The Politics Thread

If you have a life outside of BWFC, then this is the place to tell us all about your toilet habits, and those bizarre fetishes.......

Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em

Post Reply

Who will you be voting for?

Labour
12
40%
Conservatives
11
37%
Liberal Democrats
2
7%
UK Independence Party (UKIP)
0
No votes
Green Party
3
10%
Plaid Cymru
0
No votes
Other
1
3%
Planet Hobo
1
3%
 
Total votes: 30

BWFC_Insane
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 25843
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm

Re: The Politics Thread

Post by BWFC_Insane » Tue Dec 17, 2019 2:56 pm

Lisa Nandy doing a pretty good speech in parliament right now re Lindsay Hoyle speaker nomination. Not a huge fan of her politics BUT she's certainly showing up the current Labour leadership. Forthright, honest and actually getting laughs out of the Tory benches.

Enoch
Icon
Icon
Posts: 4173
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 7:08 pm
Location: The Garden of England.

Re: The Politics Thread

Post by Enoch » Tue Dec 17, 2019 3:04 pm

It's almost a shame Hoyle is Speaker, he looks like a good Labour leader to me.

BWFC_Insane
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 25843
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm

Re: The Politics Thread

Post by BWFC_Insane » Tue Dec 17, 2019 3:18 pm

Enoch wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 3:04 pm
It's almost a shame Hoyle is Speaker, he looks like a good Labour leader to me.
Don't see him appealing much to the South or city seats that Corbyn has done well in. Labour need someone who does both - not just one thing.

Prufrock
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 20001
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:51 pm

Re: The Politics Thread

Post by Prufrock » Tue Dec 17, 2019 3:46 pm

I don't think it's anywhere near as much "appeals in the North and South" as "doesn't massively put off one group of people".

Think it's overly simplistic to treat "the North" as a homogenous mass and despair to read the outriders have decided that Corbynisms failure was "not racist enough" and they need to pivot there.

Think there are two main reasons (somewhat linked) why Corbyn got destroyed. Firstly, and most simply, his ideas are bad. From allowing "nationalising broadband" to be a flagship policy to spending the 80s hanging out with terrorists. Most people don't live on Twitter, they don't see Boris pinching journos phones or worrying about what Laura K has or hasn't reported. Most of what they see if the leaders is broad brush what are their priorities and they hated Labour's.

2) and linked, he was a leader who offered no leadership. You cannot spend 3 years not having a policy on the biggest issue of the day and get away with it. People want the person in charge to be decisive and strong. Corbyn isn't.

In hindsight, they should have come out for a soft Brexit, customs union Norway type deal from the beginning and argued from there. I understand why we wanted to cling to an idea of remain (because I still think Brexit is senseless and bad and I want what's best for the country) but leaders of a political party ought to have recognised that isn't the mood in the country. People think we've voted, so crack on with it. Far better to pick apart the gaping holes in the Tory deal when you yourselves are promising to respect the referendum.

Or, if not, you go the other way and commit to a second referendum. I don't think they'd have won but think they'd have done better than they did. I actually liked the eventual policy but they took 3 years to get there. All the while the simple honest politicians where triangulating like f*ck and underlining their whole selling point.

Despair, but not surprised to see the front runners are "more of the same". I don't mind Rayner (though nowhere near ready to lead) but as has been pointed out, RBL isn't even the best candidate in her own flat.

Obviously Starmer for me, but not going to happen.
In a world that has decided
That it's going to lose its mind
Be more kind, my friends, try to be more kind.

BWFC_Insane
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 25843
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm

Re: The Politics Thread

Post by BWFC_Insane » Tue Dec 17, 2019 4:02 pm

Prufrock wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 3:46 pm
I don't think it's anywhere near as much "appeals in the North and South" as "doesn't massively put off one group of people".

Think it's overly simplistic to treat "the North" as a homogenous mass and despair to read the outriders have decided that Corbynisms failure was "not racist enough" and they need to pivot there.

Think there are two main reasons (somewhat linked) why Corbyn got destroyed. Firstly, and most simply, his ideas are bad. From allowing "nationalising broadband" to be a flagship policy to spending the 80s hanging out with terrorists. Most people don't live on Twitter, they don't see Boris pinching journos phones or worrying about what Laura K has or hasn't reported. Most of what they see if the leaders is broad brush what are their priorities and they hated Labour's.

2) and linked, he was a leader who offered no leadership. You cannot spend 3 years not having a policy on the biggest issue of the day and get away with it. People want the person in charge to be decisive and strong. Corbyn isn't.

In hindsight, they should have come out for a soft Brexit, customs union Norway type deal from the beginning and argued from there. I understand why we wanted to cling to an idea of remain (because I still think Brexit is senseless and bad and I want what's best for the country) but leaders of a political party ought to have recognised that isn't the mood in the country. People think we've voted, so crack on with it. Far better to pick apart the gaping holes in the Tory deal when you yourselves are promising to respect the referendum.

Or, if not, you go the other way and commit to a second referendum. I don't think they'd have won but think they'd have done better than they did. I actually liked the eventual policy but they took 3 years to get there. All the while the simple honest politicians where triangulating like f*ck and underlining their whole selling point.

Despair, but not surprised to see the front runners are "more of the same". I don't mind Rayner (though nowhere near ready to lead) but as has been pointed out, RBL isn't even the best candidate in her own flat.

Obviously Starmer for me, but not going to happen.
I also think its too simplistic to just say "pick a competent leader" and its all ok. Starmer - sure he's capable - does he have the dynamic to win an election - I'm not sure. The voters that abandoned Labour aren't all that likely to vote for him. The Corbyn momentum lot are likely to become disillusioned with him and its very much a safe middle of the road Ed Milliband type - who likely appeals to neither side strongly enough.

I'm not sure there is an answer. I don't think anyone will win an election for Labour. Dan Jarvis - he was once "the second coming", the untankable distinguished former army Labour man since his teens - whatever happened to him?

Bruce Rioja
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 35818
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:19 pm
Location: Drifting into the arena of the unwell.

Re: The Politics Thread

Post by Bruce Rioja » Tue Dec 17, 2019 4:27 pm

BWFC_Insane wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 3:18 pm
Enoch wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 3:04 pm
It's almost a shame Hoyle is Speaker, he looks like a good Labour leader to me.
Don't see him appealing much to the South or city seats that Corbyn has done well in. Labour need someone who does both - not just one thing.
Hang on. Weren't the vast majority of Labour's lost seats in the North?
May the bridges I burn light your way

Prufrock
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 20001
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:51 pm

Re: The Politics Thread

Post by Prufrock » Tue Dec 17, 2019 4:34 pm

Certainly, but picking a competent leader is the sine qua non.

I think you're wrong about Starmer personally, I think he's a very competent leader, and a good communicator and a man of substance. I think he'd be a much better leader than Ed M (who I liked but was a bit "wet").

Think he's been hamstrung by Labour's idiotic Brexit policy (and meaning he was effectively sidelined during the campaign). I appreciate all of that is just an opinion and a "feel" though.

All that is what I think should happen, not what I think will happen. I think Labour will find it difficult to win the next election no matter what, but 5 years is a long time. I still think Brexit is a shit show and so very possible it could tank the Tories at the next election. Plus a lot of time for Boris to feck up big time. Unfortunately I don't think the children have given up playing student politics with the opposition though, and Labour still won't be fit to govern.

Step 1 is a leader who doesn't dislike the country. The more I read people make that point, the more it rings true with the momentum lot.
In a world that has decided
That it's going to lose its mind
Be more kind, my friends, try to be more kind.

Prufrock
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 20001
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:51 pm

Re: The Politics Thread

Post by Prufrock » Tue Dec 17, 2019 4:36 pm

Bruce Rioja wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 4:27 pm
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 3:18 pm
Enoch wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 3:04 pm
It's almost a shame Hoyle is Speaker, he looks like a good Labour leader to me.
Don't see him appealing much to the South or city seats that Corbyn has done well in. Labour need someone who does both - not just one thing.
Hang on. Weren't the vast majority of Labour's lost seats in the North?
Aye, but I think Insano is saying that Hoyle might be able to win those back but not without losing the London types they'd need to retain to win.

Not sure I buy that, especially as Hoyle's been effectively neutral for so long that it can't be based on much more than him having a northern accent.

Went to school with my auntie did LH. Used to blow up frogs with fireworks. How he's the Speaker of the House of Commons. Makes you think.
In a world that has decided
That it's going to lose its mind
Be more kind, my friends, try to be more kind.

Harry Genshaw
Legend
Legend
Posts: 7158
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2005 10:47 pm
Location: Half dead in Panama

Re: The Politics Thread

Post by Harry Genshaw » Tue Dec 17, 2019 4:43 pm

From the number of Chorley based folk I heard moaning about not getting a proper vote, I'm not sure Hoyle would necessarily have got back in if he hadn't been named speaker.
"Get your feet off the furniture you Oxbridge tw*t. You're not on a feckin punt now you know"

Prufrock
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 20001
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:51 pm

Re: The Politics Thread

Post by Prufrock » Tue Dec 17, 2019 4:51 pm

His vote share only went up 12% despite being unopposed!

Think you may be right, Chorley elected an MP of the winning party from 1964-2010. Wouldn't have been surprised for it to be another Tory gain this time around if they'd stood though I think Hoyle is quite popular personally locally (outside my family!).

This both made me laugh and despair: in this election an Independent called "Mark Brexit-Smith" was Hoyle's closest challenger, with almost 3 times as many votes as the Green Party. We are doomed.

Turnout of 51% too which I thought was pretty impressive, considering.
In a world that has decided
That it's going to lose its mind
Be more kind, my friends, try to be more kind.

BWFC_Insane
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 25843
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm

Re: The Politics Thread

Post by BWFC_Insane » Tue Dec 17, 2019 6:37 pm

Bruce Rioja wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 4:27 pm
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 3:18 pm
Enoch wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 3:04 pm
It's almost a shame Hoyle is Speaker, he looks like a good Labour leader to me.
Don't see him appealing much to the South or city seats that Corbyn has done well in. Labour need someone who does both - not just one thing.
Hang on. Weren't the vast majority of Labour's lost seats in the North?
Yep. Northern Brexit seats. But the point is that Labour have won those seats for generations yet most of that time didn’t actually win elections. Pick a Northern Brexit type might lose them the gains Corbyn made for them in cities and the South etc meaning they’d lose just as much. They need someone to straddle Corbyns ability to engage the metropolitan remainers, the youth and the bitter Northern working class.....

Hoboh
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 12778
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 8:19 am

Re: The Politics Thread

Post by Hoboh » Tue Dec 17, 2019 7:17 pm

Prufrock wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 4:34 pm
Certainly, but picking a competent leader is the sine qua non.

I think you're wrong about Starmer personally, I think he's a very competent leader, and a good communicator and a man of substance. I think he'd be a much better leader than Ed M (who I liked but was a bit "wet").

Think he's been hamstrung by Labour's idiotic Brexit policy (and meaning he was effectively sidelined during the campaign). I appreciate all of that is just an opinion and a "feel" though.

All that is what I think should happen, not what I think will happen. I think Labour will find it difficult to win the next election no matter what, but 5 years is a long time. I still think Brexit is a shit show and so very possible it could tank the Tories at the next election. Plus a lot of time for Boris to feck up big time. Unfortunately I don't think the children have given up playing student politics with the opposition though, and Labour still won't be fit to govern.

Step 1 is a leader who doesn't dislike the country. The more I read people make that point, the more it rings true with the momentum lot.
Well you would seeing Stammer is one of yours.
Congrats on a decent post earlier Pru, actually read it without slapping my forehead :D
Last edited by Hoboh on Tue Dec 17, 2019 8:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Bruce Rioja
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 35818
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:19 pm
Location: Drifting into the arena of the unwell.

Re: The Politics Thread

Post by Bruce Rioja » Tue Dec 17, 2019 8:14 pm

Prufrock wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 4:51 pm
His vote share only went up 12% despite being unopposed!
Hang on, there wasn't any point in even bothering to vote at all.
May the bridges I burn light your way

Enoch
Icon
Icon
Posts: 4173
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 7:08 pm
Location: The Garden of England.

Re: The Politics Thread

Post by Enoch » Tue Dec 17, 2019 8:52 pm

Bruce Rioja wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 8:14 pm
Prufrock wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 4:51 pm
His vote share only went up 12% despite being unopposed!
Hang on, there wasn't any point in even bothering to vote at all.
Indeed. My only question was how dull is your life if you need to visit the polling station to vote for someone whose own vote would secure their re-election.

User avatar
TANGODANCER
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 38462
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 9:35 pm
Location: Lost between the Regency and the Rubaiyat and forever trying to light a penny candle from a star.

Re: The Politics Thread

Post by TANGODANCER » Tue Dec 17, 2019 10:33 pm

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50808536

After idly perusing this article it makes me wonder just what is the criteria to be a member of Parliament? Just what exactly has diversity to do with anything if the prime aim is to elect the best and most experienced person to the post regardless of all else. Surely the rest is just a case of leadership and best practise according to the laws of Great Britain? Man, woman, ethnic origin, religion etc etc can have no real bearing on whats' needed to run the country to the best advantage of all within said laws? Emily Pankhurst did her job a long time back but proved nothing at all if such choices are still going to matter.

We're in a bit of a cleft stick right now with drastic changes the order of the day and the mandates of traditional "old-boys club" selection possibly through Westminster's hallowed windows (at least theoretically). I really hope that the new-broom philosophy doesn't mean that all the (hard and costly) lessons learned in the past are about to be ignored in the battles of sectional supremacy and that percentages are going to matter more that collective rational thinking. Is this too much to hope so early I wonder? In my uncomplicated world, men woman and children exist unchanged as they have ever done ,all part of the team with one leader and without anybody else needing to be captains. We have a Prime Minister, let's now hope he steps up and does the job he was voted in for.

One can dream.....Amen. ae:)

:D
The wisest and the best of men, nay, the wisest and best of their actions, may be rendered ridiculous by a person whose first object in life is a joke...Darcy. Pride and Prejudice.

BWFC_Insane
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 25843
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm

Re: The Politics Thread

Post by BWFC_Insane » Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:57 am

TANGODANCER wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 10:33 pm
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50808536

After idly perusing this article it makes me wonder just what is the criteria to be a member of Parliament? Just what exactly has diversity to do with anything if the prime aim is to elect the best and most experienced person to the post regardless of all else. Surely the rest is just a case of leadership and best practise according to the laws of Great Britain? Man, woman, ethnic origin, religion etc etc can have no real bearing on whats' needed to run the country to the best advantage of all within said laws? Emily Pankhurst did her job a long time back but proved nothing at all if such choices are still going to matter.

We're in a bit of a cleft stick right now with drastic changes the order of the day and the mandates of traditional "old-boys club" selection possibly through Westminster's hallowed windows (at least theoretically). I really hope that the new-broom philosophy doesn't mean that all the (hard and costly) lessons learned in the past are about to be ignored in the battles of sectional supremacy and that percentages are going to matter more that collective rational thinking. Is this too much to hope so early I wonder? In my uncomplicated world, men woman and children exist unchanged as they have ever done ,all part of the team with one leader and without anybody else needing to be captains. We have a Prime Minister, let's now hope he steps up and does the job he was voted in for.

One can dream.....Amen. ae:)

:D
I mean you'd want surely want parliament to somewhat be reflective of societies diversity? And its broadly a good thing that parliament is more diverse. There is of course a danger that it becomes a bit "tokenism". Having a brown man there doesn't mean he represents all brown men etc....I'm not sure Sajid Javid represents your average muslim any better than any grey haired white man, nor does for balance, Lammy necessarily represent black people or Diane Abbott....

But I guess broadly its a good thing to be more representative and represent the wider variety of voices across the UK.

And thinking about it the demographic least represented in parliament are the under 35's.

jimbo
Passionate
Passionate
Posts: 2720
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 9:34 am

Re: The Politics Thread

Post by jimbo » Wed Dec 18, 2019 12:25 pm

BWFC_Insane wrote:
Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:57 am
TANGODANCER wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 10:33 pm
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50808536

After idly perusing this article it makes me wonder just what is the criteria to be a member of Parliament? Just what exactly has diversity to do with anything if the prime aim is to elect the best and most experienced person to the post regardless of all else. Surely the rest is just a case of leadership and best practise according to the laws of Great Britain? Man, woman, ethnic origin, religion etc etc can have no real bearing on whats' needed to run the country to the best advantage of all within said laws? Emily Pankhurst did her job a long time back but proved nothing at all if such choices are still going to matter.

We're in a bit of a cleft stick right now with drastic changes the order of the day and the mandates of traditional "old-boys club" selection possibly through Westminster's hallowed windows (at least theoretically). I really hope that the new-broom philosophy doesn't mean that all the (hard and costly) lessons learned in the past are about to be ignored in the battles of sectional supremacy and that percentages are going to matter more that collective rational thinking. Is this too much to hope so early I wonder? In my uncomplicated world, men woman and children exist unchanged as they have ever done ,all part of the team with one leader and without anybody else needing to be captains. We have a Prime Minister, let's now hope he steps up and does the job he was voted in for.

One can dream.....Amen. ae:)

:D
I mean you'd want surely want parliament to somewhat be reflective of societies diversity? And its broadly a good thing that parliament is more diverse. There is of course a danger that it becomes a bit "tokenism". Having a brown man there doesn't mean he represents all brown men etc....I'm not sure Sajid Javid represents your average muslim any better than any grey haired white man, nor does for balance, Lammy necessarily represent black people or Diane Abbott....

But I guess broadly its a good thing to be more representative and represent the wider variety of voices across the UK.

And thinking about it the demographic least represented in parliament are the under 35's.
When I clicked the link I was expecting the story of how people feel the next labour leader needs to be a woman, rather than diversity in parliament.

Diversity in parliament is obviously a great thing. Actively saying the next leader of a party ‘needs to be a woman’ less so. Not sure why that’s a thing. Can only think it’s so they’re no longer the only major party to never have had a female leader so it doesn’t get brought up every time they try to mention anything relating to gender equality.

User avatar
TANGODANCER
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 38462
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 9:35 pm
Location: Lost between the Regency and the Rubaiyat and forever trying to light a penny candle from a star.

Re: The Politics Thread

Post by TANGODANCER » Wed Dec 18, 2019 1:59 pm

Gee, why did I think my post was simple enough in its statement not to need expanding or defending ? How could I be so foolish? :(
The wisest and the best of men, nay, the wisest and best of their actions, may be rendered ridiculous by a person whose first object in life is a joke...Darcy. Pride and Prejudice.

Enoch
Icon
Icon
Posts: 4173
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 7:08 pm
Location: The Garden of England.

Re: The Politics Thread

Post by Enoch » Wed Dec 18, 2019 2:03 pm

Enoch wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 2:24 pm
Enjoyed watching Ms Wilson, newly elected Lib Dem MP, telling us all she is taking up her seat in Westminster to 'Stop Brexit'

What does it take!

Also just seen Sam Tarry, newly elected Labour MP for Ilford South, staunchly defending the Marxist platform.

Sam being a Corbyn clone shoe-in to replace the hapless Mike Gapes, #changefuckall.

Good luck with your project, Sam.

Prufrock
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 20001
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:51 pm

Re: The Politics Thread

Post by Prufrock » Wed Dec 18, 2019 2:39 pm

Sajid Javid isn't Muslim so no he probably doesn't :D.

His parents are Muslim but he says he isn't. Up the apostates.
In a world that has decided
That it's going to lose its mind
Be more kind, my friends, try to be more kind.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests