflets for at the election had left, she realised that the party had a real problem that just wasn't been addressed and admired his principles at least in sticking up for his beliefs,she hoped that this would finally kick start the party into realising that if they hoped to be elected they had to reform away from the perception of anti Semitism and inter party bullying and threats...
Then the young guy sat next to her who might have well had momentum tattooed across his head snarled that he was a traitor,and that he shouldn't show his face around there again..You could see the hate in his eyes...He was just a nasty piece of work,and obviously didn't have a debate in him,it was his way or no way....
And that for me sums the Labour party up right now,a so called broad church, which its anything but..A absolute car crash of a party run by a leader who is only any good at objection politics and always has been...backed by momentum who take socialism to a level bordering on communism...
-
It tells you everything when you find out Derek Hatton's been welcomed back into the Labour Party...
It might be a good time for Channel 4 to take GBH out of the cupboard, dust it down and give it a reshowing.
-
I'd like a centre left leader to take the reins if that's what makes the party more electable, as long as they keep the majority of socialist domestic policies outlined in the manifest and don't go back on increasing taxes for the rich and corporate world etc.
Depends on your definition of corporate world. Taxing a lot of big companies and high earners is indirectly negative for low and middle earners. I don't agree with increasing taxes, I would much rather the rules were changed to clamp down on Amazon et al. An overall increase just harms all companies, not just the ones who are an issue.
-
I thought an interview with 2 local labour party foot soldiers in the constituency of a MP who left Labour yesterday summed it up perfectly for me..
The first was a lady who while disappointed that the mp who she had spent hours posting leaflets for at the election had left, she realised that the party had a real problem that just wasn't been addressed and admired his principles at least in sticking up for his beliefs,she hoped that this would finally kick start the party into realising that if they hoped to be elected they had to reform away from the perception of anti Semitism and inter party bullying and threats...
Then the young guy sat next to her who might have well had momentum tattooed across his head snarled that he was a traitor,and that he shouldn't show his face around there again..You could see the hate in his eyes...He was just a nasty piece of work,and obviously didn't have a debate in him,it was his way or no way....
And that for me sums the Labour party up right now,a so called broad church, which its anything but..A absolute car crash of a party run by a leader who is only any good at objection politics and always has been...backed by momentum who take socialism to a level bordering on communism...
Perfectly put
-
That's the rub BJW.
That's precisely the leader that Labour had pre-Corbyn. The domestic policies were nigh on identical.
The ACTUAL difference between Corbyn and Milliband is that now we have a batshit foreign policy.
The way Momentum spin it is that the world BJ was one in which ever Labour leader was fully signed up to Austerity.
Textbook Marxist propaganda. You re-write history to accuse everyone on your side who's not signed up to the project as a Quisling.
-
We should probably change the title to include the Tories.....
It's intriguing how this pans out, how can some Tories and labour leavers work together, what happens at the point they disagree. For the Tories it's a Brexit problem, for Labour a fundamental overall strategy problem. Quite interesting and as a group, one more person and they match the Lib Dems for size.....
Could play havoc at the next election.
-
Don't they match Lib Dems now? Both have 11. Labour had one more go this morning.
-
Aye, although technically "The Independent Group" isn't actually a party - it's a private company. All the MPs are just sitting as independents for now. Interestingly, this means they aren't bound to release who's funding them yet.
-
We should probably change the title to include the Tories.....
It's intriguing how this pans out, how can some Tories and labour leavers work together, what happens at the point they disagree. For the Tories it's a Brexit problem, for Labour a fundamental overall strategy problem. Quite interesting and as a group, one more person and they match the Lib Dems for size.....
Could play havoc at the next election.
It strikes me that the one issue that unites them all is that they want to have a Second Referendum on Brexit. That being the case, shouldn't they all fight by-elections on that issue? If they won, surely it would demonstrate that a Second Referendum was wanted by voters.
-
Aye, although technically "The Independent Group" isn't actually a party - it's a private company. All the MPs are just sitting as independents for now. Interestingly, this means they aren't bound to release who's funding them yet.
And that's very telling...I've no doubt that they will form a new party everything is being orchestrated towards that.The Labour mp's planned the defection for maximum impact and today the ex tory mp's did the same before pmq's.I have no doubt that others will do the same from both party's in the coming days..
I have to say as someone who is totally despondent with the party I support (Tory) yet even more despondent with the terrible way that Labour is being run,i may well welcome this alternative party with open arms,once they fully get going and show me some meat on the bone policy wise..
-
Wc I would say many are probably thinking similar....
-
Depends on your definition of corporate world. Taxing a lot of big companies and high earners is indirectly negative for low and middle earners. I don't agree with increasing taxes, I would much rather the rules were changed to clamp down on Amazon et al. An overall increase just harms all companies, not just the ones who are an issue.
re: income tax - 45% on income over £150k is far too low. And why should someone on £50k pay the same upper tax as someone on £140k? Plus the jump between basic rate and higher rate is too high; there needs to be higher levels for higher earners but applied in more stages.
re: corporation tax - rules do need to be changed to make sure companies actually pay. yet it's no surprise that the Tories still haven't solved this after almost 10 years!
17% (from 2020) is far too low though, especially as it's regardless of profit. Again, tax rates should be in stages to encourage start-ups and innovation.
How on earth can we fund the NHS, education, policing etc when we keep on reducing taxes?
-
If I was Corbyn I'd call their bluff and call another no confidence motion in the Government.
They have all said Corbyn is facilitating a hard Tory brexiters, wonder if they will do the same and support the govt in any confidence motion.
Either way, when the time comes to answer to the voters, the electorate will punish their arrogance.
-
Corbyn will wait till after May's next Brexit vote defeat. The Labour rebels will still probably vote against May but it give more time for more Tories to resign from the party and then vote against her. It wouldn't surprise me if at least two more (Grieve, Boles) jump ship, best to leave enough time for more to jump before calling another confidence vote.
-
Corbyn will wait till after May's next Brexit vote defeat. The Labour rebels will still probably vote against May but it give more time for more Tories to resign from the party and then vote against her. It wouldn't surprise me if at least two more (Grieve, Boles) jump ship, best to leave enough time for more to jump before calling another confidence vote.
I agree. There's no point in Corbyn doing anything until May loses another meaningful vote on Brexit. However, given that the Independent Group don't seem keen on calling by-elections in their seats, I wonder how keen they might be to vote in a way that would trigger a General Election.
-
Corbyn will wait till after May's next Brexit vote defeat. The Labour rebels will still probably vote against May but it give more time for more Tories to resign from the party and then vote against her. It wouldn't surprise me if at least two more (Grieve, Boles) jump ship, best to leave enough time for more to jump before calling another confidence vote.
I agree. There's no point in Corbyn doing anything until May loses another meaningful vote on Brexit. However, given that the Independent Group don't seem keen on calling by-elections in their seats, I wonder how keen they might be to vote in a way that would trigger a General Election.
They'd look complete d**kheads if they supported May after all this though.
-
Corbyn will wait till after May's next Brexit vote defeat. The Labour rebels will still probably vote against May but it give more time for more Tories to resign from the party and then vote against her. It wouldn't surprise me if at least two more (Grieve, Boles) jump ship, best to leave enough time for more to jump before calling another confidence vote.
I agree. There's no point in Corbyn doing anything until May loses another meaningful vote on Brexit. However, given that the Independent Group don't seem keen on calling by-elections in their seats, I wonder how keen they might be to vote in a way that would trigger a General Election.
They'd look complete d**kheads if they supported May after all this though.
Well yes, but you have to admit it does look like a pantomime horse. Apparently Soubry has been praising George Osborne tonight. I wonder how well that has gone down with the ex-Labour lot?
-
Or with anyone with so much as a passing acquaintance with basic economics?
-
Anyroad.
This is the inevitable outcome of the Referendum.
Our politics is now utterly f**ked and it will be for another generation.
The splits that were kept held together are now tearing apart.
As I keep saying, Putin must be laughing his cock off.
THIS is why he poured money into the Leave campaign.
-
Corbyn will wait till after May's next Brexit vote defeat. The Labour rebels will still probably vote against May but it give more time for more Tories to resign from the party and then vote against her. It wouldn't surprise me if at least two more (Grieve, Boles) jump ship, best to leave enough time for more to jump before calling another confidence vote.
I agree. There's no point in Corbyn doing anything until May loses another meaningful vote on Brexit. However, given that the Independent Group don't seem keen on calling by-elections in their seats, I wonder how keen they might be to vote in a way that would trigger a General Election.
They'd look complete d**kheads if they supported May after all this though.
Well yes, but you have to admit it does look like a pantomime horse. Apparently Soubry has been praising George Osborne tonight. I wonder how well that has gone down with the ex-Labour lot?
I suspect that it has nothing to do with Labour but more because Osborne edits the London Standard and hates May's guts..!
-
George Soros will be funding this little band of saboteurs. If this lot are so keen on a second vote why don't they put there money where their mouth is and call by elections?
-
George Soros will be funding this little band of saboteurs. If this lot are so keen on a second vote why don't they put there money where their mouth is and call by elections?
Like St Nigel of Farage did when he quit UKIP, and then again when he set up his new party?
-
George Soros will be funding this little band of saboteurs. If this lot are so keen on a second vote why don't they put there money where their mouth is and call by elections?
And how, pray, will holding by-elections produce a vote on May's Deal, No Deal or Remain?
You need to stop reading the Daily Mail, or is it the Express?
-
George Soros will be funding this little band of saboteurs. If this lot are so keen on a second vote why don't they put there money where their mouth is and call by elections?
Like St Nigel of Farage did when he quit UKIP, and then again when he set up his new party?
Or Carswell? Or that other non-entity who left the Tories, joined UKIP then vanished without trace in 2017?
-
George Soros will be funding this little band of saboteurs. If this lot are so keen on a second vote why don't they put there money where their mouth is and call by elections?
Like St Nigel of Farage did when he quit UKIP, and then again when he set up his new party?
Or Carswell? Or that other non-entity who left the Tories, joined UKIP then vanished without trace in 2017?
Carswell and Reckless did actually put themselves up for re-election when they defected to UKIP. The only times UKIP ever won Parliamentary elections.
-
Anyroad.
This is the inevitable outcome of the Referendum.
Our politics is now utterly f**ked and it will be for another generation.
The splits that were kept held together are now tearing apart.
As I keep saying, Putin must be laughing his cock off.
THIS is why he poured money into the Leave campaign.
hmmm Putin - follow the money....
https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/brexitinc/peter-geoghegan-jenna-corderoy/revealed-how-dark-money-is-winning-brexit-influencing-ga
-
George Soros will be funding this little band of saboteurs. If this lot are so keen on a second vote why don't they put there money where their mouth is and call by elections?
Like St Nigel of Farage did when he quit UKIP, and then again when he set up his new party?
Or Carswell? Or that other non-entity who left the Tories, joined UKIP then vanished without trace in 2017?
Carswell and Reckless did actually put themselves up for re-election when they defected to UKIP. The only times UKIP ever won Parliamentary elections.
Did they? My mistake.
-
I'd like a centre left leader to take the reins if that's what makes the party more electable, as long as they keep the majority of socialist domestic policies outlined in the manifest and don't go back on increasing taxes for the rich and corporate world etc.
Depends on your definition of corporate world. Taxing a lot of big companies and high earners is indirectly negative for low and middle earners. I don't agree with increasing taxes, I would much rather the rules were changed to clamp down on Amazon et al. An overall increase just harms all companies, not just the ones who are an issue.
That's taken as an article of faith on the Right BYFP, but there's absolutely zero evidence that imposing high taxes on the rich has negative effects on the economy, or reduces Govt income. It's just a line that's repeated so often and so confidently by right wing politicians that lots of people assume it to be true.
-
I read an interesting political stat that of the 28 SDP MPs, only five held their constituencies at the 1983 General Election. The only chap who fought a by-election after defecting, Bruce Douglas-Mann, actually lost his seat.
It might explain why the Independent Group don't fancy fighting by-elections.
-
What's wrong with Russia? As far as I can see in most international conflicts they back the side of decency, unlike the West backing the head choppers in Syria. But that's ok because they are 'moderate' head choppers.
-
It's all just a car crash.I settled down last night to watch question time hoping that somebody regardless of party would give me a straw to clutch at that our politics wasn't completely broken..Sadly the only person who did was John bloody Barnes...
Both the Labour and Tory Mp's were in complete denial there were problems with there respective Party.The Tory spinning figures to deflect the true impact of Austerity and the Labour trying to convince everybody that there internal problems were a figment of peoples imagination..The independent was a bit better but only because he was free from the impact of the whip..
When it finished I asked myself,if there was a election tomorrow what would I do,who's cross would I put in the box and the reality is right now I probably wouldn't even put my coat on..A opinion I never thought I would have
-
AL
I can't begin to think what's wrong with Russia.
Let me see.
The economy being carved up between a few dozen gangster?
Journalists and politicians who criticise the ...ahhh...democratically elected president either being hailed or strangely walking into bullets or falling out of windows?
Military strategy in their wars that make what we did in Iraq and Afghanistan look like a church outing?
No. That all seems fine.
Oh aye. The fact that when THEY pour money into OUR elections, they are breaking OUR laws.
Tell you what. If you're such a fan of Russia, why don't you go and live there?
-
What's wrong with Russia? As far as I can see in most international conflicts they back the side of decency, unlike the West backing the head choppers in Syria. But that's ok because they are 'moderate' head choppers.
Salisbury.
-
What's wrong with Russia? As far as I can see in most international conflicts they back the side of decency, unlike the West backing the head choppers in Syria. But that's ok because they are 'moderate' head choppers.
In Syria they backed a regime that used chemical weapons against it’s own people, decent?
They invaded Ukraine and annexed Crimea, decent?
They used nerve agent un the UK to assisnated former Russian spies, decent?
If you go back further
In WW2 they sided with Nazi Germany only Turning against them after Germany invaded Russia, during that time Russia invaded Poland and Finland, after the war they installed puppet regimes in many countries in Eastern Europe, Decent?
-
What's wrong with Russia? As far as I can see in most international conflicts they back the side of decency, unlike the West backing the head choppers in Syria. But that's ok because they are 'moderate' head choppers.
In Syria they backed a regime that used chemical weapons against it’s own people, decent?
They backed the legitimate regime in a battle for survival against terrorists.
They invaded Ukraine and annexed Crimea, decent?
The EU started the whole Ukraine saga engineering the so called revolution. Crimea has always been Russian.
They used nerve agent un the UK to assisnated former Russian spies, decent?
He was traitor so he had it coming.
If you go back further
In WW2 they sided with Nazi Germany only Turning against them after Germany invaded Russia, during that time Russia invaded Poland and Finland, after the war they installed puppet regimes in many countries in Eastern Europe, Decent?
WW2 was the Soviet Union, not Russia.
-
AL
I can't begin to think what's wrong with Russia.
Let me see.
The economy being carved up between a few dozen gangster?
Journalists and politicians who criticise the ...ahhh...democratically elected president either being hailed or strangely walking into bullets or falling out of windows?
Military strategy in their wars that make what we did in Iraq and Afghanistan look like a church outing?
No. That all seems fine.
Oh aye. The fact that when THEY pour money into OUR elections, they are breaking OUR laws.
I live here because... i'm English. If everyone stayed at home half of the world's troubles would be gone.
Tell you what. If you're such a fan of Russia, why don't you go and live there?
-
AL
I can't begin to think what's wrong with Russia.
Let me see.
The economy being carved up between a few dozen gangster?
Journalists and politicians who criticise the ...ahhh...democratically elected president either being hailed or strangely walking into bullets or falling out of windows?
Military strategy in their wars that make what we did in Iraq and Afghanistan look like a church outing?
No. That all seems fine.
Oh aye. The fact that when THEY pour money into OUR elections, they are breaking OUR laws.
Tell you what. If you're such a fan of Russia, why don't you go and live there?
I live here because i'm English. If everyone stayed at home half of the world's problems would be solved.
-
AL
I can't begin to think what's wrong with Russia.
Let me see.
The economy being carved up between a few dozen gangster?
Journalists and politicians who criticise the ...ahhh...democratically elected president either being hailed or strangely walking into bullets or falling out of windows?
Military strategy in their wars that make what we did in Iraq and Afghanistan look like a church outing?
No. That all seems fine.
Oh aye. The fact that when THEY pour money into OUR elections, they are breaking OUR laws.
Tell you what. If you're such a fan of Russia, why don't you go and live there?
I live here because i'm English. If everyone stayed at home half of the world's problems would be solved.
And the world would be a much narrower minded place.
-
AL
I can't begin to think what's wrong with Russia.
Let me see.
The economy being carved up between a few dozen gangster?
Journalists and politicians who criticise the ...ahhh...democratically elected president either being hailed or strangely walking into bullets or falling out of windows?
Military strategy in their wars that make what we did in Iraq and Afghanistan look like a church outing?
No. That all seems fine.
Oh aye. The fact that when THEY pour money into OUR elections, they are breaking OUR laws.
Tell you what. If you're such a fan of Russia, why don't you go and live there?
I live here because i'm English. If everyone stayed at home half of the world's problems would be solved.
And the world would be a much narrower minded place.
Wouldn't be as much aggro though would there?
-
Well, after spending the last few days insisting that the MPs who have left Labour must stand down and have by-elections, this is a bit embarrassing for Corbyn.
https://mobile.twitter.com/DanLord78/status/1098554120846360578/photo/1
I mean the content is embarrassing. Obviously the txt spk is excruciating an all.
-
Yes of course. Because disagreeing with the stance of your leader during an election is the same as standing for election as a party candidate and then resigning from that party.
And setting up your own political grouping, registering it as a private company and not declaring where your funding is coming from - now who on here might be expected to query the integrity of the people who have done that? Lol
-
Siobahn Mcdonagh Mp is the latest victim of the Jeremy Jewhater Road show, she has been bombarded with threats and vitriol all week as Zmomentum Hamshankers suspect she is about to walk away from Britain's answer to the 'National Socialist Party'
-
Wilts.
In 2010, Corbyn stood and was elected on the agreed Labour manifesto. But there he was. In his own, rather excruciating wrds saying that people were voting for him. Personally. Not necessarily for the party.
Now, much as Momentum want to paint this as a "You're either in the Church of the Blessed St Jeremy the Infallible or your a Tory like Umunna", I have no axe to grind for a bunch of people well to the right of me who have left Labour.
My point is that Corbyn doesn't have the moral high ground here. Because he has spent his lifetime being the rebel, putting HIS principles above all, he now cannot call for other people to put THEIR principles to one side.
Because, strange though it might sound to committed far leftists (and I've been there) outside that room full of people who agree with your ideological position where you polish up YOUR principles, there are people equally believing in THEIR principles which are different.
-
RIP the Labour Party. Murdered by momentum 2018
-
Siobahn Mcdonagh Mp is the latest victim of the Jeremy Jewhater Road show, she has been bombarded with threats and vitriol all week as Zmomentum Hamshankers suspect she is about to walk away from Britain's answer to the 'National Socialist Party'
Jeez....
As for the Jew hater nonsense, I wonder if you have any evidence of that?
-
Mind. Talking of splits. Wait till the story about the three Cabinet ministers breaks tomorrow.
I have never in my life seen Cabinet Ministers so openly call out a PM's key policy as wrong, and not either resign or get sacked.
Bizarre times.
-
It's more than calling out her policies, they are insisting she resign after the May local elections. I hope she does and then we can have the real face of Toryism JRM in the hot seat :evil:
-
Mind. Talking of splits. Wait till the story about the three Cabinet ministers breaks tomorrow.
I have never in my life seen Cabinet Ministers so openly call out a PM's key policy as wrong, and not either resign or get sacked.
Bizarre times.
I was going to post something similar myself. An extraordinary intervention by Rudd and co, but in the context of this week hardly surprising.
I wonder if they will actually resign so they can vote for Letwin's amendment. Maybe they will vote anyway and defy May to sack them.
My money is on the vote being pulled again and May reluctantly agreeing to go to Brussels and ask for an Article 50 extension.
-
Wilts.
In 2010, Corbyn stood and was elected on the agreed Labour manifesto. But there he was. In his own, rather excruciating wrds saying that people were voting for him. Personally. Not necessarily for the party.
Now, much as Momentum want to paint this as a "You're either in the Church of the Blessed St Jeremy the Infallible or your a Tory like Umunna", I have no axe to grind for a bunch of people well to the right of me who have left Labour.
My point is that Corbyn doesn't have the moral high ground here. Because he has spent his lifetime being the rebel, putting HIS principles above all, he now cannot call for other people to put THEIR principles to one side.
Because, strange though it might sound to committed far leftists (and I've been there) outside that room full of people who agree with your ideological position where you polish up YOUR principles, there are people equally believing in THEIR principles which are different.
Sorry no. Where are the principles here? Corbyn put his principles out to the electorate before the election and said vote for me or not. These MP's stood on a Labour manifesto - got elected on that - now they don't like it and want to stand for something else!!!
And it comes out today that they are willing to vote with the Tories to keep May in power!!!
There's something going on here and it's certainly not principle. If they were principled they would stand for re-election on what they believe now.
-
This sorry bunch of self serving idiots from all side of the house have broken our system big style. At this moment I think there’s millions of voters out there that feel homeless, the next General Election could be very interesting result wise
-
As per Wilts's post above, the "Independent Group" have said they will back May in a vote of confidence. Also Heidi Allen hinted at a Confidence and Supply agreement!
They are clearly sh*t-scared of facing the electorate although they are not averse to a Second EU Referendum. A highly principled group indeed.
-
Just thinking about the "Independent Group" I found it significant that Ian Austin chose not to join them when he quit Labour yesterday. Austin is one of the few Labour MPs to vote for May's Deal. He is clearly pro-Brexit but wants to avoid No Deal.
I'm guessing that all the guff spouted by Soubry's Three Amigos (should that be Amigas?) about avoiding No Deal is really Westminster code for "we want to stop Brexit from happening"
-
Just thinking about the "Independent Group" I found it significant that Ian Austin chose not to join them when he quit Labour yesterday. Austin is one of the few Labour MPs to vote for May's Deal. He is clearly pro-Brexit but wants to avoid No Deal.
I'm guessing that all the guff spouted by Soubry's Three Amigos (should that be Amigas?) about avoiding No Deal is really Westminster code for "we want to stop Brexit from happening"
If this lot are so keen on another referendum why are they so averse to by elections? Absolute scum the lot of them.
-
Siobahn Mcdonagh Mp is the latest victim of the Jeremy Jewhater Road show, she has been bombarded with threats and vitriol all week as Zmomentum Hamshankers suspect she is about to walk away from Britain's answer to the 'National Socialist Party'
Jeez....
As for the Jew hater nonsense, I wonder if you have any evidence of that?
After a long-running row, Labour has adopted, in full, the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's definition, and accompanying examples, of anti-Semitism.
It included an extra statement saying this should not undermine free speech on Israel. Jeremy Corbyn proposed a longer additional statement - which would have allowed criticism of the foundation of the state of Israel as racist - but this was not accepted by the party's ruling executive.
Corbyn s own stance (including openly supporting Hezbullah)and refusal/benign support of the Anti Semitic elements currently ruling the roost in the Labour Party are rapidly leading towards its recognition as Institutionaly Racist.
-
In other news, Jeremy Hunt has managed to upset a whole nation.
https://mobile.twitter.com/FRANKADEMILLE/status/1098992199491076099?p=v
I sometimes wonder if he really is an upgrade on BoJo.
-
Just thinking about the "Independent Group" I found it significant that Ian Austin chose not to join them when he quit Labour yesterday. Austin is one of the few Labour MPs to vote for May's Deal. He is clearly pro-Brexit but wants to avoid No Deal.
I'm guessing that all the guff spouted by Soubry's Three Amigos (should that be Amigas?) about avoiding No Deal is really Westminster code for "we want to stop Brexit from happening"
If this lot are so keen on another referendum why are they so averse to by elections? Absolute scum the lot of them.
Just thinking about the "Independent Group" I found it significant that Ian Austin chose not to join them when he quit Labour yesterday. Austin is one of the few Labour MPs to vote for May's Deal. He is clearly pro-Brexit but wants to avoid No Deal.
I'm guessing that all the guff spouted by Soubry's Three Amigos (should that be Amigas?) about avoiding No Deal is really Westminster code for "we want to stop Brexit from happening"
If this lot are so keen on another referendum why are they so averse to by elections? Absolute scum the lot of them.
Politicians in hypocrisy shock! LOL!
-
In other news, Jeremy Hunt has managed to upset a whole nation.
https://mobile.twitter.com/FRANKADEMILLE/status/1098992199491076099?p=v
I sometimes wonder if he really is an upgrade on BoJo.
Has he found out if his wife is Chinese or Japanese yet 😂😂😂
-
After a long-running row, Labour has adopted, in full, the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's definition, and accompanying examples, of anti-Semitism.
It included an extra statement saying this should not undermine free speech on Israel. Jeremy Corbyn proposed a longer additional statement - which would have allowed criticism of the foundation of the state of Israel as racist - but this was not accepted by the party's ruling executive.
Corbyn s own stance (including openly supporting Hezbullah)and refusal/benign support of the Anti Semitic elements currently ruling the roost in the Labour Party are rapidly leading towards its recognition as Institutionaly Racist.
That depends on what you mean by "supporting" Hezbollah? Supporting them in getting a peace agreement that is fair to the Palestinians - yes.
As for the Labour thing - yes, some may have gone beyond what is okay, far far far less than the Tories coming out with their guffing racism.
Meanwhile, calling him Jew hating is showing your bias, or worst, simple mindedness regurgitating Zionist and right wing propaganda.
https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/20/jeremy-corbyn-labour-party-crucial-ally-in-fight-against-antisemitism
-
After a long-running row, Labour has adopted, in full, the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's definition, and accompanying examples, of anti-Semitism.
It included an extra statement saying this should not undermine free speech on Israel. Jeremy Corbyn proposed a longer additional statement - which would have allowed criticism of the foundation of the state of Israel as racist - but this was not accepted by the party's ruling executive.
Corbyn s own stance (including openly supporting Hezbullah)and refusal/benign support of the Anti Semitic elements currently ruling the roost in the Labour Party are rapidly leading towards its recognition as Institutionaly Racist.
That depends on what you mean by "supporting" Hezbollah? Supporting them in getting a peace agreement that is fair to the Palestinians - yes.
As for the Labour thing - yes, some may have gone beyond what is okay, far far far less than the Tories coming out with their guffing racism.
Meanwhile, calling him Jew hating is showing your bias, or worst, simple mindedness regurgitating Zionist and right wing propaganda.
https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/20/jeremy-corbyn-labour-party-crucial-ally-in-fight-against-antisemitism
[/quote
I will continue to refer to him as Jeremy Jew hater until he sorts himself and the Labour Party out.... that will be for some considerable time no doubt.
-
BRR
I've no idea if Corbyn holds anti-Semitic views, although his support for that disgustingly anti-Semitic mural a few years back does make you wonder.
However, one thing I can say. Before he became leader, Labour didn't have a problem with members hurling anti-Semitic abuse at MPs.
That is something that has happened on his watch and he did virtually nothing to rein it in until it exploded in the press last summer. Prior to that, he made a string of comments which, wittingly or u wittingly set a culture and an atmosphere whereby prominent Jewish people were seen by many in the party as fair game.
-
Sproty - oh, dear.
BST - as far as I'm aware. JC supported the artist who did that mural, until he saw that mural.
Labour has always had people who hated the who Israel thing. And it always will. It also has less racism by far than the Tories.
The conspiracy Jew side of things, tends to be more of a right wing thing, though some people have said things that can be seen as racist. This hasn't changed, and in fact has probably reduced massively even before the Tories and Israel decided to make this an issue. There's more record of what people say these days, that's why it's increased.
And let's be clear, most of what is cited as anti=semetic is simply anti-zionist. People who are pro zionist are and should be fair game.
-
BRR
Nope. I know a couple of Momentum members who have claimed that, but it's not true.
See the screenshot of Corbyn's original Facebook post straight under an image of the mural here.
https://wsbuzz.com/world-news/fury-revealed-jeremy-corbyn-defended-anti-semitic-public-art-showing-men-playing-monopoly/
He wrote a FB response to an OP that featured a picture of the mural.
Corbyn himself has said that he didn't look closely ENOUGH at the mural. Which is very odd as with the merest glance it's obvious that the central theme is age old anti-Semitic imagery.
Bizarre how Corbyn supporters don't see what a car crash he looks like to the rest of the world. As someone put it today, he's not actually very intelligent (he wrote a piece on NATO which would fail GSCE History) and he's wedded to rigid ideological stances. A really, really bad combination for a politician.
Me, I don't think he's anti-Semitic. I just think he's not very smart. Thoroughly immature and one dimensional in the foreign policy stances he's held all his life and now a bit bewildered that those things come back and smack him in the face.
-
You're agreeing with me in that first part. He was in general agreement with the artist and the issue of art being removed as an issue of being anto free speech. Corbyn quite likely didn't really look at it - believe it or nbot he's a busy dude. Either way, it absolutely doesn't fit with anything about the man bar the right wing establishment tripe which is what most people (Sproty to the extrenme) regurgitate. I'm v surprised to see you going along with this same narative.
So, car crash to those who swallow all that bullshit. His views aren't that radical at all, only when you compare them to the likes of Cameron, May, Blair, Johnson and JRM.
Foreign policy stance - anti apartheid. Was that so bad? Which one's do you currently have issue with?
-
Well I guess not having an ethical foreign policy must mean we support having an unethical foreign policy!
I wonder what that looks like....
selling arms to rogue states,
using aid as a political weapon,
support for military dictatorships,
using trade deals to asset strip resources from poor countries,
taking part in proxy wars and destabilising democracy
and all the rest of it!
Thinking on....we might be a dab hand at some of that.
-
Corbyn's foreign policy is based on the most simplistic of analyses.
He works on the philosophy that the world sub-divides into Oppressors and Victims. It is that one-dimensional.
In any situation, that means that he automatically sides with one side. And then you will look for a long, long time for ANY direct criticism from him of that side.
The big one is Russia/The West.
Go and make a list of all the times Corbyn has directly and passionately condemned Russia and Putin. Whether over Grozny, Crimea, Aleppo or Salisbury. Or over the trail of carnage among Putin's domestic opponents who have been jailed or murdered.
You can do the same exercise over Israel/Hamas, over USA/Venezuela, over Britain/IRA.
It is puerile politics. Simplistic. Unintelligent. Prepared to overlook bestial crimes so long as they are committed by your enemy's enemy, because they serve the greater good.
Corbyn's ideological guardian, Seamus Milne said over the carpet bombing of Aleppo, that we shouldn't criticise it publicly because it "diverts attention from Western atrocities." Read that, then go back and look at Corbyn's mumbled dissembling over gas attacks in Syria or over Salisbury or over ANY scenario where he's been asked to criticise Russia or Syria or Maduro or Hamas or the IRA. He has a stock line about condemning all violence. But he will never, EVER publicly point the finger at one of those for their actions. Whereas he's had a career of passionately shouting to crowds about the crimes of NATO, the USA, Israel and the British.
Read his, frankly, disgusting ramblings about Bosnia, where he sides with conspiracy theorists who claim that the massacre at Srebrenica, the single foulest act in Europe since the War, was over-exaggerated and used as an "excuse" (his words) for NATO to attack Serbia.
It'd be wise not to lecture folk on Corbyn's foreign policy without first understanding it. It's not ethical foreign policy. It is student common room rigid ideological purity gone mad. I know exactly where it comes from because I was a part of that scene 30 years ago. We'd discuss (actually, be berates by one or two ideologues) how you focus on the actions of the West, of Israel, of the British Army in NI, and never, ever criticise the Soviet Union, or the Palestinians or the IRA.
I know the tactic, and when I came to my senses, it disgusted me. Because the world is complex, and you don't make the world a better place by turning a blind eye to atrocities committed by autocrats because you think the other side is worse. Corbyn and his inner circle never left that position.
If you're a Corbynista and you've got this far into this post, you'll be thinking I'm away with the fairies. Going OTT. If so, do what I've done over the past few years. Go back through the record of Corbyn's public pronouncements on foreign issues before he became leader. See who he NEVER criticised. And who he passionately berated at every opportunity.
-
You could start with Corbyn calling for a Magnitsky Act to sieze laundered Russian money in the UK if you wished.
You could also mention that the mural was publicised as anti-capitalist imagery and its removal as an attack on free speech - it was only when you looked closely at could you see what it actually was.
You could also mention that he was one of the few MP's to sign the motion against the anti Jewish march in North London in 2015 (for which the organiser was jailed) along with supporting numerous other anti-semitic motions.
https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/jeremy-corbyn-is-an-anti-racist-not-an-antisemite/
But you wont. Because this doesn't suit your narrative. Get Corbyn out. He is a threat to society.
Yes he is. To the self-serving elites who control the wealth and the information narrative - and who want to continue the neo-liberal policies of privatisation, austerity and pointless foreign wars.
-
Wilts.
More Whataboutery. None of what you wrote addresses anything I raised.
Still. I suppose it's a step up from last year, when you were posting stuff from craigmurray.org to help clarify the Salisbury issue.
And then you go off on one about my "agenda". My agenda is to get a Labour Govt elected. And as I've said since the day he took over, I agree 100% with his economic and home policies. But he will NEVER become PM of the UK with the foreign policies he has.
-
BST don’t expect anything but deflection from a Corbyn supporter
-
Wilts.
In 2010, Corbyn stood and was elected on the agreed Labour manifesto. But there he was. In his own, rather excruciating wrds saying that people were voting for him. Personally. Not necessarily for the party.
Now, much as Momentum want to paint this as a "You're either in the Church of the Blessed St Jeremy the Infallible or your a Tory like Umunna", I have no axe to grind for a bunch of people well to the right of me who have left Labour.
My point is that Corbyn doesn't have the moral high ground here. Because he has spent his lifetime being the rebel, putting HIS principles above all, he now cannot call for other people to put THEIR principles to one side.
Because, strange though it might sound to committed far leftists (and I've been there) outside that room full of people who agree with your ideological position where you polish up YOUR principles, there are people equally believing in THEIR principles which are different.
Sorry no. Where are the principles here? Corbyn put his principles out to the electorate before the election and said vote for me or not. These MP's stood on a Labour manifesto - got elected on that - now they don't like it and want to stand for something else!!!
And it comes out today that they are willing to vote with the Tories to keep May in power!!!
There's something going on here and it's certainly not principle. If they were principled they would stand for re-election on what they believe now.
What did I say yesterday? No meaningful vote this week, meaningful vote to be held on 12th March. Time to lump on a No-Deal Brexit methinks.
-
Not a chance of No Deal TRB. Not after that extraordinary intervention by the three Cabinet ministers yesterday.
May's approach is now a busted flush. She's parroting the line that it's her deal or No Deal, but in the real world, outside her bunker, everyone knows the choose is her deal or an extension of A50.
And everyone knows she won't get the votes in Parliament for her deal.
So, the question is, what will the EU want in return for allowing us an extension to get our shit together?
Because one thing they have been consistent on is saying that they will not allow an extension without some idea of what the extension is for.
As I keep saying, there's only one endgame that this is heading towards: Ref2.
-
Got to say though, the fact that she's running the clock down so far is beyond disgraceful. It is the most reckless and dangerous policy and British PM has chosen since Suez. If there IS, some cock up that results in the catastrophe of a No Deal, she'd better have lots of bottled water and cans of bean in No10, because there'll be millions on the streets baying for her blood and she'll not be able to get out.
-
BST,
I understand that you disagree with Corbyn on foreign policy.
You have outlined your view time and again on this, as though repetition adds weight.
What is not clear is what foreign policy position you think Labour should take?
Presumably as a Labour supporter you think an ethical policy position is essential.....so define what it means for you!
Take as an example Israel/Palestine.
What changes should be made to make an ethical stance?
Are you suggesting that the foreign policy stance taken in the Blair/Brown era, or that followed by the coalition/Cameron/May, is suitable for the world as it stands today.
-
Classic approach Albie. If you're not a Corbynista, you're a Blairite.
If only the world were that one-dimensional, eh? Then it's be easy. As it is, as someone who was vehemently against the NeoCon approach, I'm going to treat your final paragraph with the disdain it deserves. See, you can criticise Corbyn without getting into bed with Rumsfeld.
My point, consistently has been that Corbyn's insistence on stupid and rigidly ideological stances on foreign policy issues does great damage to the party.
This time last year, Labour were doing reasonably well in the polls. Polling 42-44%. Now they are down to the mid to low 30s.
Go and look at when the dips have occurred.
March, July/Aug and Jan/Feb.
Don't take my word. Have a look for yourself.
Then have a think what the key issues were are those times.
Salisbury
Anti-Semitism
Brexiters
Every single time an issue has emerged where Corbyn's stance on foreign policy has come under scrutiny, Labour takes a hit.
It's not just me pointing this out. McDonnell was comnenting in a recent interview about how Labour has to learn to put these issues to bed quickly if they are going to have a chance at the polls.
Corbyn could have shut down everyone of those.
Firmly pointed the finger at Russia last March and say that he, as PM would not countenance such actions in our soil.
Immediately accepted the IHRA definition on anti-Semitism and loudly and passionately tell the world that he will root out anti-Semites from the party, instead of letting the issue drag on throughout the summer.
Commit Labour to the Ref2 that his members and most of his voters want.
McDonnell has been trying to push those lines because he knows that they are the way to limit damage to Labour. Corbyn has refused to do because he couldn't look McCluskey, Milne and the other ideological purists in the eye if he did.
-
To be fair Albie, I did ask BST about what issues he had with Corbyn's policies.
I see you mention Israel/Hammas - that's scewing things. Hammas may be the main representitives of the Palestinians, but they are not the only ones. JC undoubtedly supports Palestinians in the numan rights abuses in Israel, he is not supporting Hammas.
Venezuela/USA - really? There's two sides to this?
Britain/IRA? Hmmmm.... Surely you mean Britain and Ireland?
The Salisbury thing seems very iffy. I don't think you can cite it as evidence of anything. The gassing incidences in Syria are very questionable - the more recent one especially. Crimea, yep, not right but then part of a whole East v West action stirred up by the yanks and EU lap dogs.
Having said that, I do get your point, it is a perspective, but Corbyn's policies appear more morally correct than others. I'm not sure it's a string reason to criticise him.
Good to hear you don't see him as anti-semetic. He should have and should be dealing with all this bullshit a lot firmer, but when you have the media and Israel on your back in this way, it's not easy. The IHRA definition is dubious, it isn't the best, and IMO should never be agreed to. Namely anti Israel is NOT anti semetic. Corbyn's mistake here is not acting quick enough.
-
Scary numbers for Labour in these poll results.
https://medium.com/@theobertram/the-week-that-labour-lost-3307ecd58ce5
We've finally got to the inevitable outcome of Corbynism. The apparent polling support Labour had was always piss and wind. It's rapidly evaporating.
What a mess.
-
Scary numbers for Labour in these poll results.
https://medium.com/@theobertram/the-week-that-labour-lost-3307ecd58ce5
We've finally got to the inevitable outcome of Corbynism. The apparent polling support Labour had was always piss and wind. It's rapidly evaporating.
What a mess.
"3. When asked who best represents Britain, more voters prefer the MPs who resigned to Corbyn.
40% say those who resigned represent Britain better than Corbyn (Source: Survation, Feb 18)"
Does not compute.
-
It depends how many don't knows and that said no difference Glyn.
It might make it clearer if they gave percentages for all options.
-
Scary numbers for Labour in these poll results.
https://medium.com/@theobertram/the-week-that-labour-lost-3307ecd58ce5
We've finally got to the inevitable outcome of Corbynism. The apparent polling support Labour had was always piss and wind. It's rapidly evaporating.
What a mess.
Hence the agreement on pushing for the referendum, it's something they know will probably poll well in some areas.
-
It's not so much about it polling well for Labour (although it IS the least damaging alternative for them).
It's the only rational way forward.
There is no majority in Parliament for any of the following:
May's deal
Corbyn's deal
No deal.
The only possible deal that could get a majority is May's deal without the backstop. But the EU, quite rightly, will not offer that.
So, with Parliament gridlocked, there is no possible way forward but putting it to a Ref2 with a SPECIFIC leave option or options (unlike the totally undefined Leave of 2016) and a firm commitment from all parties that they will implement whatever the outcome is.
I cannot see how anyone could possibly feel that was a betrayal.
But you'll hear that word from the Brexiters. A lot.
-
It depends how many don't knows and that said no difference Glyn.
It might make it clearer if they gave percentages for all options.
Only 40% said they prefer the MPs who resigned.
No matter what the other 60% said, they didn't prefer the MPs who resigned, so that is the majority group and you cannot state 'more voters prefer the MPs who resigned to Corbyn' when it's just not true.
-
A moot point but unless more than 40% openly state that they would prefer Corbyn then his supporters aren't in the majority either.
-
Thing is, the TIG MPs aren't a particularly attractive bunch. But they still pull a lot of flaky support from Labour.
Emphasises what I've been saying for 3 years. Corbyn has very weak support amongst Lab supporters. Many have been sticking with Lab DESPITE him, not BECAUSE OF him.
-
A moot point but unless more than 40% openly state that they would prefer Corbyn then his supporters aren't in the majority either.
But that isn't the assertion being made on the back of it, is it?
-
The vermin in parliament who are trying every trick in the book to block Brexit are traitors and should all be executed for treason.
-
Didn't Corbyn try to organise a fan boycott at Arsenal due to some sposorship or advertising of holidays in Israel?
-
The vermin in parliament who are trying every trick in the book to block Brexit are traitors and should all be executed for treason.
Presumably if we have another referendum and remain won, you'd want everybody who voted remain to be executed for treason too.
-
:that: .... and I return not for the first time to 1976 and a Referendum that produced this Result
Remain 66 per cent
Leave 33 per cent
And again I ask who were the traitors then ? Answer Tories (in the main) who never resected a majority EIGHT to TEN TIMES bigger than this last time
Didnt see any hangings then and in the period up to them FINALLY getting their own way with a second Referendum. So for me best of three will do nicely
-
The vermin in parliament who are trying every trick in the book to block Brexit are traitors and should all be executed for treason.
Toddle of to Iran or Saudi Arabia. That's what they'd do there.
One thing that Brexit has done. It'd smoked out loads of people who claim to be in favour of democracy, but haven't actually got a f**king clue what it means.
-
The vermin in parliament who are trying every trick in the book to block Brexit are traitors and should all be executed for treason.
Toddle of to Iran or Saudi Arabia. That's what they'd do there.
One thing that Brexit has done. It'd smoked out loads of people who claim to be in favour of democracy, but haven't actually got a f**king clue what it means.
Like keep voting until we get the 'right' answer.
-
The vermin in parliament who are trying every trick in the book to block Brexit are traitors and should all be executed for treason.
Toddle of to Iran or Saudi Arabia. That's what they'd do there.
One thing that Brexit has done. It'd smoked out loads of people who claim to be in favour of democracy, but haven't actually got a f**king clue what it means.
Like keep voting until we get the 'right' answer.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nigel-farage-wants-second-referendum-7985017
-
If you buy a lottery ticket and lose it doesn't stop you buying another ticket to win next time. If you buy a lottery ticket and win, and then they tell you to f**k off, you haven't won because there's gonna be a re-draw, you'd be rather peeved!
-
The vermin in parliament who are trying every trick in the book to block Brexit are traitors and should all be executed for treason.
Toddle of to Iran or Saudi Arabia. That's what they'd do there.
One thing that Brexit has done. It'd smoked out loads of people who claim to be in favour of democracy, but haven't actually got a f**king clue what it means.
Like keep voting until we get the 'right' answer.
Axholme, perhaps you should read this document, published by the Government yesterday. Finally, they have admitted the probable impacts to the UK of a No Deal Brexit - you know, the kind that you appear to want.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/781768/Implications_for_Business_and_Trade_of_a_No_Deal_Exit_on_29_March_2019.pdf
Having read that, (though somehow I think you won't), do you still want No Deal? And if so, why?
-
The vermin in parliament who are trying every trick in the book to block Brexit are traitors and should all be executed for treason.
Toddle of to Iran or Saudi Arabia. That's what they'd do there.
One thing that Brexit has done. It'd smoked out loads of people who claim to be in favour of democracy, but haven't actually got a f**king clue what it means.
Like keep voting until we get the 'right' answer.
It'll be the will of the people.
-
The vermin in parliament who are trying every trick in the book to block Brexit are traitors and should all be executed for treason.
Toddle of to Iran or Saudi Arabia. That's what they'd do there.
One thing that Brexit has done. It'd smoked out loads of people who claim to be in favour of democracy, but haven't actually got a f**king clue what it means.
Like keep voting until we get the 'right' answer.
Yes - but as I keep saying to anyone that will read what I put - and you have not responded so I will repeat it again - we got the right answer in 1976.
Majority then 33 to 34 % ( to Remain)
Majority 2016 3 to 4 % (to Leave)
10 times more people voted first time round to Remain than last time to Leave. Then (mainly) Tory MPs immediately started to disrupt the "will of the British people" and carried on for 40 years till they got their way
Would you be miffed if you were a voter in 76 that they kept going until THEY got the result they wanted
I have no axe to grind with you or anyone - people have opinions one way or another - I just like to point out what happened in 1976 (again) and for the record I voted Leave !
-
If you buy a lottery ticket and lose it doesn't stop you buying another ticket to win next time. If you buy a lottery ticket and win, and then they tell you to f**k off, you haven't won because there's gonna be a re-draw, you'd be rather peeved!
Its more like being told you've got cancer and Aids by the same doctor and then asking for a second opinion.
-
Is it really? I doubt even RedJ would agree with that one..........Mind you, time will tell!
-
BB
That would be a brilliant analogy if it weren't a really shit analogy.
-
It's more like choosing between two beds on the understanding that you would stay in the bed you chose for the rest of your life, then waking up one day to find that Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage, Michael Gove, Jacob Rees-Mogg, Liam Fox, Chris Grayling, James Dyson, that Kitson from Weatherspoons and Vladimir Putin had all popped in and done massive shits in the bed you chose, then having to decide whether to honour the agreement to spend the rest of your life in that bed or move to another bed.
-
..... Are you reading Filo?
Can't resist can you Billy lad. I think it's a perfect example of how people will react to a re-vote.
Your reply, following the insulting one, is just a bag of shite that's only worthy of a RedJ 'like'.
-
BB
I wasn't trying to be insulting. It just was a shit analogy. If you think "people" will think like that (I wouldn't know cos I don't often talk to "people") then as a bright lad, you've got a responsibility not to spread daft analogies like that.
Actually mine wasn't very good either, but there's one halfway between the two that's just about right.
It's like buying a ticket to the lottery where you don't know what the prize is, but Boris Johnson says he's read the small print and the prize will be f**king brill. You win, then two years later, you read the small print and it says that the winner wins the right to have Boris Johnson shit in their bed and take £20,000 of future wealth off every man woman and child in the country.
But you do have the right to burn your ticket and pretend it never happened. Or, of course, you can insist on claiming your prize and slag off anyone who points out the downside as being condescending.
-
Billy. I've told you before. As an intelligent guy, you have a responsibility to not mislead vulnerable people who hang on every word you say. It's your duty as a decent guy at least.
Now, what I said is what I feel will be a consequence of another vote. The people who were deprived of their lottery win will be mostly those who support the 'Kitsons' you describe! I'm afraid that it's your analogy that is a really shit one for that reason alone, without looking further into the bullshit.
You must try harder owd lad. That was embarrassing.
-
What I can't understand then, is why Leavers would want to spurn the chance to rub Remainers noses in it even more by having an even more emphatic and glorious victory?
-
What I can't understand then, is why Leavers would want to spurn the chance to rub Remainers noses in it even more by having an even more emphatic and glorious victory?
Oh my Lord..Thats a bit like saying Rovers only beat a team 1-0 so lets forget that one and play them again and try and do better...
-
The analogy with lottery tickets is shite. A lottery gives you a tiny chance of winning something based on no knowledge of anything; the consequences of Brexit, whether a no-deal or not, can be safetley predicted using established economic models and has already been backed up with, for example, a steady stream of Global businesses moving their headquarters and factories out of the country.
-
BJW, as with all analogies there are lots of differences in the detail! The basic point of using the lottery ticket as an example of how Brexiteers could react towards a re-vote is an excellent one.
-
Why are we comparing Brexit to a lottery anyway? I thought it was a sure thing that Brexit was going to be super amazing? Now all of a sudden the goalposts have shifted to a game of random chance? What happened, lads?
-
What's happened is an excellent analogy has been taken out of context by the usual culprits.
-
Many make the point we didn't know what was voted for, however does that apply after ref2 and a remain win? Do we then go again at every change?
-
BFYP
No. Of course not. Because we know what Remain means. Just like we now know what May's deal or No Deal means.
The whole point is that in 2016, NO-ONE knew what "Leave" meant. It wasn't a thing. It was a totally ill-defined concept covering a huge spectrum of possible outcomes.
Farage was still saying six months AFTER the vote that a Norway deal was preferable. That's way closer integration with the EU than anything being put forward as acceptable to the Right these days.
I posted a video on here a few weeks ago of a prominent Brexiter during g the ref campaign saying it would be lunacy to leave with No Deal. He's now supporting No Deal. Fox insisted that trade negotiations would be the easiest in history and we'd simply roll over existing EU agreements with other countries. In 2 years he's managed to roll over 7 out of 69. There are countless other examples.
We now have FAR more clarity on precisely what options there are for Leave. It is wilful stupidity to say that the 2016 vote gave a clear mandate and that to revisit that would be anti-democratic.
-
If the current generation had be around in 1940 we would have surrendered and been speaking German by now because going to war would be too difficult and cost too much.
-
If the current generation had be around in 1940 we would have surrendered and been speaking German by now because going to war would be too difficult and cost too much.
And here was me thinking that we were promised that Brexit was going to be easy and save us money!
-
BFYP
No. Of course not. Because we know what Remain means. Just like we now know what May's deal or No Deal means.
But here is the point which is oft used for another vote, we don't no what remain means do we? Promises on the remain side in the last ref wouldn't have been kept and were untrue also, but nobody seems to mention that....
As for Axholme Lion, your last post is frankly rubbish.....
-
Of course we know what remain means? It means as we were before. Simple as that.
What promises are you referring to?
-
Scary numbers for Labour in these poll results.
https://medium.com/@theobertram/the-week-that-labour-lost-3307ecd58ce5
We've finally got to the inevitable outcome of Corbynism. The apparent polling support Labour had was always piss and wind. It's rapidly evaporating.
What a mess.
Such emotive comments, and very reactive to one poll. Note the YouGov/Times polls consistently giving the Tories a higher rating than other polls. Anyone would think The Times is biased.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#2019
Worth noting that link was to a blog by a former advisor to Blair. It's clear he'd word info in one direction only. The funniest part of was the overtly Blairite comment:
It is absolutely essential to Labour’s campaign at the next general election that Labour voters believe that Labour can win and that a vote for anyone but Labour will put the Tories in office. If Labour voters start to see consistent Tory leads of six points or more, then there is no longer jeopardy in casting their vote in protest with the TIG and they will do so in larger numbers.
Support for TIG is likely to be soft and highly volatile. Ultimately it can be won back by Labour but not by this leader. And unless Labour can quickly respond to the events of this last week, Labour support will decline further.
And that with the added 11% think The Indi Group could win the next election - which looney bin were they polling?
Labour support does appear to have progressively decreased, albeit very gradually, over recent times. However, considering the bullshit put out by the press (the effectiveness of which is ehoed in this forum), and especially the nonsensical antisemitism smears on Corbyn, it is hardly surprising that many are finally being twisted to see things as the scared shitless establishment are wanting them to.
-
BJW
Does Remain need to be just as was?
Maybe a remain and reform package is needed.
All is not well within the EU, as events in Hungary show.
Perhaps now is the time for a review of the way the institution works!
The polls are just a temporary barometer, which give pointers to the big data analytics of where to focus.
Folk should remember Labour improved over 20 points in the polls leading up to the last election.
One or two on here are still living in the past, when polling was the only tool in the toolbox.
Since 2010 or so, that is history.
-
It was a shit analogy BB. Brexiteers were telling us that we would all be better off without the EU. I don't ever remember being told everybody would win the lottery.
-
Albie
Corbyn campaigned superbly in 2017. And May was horrific.
But we KNOW those abilities now. They are priced in. It's not going to be a surprise next time when May is unable to form intelligible sentence. And Corbyn is not going to be able to pull off the sleight of hand of convincing left Leavers and Remainers that he agreed with both of them.
Individuals are meaningless, but look at the drift over the past 12 months. Corbyn has taken Labour's support back down to not much above where it was in early 2017 through a series of entirely avoidable f**k ups, every one of which, as I keep saying, are attributable to his infantile approach to foreign policy.
-
It was a shit analogy BB. Brexiteers were telling us that we would all be better off without the EU. I don't ever remember being told everybody would win the lottery.
IAATP. Your misunderstanding of my comparison regarding why I think many Brexiteers will object to a re-vote is your problem. It is, after all, an excellent analogy.
-
Albie
Corbyn campaigned superbly in 2017. And May was horrific.
But we KNOW those abilities now. They are priced in. It's not going to be a surprise next time when May is unable to form intelligible sentence. And Corbyn is not going to be able to pull off the sleight of hand of convincing left Leavers and Remainers that he agreed with both of them.
Individuals are meaningless, but look at the drift over the past 12 months. Corbyn has taken Labour's support back down to not much above where it was in early 2017 through a series of entirely avoidable f**k ups, every one of which, as I keep saying, are attributable to his infantile approach to foreign policy.
I don't see any of the issues that most read about being about his actual foriegn policies, more to do with Israeli influenced mass media swallowed anti-semite bullshit. The bullshit about him supporting terrorism by Hamas, and then the Venezuela thing thrown on top - minus any mention of the US doing the same as it's done all over the world, for ever. That and the general bullshit swallowing of the Tories having a great economic know how whereas Corbyn is a commie friend of Stalin, once slept with Gadaffi, and has a love child with Sadam Hussain.
As an aside, it would be interesting to hear about your foriegn policy ideas about Venezuela, Israel, and USA.
-
BRR
I've given my two pennorth previously. I'll say it again, briefly.
I KNOW Corbyn's approach to foreign policy, because I was involved in politics on the far left of the Labour party in the 1980s. And I see flashbacks to that every time he says anything on foreign policy.
He sees the world through a one dimensional Marxist filter.
There are Oppressors and Oppressed.
And what you do is ALWAYS take the side of the Oppressed. And you NEVER, EVER criticise anyone who you see as taking on the Oppressor.
Sounds great.
But it's infantile and stupid for two reasons.
1) It grotesquely over-simplifies complex problems. So the IRA bombers were freedom-fighting heroes and the Shankhill Butchers were evil, bigoted thugs.
2) It allows (nay, REQUIRES) you to ignore anything wrong that the people who you deem to be fighting an Oppressor ever does. So you ignore Russia facilitating gassing in Douma and carpet bombing Aleppo and you downplay them using nerve agents in Britain, because they are a bulwark against America. You gloss over Srebrenica, because it was carried out by friends of Moscow. You ignore Maduro's tragi-comic catastrophe because he sticks two fingers up to America. You don't condemn Hizbullah bombings because...well, Israel innit?
I'm.not exaggerating the one-dimensional nature of his foreign pivy stances. If you think I am, I hope you've read his back catalogue in depth because I'll quote you chapter and verse if you like. Not Blairite hatchet jobs. I'll give you his own words.
Finally, I don't HAVE any simple answers to those problems. That's kind of the point.
-
PS
"more to do with Israeli influenced mass media".
The Corbynistas are insistent on choosing this particular hill to crucify the Labour Party on.
You ARE Chris Williamson (or Ken Livingstone) and I claim my five pounds.
-
BJW
Does Remain need to be just as was?
Maybe a remain and reform package is needed.
All is not well within the EU, as events in Hungary show.
Perhaps now is the time for a review of the way the institution works!
The polls are just a temporary barometer, which give pointers to the big data analytics of where to focus.
Folk should remember Labour improved over 20 points in the polls leading up to the last election.
One or two on here are still living in the past, when polling was the only tool in the toolbox.
Since 2010 or so, that is history.
Why would it not mean remaining as before?... if we decided to remain, we wouldn't have left any of the things we're in!
We'd lose some respect for the shit show of the last two years and we've lost EU institutions that have moved abroad in anticipation of our exit but that's it.
-
Guys can I just say I’m really enjoying reading this debate, some excellent points being made and (in the main) without throwing stones etc.
I’ve learned a lot of facts on both sides through this.
I have to admit that I am from a labour background, but have not for years been able to vote for them due to the immigration policy
-
Debate is always good mate,there are a lot of different opinions on here regarding Tories,Labour and Brexit.Obviously being a Labour stronghold the majority of opinions lean that way,but it's down to individual choice,i respect everybody's views and opinions whether I agree or not..But on the whole even centre/right believers like me can have there say without receiving barrel load of abuse..lol
-
You ARE Chris Williamson .... and I claim my five pounds.
3 letters out. Good try though, £3.85 on it's way ;)
-
Jesus H. !
https://mobile.twitter.com/stephenpollard/status/1101460965256847367?p=v
I'd never vote Labour, they are useless (as are the Tories these days) but if I did I'd be questioning whether I could after reading s**t like this.
-
They just can t help themselves.
Always the way of the Far Left. Proving that you're ideologically sound to your brothers and sisters is by far the most important thing you can do.
I f**king despair. We'll get shut of them eventually, but they will have done incalculable damage in the meantime. I really do wonder sometimes if these people are plants, deliberately trying to make Labour unelectable.
-
Hmm, Stephen Pollard, columnist for the Telegraph and Daily Mail amongst other publications - possibly not the most independent of sources on local Labour Party meetings or sympathetic to left wing causes.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/01/local-labour-parties-drawn-into-row-over-antisemitism-claims
It's no surprise that he doesn't mention this letter. However as some forum members also appear to have missed it here's a couple of links:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/28/labour-worst-day-shame-tom-watson-luciana-berger-resignation
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-antisemitism-letter-apology-corbyn-a8802631.html
-
Stephen Pollard is not the source Wilts.
And that letter is brilliant. It's fantastic that 0.25% of Labour members have signed that. But doesn't change the self indulgent stupidity of Williamson or the Harrow CLP.
-
And also, to my knowledge only one person has been jailed for anti-semitic abuse of an MP (Luciana Berger). Which party do you think he was from?
Clue, it's the same party as the bloke who is due in court for harassing Anna Soubrey.
Are they making that party unelectable?
-
I think you will find its 45 members of Hackney North (with 35 against) according to that first Guardian link Billy. But yes, agreed, even with passions running high still there's no accounting for some peoples' stupidity at this particular point on this particular subject.
-
Wilts
It's really very simple and I will been banging on about this for 3 years and more.
If you want a radical left wing Govt to be elected (I do, although I shouldn't have to explicitly say that) you are going to have to accept that you've got a hell of a lot resistance to overcome.
You have to be canny enough to see how you're going to be painted, and make damn sure that you rise above it. Because, if you're going to be elected, you don't just have to convince the zealots who think the sun shines out of your arse. You have to convince waiverers and (whisper it) people who might not be committed members of the congregation who worship the Dear Leader.
You have to make sure that the message you send out is relentlessly positive on the things that will make them make their decision. You have to shut down IMMEDIATELY, self-indulgent distractions.
In simple terms, if you want a radical left Govt, you have to be the very best and most disciplined people in politics. Because every failing will be swooped on and amplified.
So what you DON'T do, is give the opposition and the Press free hits by sticking your chin out and saying "Go on. Have a pop!" If you Really want a radical Labour Govt, you don't keep on raising the issue of anti-Semitism. You shut it down.
Or maybe I'm wrong. Maybe you DO chuck out free hits to people, then co sole yourself that it's all the fault of the Press and Blairite and if it wasn't for them, the country would have voted for you.
-
Yes Billy, we all know you have been banging on about it - although it does seem longer than three years. But are you addressing the issue or fuelling it?
https://jacobinmag.com/2019/02/labour-party-antisemitism-israel-palestine
-
Now unlike some on here I don't believe in socialism,but that's my own personal opinion,but what I do want to see in my politics is strong political opposition party's because it keeps whichever Government is in power honest and unable to get a free ride..
Left wing labour will always be up against it due to the media right I accept that but boy do they have there own self destruct button..I cant remember the last interview or report by a labour politician were they were discussing there own Policy's..They seem happy to go on Preston,sky,bbc yet end up arguing with there own colleagues,different day different people arguing amongst themselves..Whether that be the deputy leader who seems to not have a decent word to say about his own party or now Flint (who represents a lot of you) yesterday urging her fellow mp's to rebel the whip..Now that is obviously what the media want to happen,and they seem happy to walk straight into it.
Then of course you have Diane Abbot who regardless of her skin colour just seems to make things worse everytime she opens her mouth,and even amongst my many labour friends they despair at the prospect that she could actually one day be Home Secretary in charge of homeland security..
The only message Labour are giving across right now is the impression that the upper end of the leadership are either mainly silent on anti Semitism ie Corbyn,Abbott or varying arguments on the depth of the problem..The only person fighting the Party's position on it is the shadow chancellor...
There are people on here who are passionate about there politics and go in depth into it but the reality will always be,it's not those or the Labour party members who can put Labour into power..It's the man on the street who watches the news for half a hour a night and forms his opinion from there and if all he is seeing is labour mp's constantly constantly attacking each other, the prospects for you socialists will remain bleak..
-
WingCo.
Your last paragraph should be read out at the start of every Labour constituency party meeting in the country. That's precisely the issue that the Left never addresses.
-
haha I would be mortified if it was.. ;)
-
I know this is satire comedy that is flying around twitter today but there is a lot of truth in it..
"After a man is arrested for throwing an egg at Jeremy Corbyn,senior Labour MP's have come out in support of a second egg"
-
So where does the Labour Left stand on this one, I'd like to know?
https://mobile.twitter.com/PeterTatchell/status/1102623505110188032
That's the problem when you think Identity Politics is the way forward.
-
Another day,another Labour Mp feeling the need to air her grieviances in public by publishing her letter to Corbyn on socialmedia and currently doing a round of interviews with all the news channels about her lack of trust in disciplinary matters on anti Semitism. Step forward Margaret Hodges...
Death by a thousand cuts!!
-
What's remarkable is the lack of height of the tory story about Islamaphobioa. When you look at the incidents cited, and then look at the "anti semitism" cited in the Labour stories, the tory racism is off the planet.
And watch the tory flat denials of it - cue guffaw - and the media flopping back to it's other stories. It's sick.
-
BRR
And your point is? Surely not that the media, mainly, are sympathetic to the Tories and viciously aggressive towards a left-wing party?
If you complain about that, you're being self-indulgent. That's a given. Labour start off on an unfair playing field. Which is why it's doubly important that Labour don't give free hits.
I left the Labour party when Tony Blair became leader. But Blair didn't emerge from nowhere. He came after 15 years of the likes of me whining that the media weren't fair to Labour and convincing ourselves that we were right and they were wrong.
My concern from the very start of Corbyn-mania was that he and his inner circle didn't have the discipline to shut stories down. In his very first few days as leader, the media was dominated about stories of whether he would now before the Queen. And he mumbled and prevaricated before saying that he would. Stupid, self inflicted injury the looked like a hypocrite at the end of it, because he'd given in to pressure to say yes when every twitch of his face was saying no. That was an entirely foreseeable kerfuffle and the fact that it dragged on for a week instead of being shut down with a clear, firm answer (either way) has set the tone for everything from Brexit to Syria to Salisbury to anti-Semitism. The issues drag on through the media with Corbyn never taking control of them, and him looking weak.
They place ideological positioning over controlling the media agenda. There might be some virtue to that, but if you act that way, complaining about the media is nothing but self indulgent whining.
-
The thing is tho Billy, the problem here isn't the media - its other people in the Labour Party. The emails that are in the newspapers - they were internal emails to a select group of officials.
Hodge giving her interview - she didn't mention that Corbyn's team had asked for increased punishment in some cases - or that when Formby took over she ceased to involve them (Corbyn's team) and brought in a new process. Not that Margaret Hodge might have a long standing grudge against Corbyn just because she led the first attempt to remove him. And appears to have forgotten how many times they voted together on motions against anti-semitism.
Labour has a problem with anti-semities in the party.
Anti-semitism is being used by Corbyn's enemies in Labour to discredit him.
It is possible for both those things to be true at the same time.
-
I agree entirely Wilts. But you're doing the Whataboutery thing again.
The leadership could and should have shut this down immediately. But they don't. They prevaricate. They ignore. They dissemble. They put ideological positioning above pragmatic politics.
Time after time after time.
If they didn't do that, there wouldn't be fertilizer for the malcontents to grow in.
And then there's the other point. Complaining about people having a pop at the leadership is a bit rich, coming from the Corbyn left. That's the other point I was making more than 3 years ago. His entire political life has embodied the "My personal beliefs are more important than fealty to the leadership" approach. Fine. That's a principled stance. But it can work the other way.
-
BST is correct, rightly or wrongly Tories get bad press they do something about it - immediately they suspended some people, just last week Labour stumbled through and that opens them up to "Corbyn protects his friends etc".
Equally Corbyn doesn't help himself when he has his family and close friends employed on good salaries and doing things his policies actually object to. It's almost like they want not to win.
-
I went to school with one of them......
-
BST is correct, rightly or wrongly Tories get bad press they do something about it - immediately they suspended some people, just last week Labour stumbled through and that opens them up to "Corbyn protects his friends etc".
Equally Corbyn doesn't help himself when he has his family and close friends employed on good salaries and doing things his policies actually object to. It's almost like they want not to win.
Sorry BFYP, I just don't get this.
The Islamophobia in the blue party has been a festering sore for years, and they have done nothing about it for the same length of time. This is why Warsi has felt the need to call it out.
What is this about Corbyn having family and friends "on good salaries"?
How far does this nepotism reach....it is not like Theresa's Philip has business interests that will benefit from Government policy, is it?
-
Hmm. the Zac Goldsmith mayoral campaign - who was suspended for that? Or Boris Johnson for his comments? Someone has different measures for speedily sorting out offensive complaints than I do...
-
Goldsmith's London Mayor campaign was an absolute disgrace. Putting a picture of the 7/7 bombings on an article about the "danger" of electing a Muslim is the lowest I've ever seen UK politics get.
-
Yeah but the Tories did something about it. They made him an MP. Twice.
-
Me and BST are at complete different ends of the political spectrum but he is absolutely spot on, and in some ways the recent posts on this thread prove it..
The replies to posts on here in reply to Labours infighting on the media and anti Semitism is that the Tories are far worse on islamiphobia.Thats irrelevant and that's because whether it's right or wrong that's not what the public are seeing on the news..
What they are seeing on the news is Labour Mp's calling each other liars on a nightly basis,giving free hits out like confetti and that's what needs addressing very very quickly because if your average man on the street who's vote carrys as much wait as anybody's is sat there thinking...This Tory government is rubbish but how can I vote for a party that is at war with itself like this and has been since Corbyn became leader then Labour are goosed..Which is the reason why Labour are doing so badly and make no bones about whatever people say on here they are...
The Labour left will never again be given such a great opportunity to get into Government, if they don't get into power at the next election then Socialism is finished as a political force and will revert back to objectional politics only..This is there chance and Labour are so far blowing it..
-
Me and BST are at complete different ends of the political spectrum but he is absolutely spot on, and in some ways the recent posts on this thread prove it..
The replies to posts on here in reply to Labours infighting on the media and anti Semitism is that the Tories are far worse on islamiphobia.Thats irrelevant and that's because whether it's right or wrong that's not what the public are seeing on the news..
What they are seeing on the news is Labour Mp's calling each other liars on a nightly basis,giving free hits out like confetti and that's what needs addressing very very quickly because if your average man on the street who's vote carrys as much wait as anybody's is sat there thinking...This Tory government is rubbish but how can I vote for a party that is at war with itself like this and has been since Corbyn became leader then Labour are goosed..Which is the reason why Labour are doing so badly and make no bones about whatever people say on here they are...
The Labour left will never again be given such a great opportunity to get into Government, if they don't get into power at the next election then Socialism is finished as a political force and will revert back to objectional politics only..This is there chance and Labour are so far blowing it..
Sadly I fear it's going to take a repeat of the 1983 'longest suicide note in history' election and the subsequent leadership of someone like Kinnock willing to face the militants down and drag the party back to the middle ground.
And in the meantime the most incompetent PM in living history is free to carry on being incompetent, and I struggle to think of any possible successor who is likely to be any different.
-
WingCo,
I don't think you have understood the coalition that is the Labour Party.
Divisions have always existed below the surface, but with the election of Corbyn as leader a new influx of members has changed the grassroots input.
Whenever a power balance changes, vested interests defend their territory, even to the point of schism.
The creation of a cause, in this case exaggerated allegations of anti semitism, and a deliberate confusion of that with criticism of Israel, is a tool in that internal struggle.
Nothing more, nothing less.
There is an interesting longer article here on the factions, and their stance:
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/inevitable-division-politics-and-consequences-of-labour-split/
You say that Labour need to win the next election.
I would like it to happen, but as a Labour supporter I don't think that is a realistic goal, because of the loss of Scottish Labour seats.
A government would need to form on the basis of a partnership, probably with the SNP.
Labour can aim to become the single biggest party.
To do so requires retention of Leave voting seats, no UKIP salami slicing the voter base, and revival of the LibDems in the SW to take seats from the Tories.
Some on here think that Labour needs to win votes from the Tories as a means to become the largest party......it begs the question of the price of winning Tory voters?
Does it mean policy positions that cause loss of support elsewhere, or not being able to capture the non voting disillusioned.
They are the biggest demographic.
The anti Muslim position within the Tories is not irrelevant, it is central.
For some members, defence of their beliefs involves rejection of other cultures. That is a non runner in modern Britain.
When Boris J says Muslim women look like "letter boxes", and faces no sanction from the party, it sends out the message that it is OK for the big beasts to use dog whistle racism in political campaigns.
A few minor players might step down temporarily, to be let back in when the fuss dies down, in order to show willing.
The point is it seeks votes on the basis of assumed bias.
In doing so, it leaves a significant number of voters outside the tent.
It is a strategy with a declining support base.
Membership of the Blues is falling year on year.
Do you not think that the Tories will divide on a factional basis in the near future?
-
I think the key thought that Albie was fumbling towards is that Labour's new membership has beliefs and opinions that don't come remotely close to matching those of the people Labour need to get to vote for them.
And guess which group is wrong.
By the way. Anti-Semitism exaggerated? Here we go again....
-
Exactly the opposite, BST.
Labour can only bring new supporters to vote for the party with a revised policy offer.
You think Labour has to capture Tory votes. Whilst I would welcome that, I think the bigger prize is bringing non voters back in by giving them a stake.
The same old tired pro business assumptions of the Labour hierarchy before 2015 have already failed.
There is no evidence to suggest that the electorate would suddenly want to vote for policies that have been rejected previously.
You cannot seriously believe that the anti-semitism trope is not part of an organised attempt to discredit Labour under Corbyn.
There may well be examples which need to be dealt with, but it is not a widespread issue across Labour as a whole.
In comparison to the racism within the Conservative Party, some of which has been expressed in "hostile environment" policies, it is not in the same league.
There is no suggestion that Labour is proposing racist policy as a manifesto promise.
-
And the next tired cliche trotted out. 2015 as Year Zero.
Go and have a look at the macro-economic policies that Balls and Milliband were offering in 2015, and compare them to what McDonnell and Corbyn were offering in 2017. You'll not get a fag paper between them.
But that doesn't fit the narrative does it? Corbyn has to be seen as the Hero Who Saved the Soul of the Labour Party.
You want to know where the split has come from? It's from the people on the Left who insist that anyone to the right of them is a Red Tory who needs to be defeated.
-
You are a dab hand at the tired cliche, BST.
So why did the Labour vote increase in 2017?
What was the difference between the 2015 offer and that in 2017?
If you think that the macro-economics was identical, what other policies rang the bell.
I will give you a clue.......Corbyn is not Miliband.
That said, I am not committed to a particular individual, I vote for a policy programme.
The belief that saying the same thing over and over is a viable political strategy is not supported by evidence.
The Labour right is stuck in a timeloop that does not resonate with electors.
This is why the TINGE group with Chuka and Co will disappear into the ethers after the media feeding frenzy dies down.
Questions:
1)
Set out the policy changes you think Labour should make,
2)
and show why you think those changes would be resilient to the methods used by Cambridge Analytica to influence outcomes.
-
Albie
Go on then. What significant policies did Corbyn have in 2017 that Milliband didn't in 2015?
You ask why the Labour vote increased in 2017?
Yes, Corbyn campaigned excellently and managed to pull off a nigh on impossible task of convincing left Leave and Remain supporters that he was their man. But to listen to Momentum, it was all and only about Corbyn.
Do you remember May's personality disintegrating on a daily basis?
And Momentum, ever quick with the deceptive statistic, immediately pointed out that Corbyn had pulled off a miracle because he'd increased the Labour vote so much. I assume you do realise that May (yes, THAT May, the one who couldn't function in public) also significantly increased the Tory vote. Because the truly defining thing about 2017 was the evaporation of UKIP, the movement of their votes to Labour AND the Tories and the fact that for the first time in a generation, in England we were back to effectively bi-partisan politics.
Corbyn has never been popular among Labour voters. Look at the poll figures. No, sorry, you don't do that do you because it's SOOO yesterday.
You ask what policies I would change.
None on the domestic front. I've said that all along. Corbyn's domestic policies are sensible centre-left ones. My problem from the start has been his infantile approach to foreign policy. And the fact that his coterie of closest advisers are (and I'm using the word correctly here, not as a lame insult) Stalinist ideologues. And every single time he opens his mouth on foreign policy issues (even if it's only to mumble some evasive nonsense) you see why he will never be PM.
I'll campaign for his party at the next election, just like I did in 2017, and 2015, and 2010... But I know in my heart that he'll never get to No10. And the best chance in 80 years for a sensible centre-left Govt will have been pissed away in a naive personality cult that is blind to the man's overwhelming inadequacies.
-
That's about as close to the reality as you are going to get BST, Great synopsis of the perception of labour to the man on the street..Labour need to force a change of leadership to stand at the next GE.The public just won't buy into him now, his weakness knows no bounds and it's simply unrecoverable..The question is who on the left of Labour would be the man/woman to bridge the hard left and the centre left???.. I disagree with Albie, I believe the next election is very winnable for Labour,just not under Corbyn..This is the chance that true labour socialists have been waiting for.. Do they have the balls to take it or does the Unions and Momentum want to blindly back Corbyn's Labour into socialist political abyss?
-
This is required reading. Bear in mind before you read it that the author is quite a long way to the Right of the political spectrum. But he prizes honesty, fairness and accuracy above any political leanings. We'd be a far, far better country if more of us took a leaf out of his book.
https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/tom-bower-book-dangerous-hero-jeremy-corbyn-labour-leader-truth