The Politics Thread

[Hoboh]

That!!! Leader?

O M G

[Prufrock]

Charming as ever.

It must be hard for you knowing Harriet is going.

[Montreal Wanderer]

Well if I needed another reason to vote for Corbyn the other 3 divs have just provided it. All pledged their support for Israel and the Balfour treaty. Kendall even went further condemning the UN recognising Palestine.

I'm a bit confused by this, Harry. By the 'Balfour treaty' do they mean the Balfour Declaration of 1917? In this he simply wrote:

His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.[

This is ancient history - why would anyone pledge support for it? Or is it some other "treaty" they refer to, since the Declaration was not a treaty. Surely this is now irrelevant to the Middle East after the UN creation of the State of Israel in 1948. That is the relevant legal instrument. Further the UN recognition of Palestine is quite in keeping with what Balfour wrote. Has everyone been mesmerized by an overdose of Netanyahu?

The question was whether to celebrate the hundred year anniversary in 2017 .

Ah, thank you. Context is everything.

[thebish]

Charming as ever.

It must be hard for you knowing Harriet is going.

the long queue of labour former glitterati slagging Corbyn and his supporters will, I reckon, just about guarantee a Corbyn win at this rate...

Kendall is saying that those thicko rank and file members and constiuency parties are backing corbyn and not her because they are "traumatised" (some of that might be paraphrased!)

Blair: "If your heart's with Jeremy Corbyn, get a transplant"

chuka whossisface - who stood then backed out 10mins later...

rumours of pre-planned coups before december should he win...

idiots - playing right into corbyn's hands...

[thebish]

Hoboh: "God no! absolutely not!!!"



Hoboh: "yummm! well tasty!!"

[Prufrock]

Charming as ever.

It must be hard for you knowing Harriet is going.

the long queue of labour former glitterati slagging Corbyn and his supporters will, I reckon, just about guarantee a Corbyn win at this rate...

Kendall is saying that those thicko rank and file members and constiuency parties are backing corbyn and not her because they are "traumatised" (some of that might be paraphrased!)

Blair: "If your heart's with Jeremy Corbyn, get a transplant"

chuka whossisface - who stood then backed out 10mins later...

rumours of pre-planned coups before december should he win...

idiots - playing right into corbyn's hands...

I'm confused as to why that's in response to my post?

Ha, "might be paraphrased" . I have no problem with the people who are going to vote for Corbyn who think he can win. I think they're mad, but fair enough. And I can't be doing with criticism of them because they don't agree with another point of view. Criticism of people who don't think he can win but still want to elect him is perfectly valid. It's self-indulgent and selling out the people we're supposed to represent.

I've also seen far more personal attacks on Kendall and her supporters than on Corbyn and his, though that's obviously subjective.

[thebish]

which prominent figures have attacked Kendall?

[Prufrock]

I'm not really talking about prominent figures. They've all said very nice things about one another. I'm talking about Facebook/blogs/twitter ect where Kendall gets dogs abuse. She's been booed at hustings ffs.

The only element from the candidates themselves was a Facebook "smear campaign" proposing Kendall as the new Tory leader that was linked back to Cooper's campaign (which they denied).

[thebish]

I'm not really talking about prominent figures. They've all said very nice things about one another. I'm talking about Facebook/blogs/twitter ect where Kendall gets dogs abuse. She's been booed at hustings ffs.

The only element from the candidates themselves was a Facebook "smear campaign" proposing Kendall as the new Tory leader that was linked back to Cooper's campaign (which they denied).

yeah... they've all had that! what I meant - but probably didn't communicarte very well - is what seems to be a coordinated campaign from the party machinery... add in to that the calls for Kendall to end her candidacy and back one of the others in a bid to defeat Corbyn...

as for Corbyn... what is it that people find so bonkers?

opposed the Iraq war before it was trendy to do so
opposes trident
opposes that euphemistic "austerity" word and its real implications
voted against ID cards and tuition fees (he'd scrap tuition fees)
supports nationalisation of the railways and utilities
reunification of ireland
pro-palestinian
increase NI contributions for those earning >£50,000
increase corporation tax
oppose privatisation of NHS

that just sounds like traditional Labour to me...

[Prufrock]

It's not the Party machinery; they've all gone haven't they? It's the New Labour lot chucking their two penneth in (which they're surely entitled to like anyone else). I haven't seen any of it personally attacking Corbyn, just saying his leadership would make the party unelectable.

On Corbyn, none of that seems bonkers if you're a Labour member or supporter, but it does to the rest of the country. They are "Traditional Labour", but "Traditional Labour" hasn't won an election since before punk music existed. It's bonkers because it means we can't win. And if we can't win, we can't do anything to help the people we're supposed to help. For all his principled voting against austerity over the last 5 years Corbyn in opposition has stopped zero people paying the bedroom tax, zero people losing their disability allowance and zero people losing their tax credits.

Only four Labour leaders have ever won a General Election, only two of whom can be truly described as being "socialist" with the latest of those two being elected in 1945 after a World War. Scotland is gone and doesn't look like coming back (and we could win all 59 and still not make a difference). We need to win 94 seats to get back in power, and only 24 of the Tory seats have a majority of less than 3,000. The only way we win power in 2020 is to win over English middle-class voters who like our social policies but don't trust us on the economy. Jeremy Corbyn is not the leader to do that.

Becoming more left-wing after losing the election for being too left-wing wasn't the answer in 1983, or 87, or 92 or 2015 and it won't be in 2020.

Paul Brannen MEP said this about New Labour:

"Iraq aside - and ‘yes’ it was a massive issue - the Labour Government of 1997 – 2010 is the best thing that has happened to this country and in its people in my adult lifetime.

If you are a Labour Party member or supporter and you think otherwise your are either deranged or an opposition purist of no more use to a person living in poverty than the complete works of Karl Marx bound in leather."

We've had an opposition voting against the cuts for five years. They still happened: because governments govern and oppositions don't.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

Labour didn't lose because they were too left wing, they lost because they had wazzock in charge of them and a complete knob that would have been in charge of the economy. That and they didn't stand up against the lies propagated by the Tories and their media chums.

[Prufrock]

So we say every time we lose. If that were the case, the voters Labour needed would have gone to the Greens, or the Socialist Workers Party.

They didn't; they went to the Tories. This is a liberal country, but it isn't a left wing one.

[thebish]

aye - it's labour - it's what the Labour Party is about.

if (to win) you need to be the tories - then just vote tory.

I am not convinced Labour lost because they were too left wing... I think they lost because the leader was perceived as weak and because nobody could fathom what the feck they were FOR - so decided to vote for the real tories...

I think today is a very different age to the Benn days (which people hark back to) - I think there very well MIGHT now or soon be an appetite for a party leader who stands up clearly and unashamedly for the poor and isn't scared to say so - and is absolutely clear and honest about what it believes and gives straight answers.

I may be wrong - but even if I am - I don't think Corbyn is any less likely to get Labour re-elected than any one of the other three lame-o candidates.. Burnham???? so - of those four - Corbyn gets my vote cos I could at least vote with integrity...

now... had Keir Starmer stood - different story!

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

So we say every time we lose. If that were the case, the voters Labour needed would have gone to the Greens, or the Socialist Workers Party.

They didn't; they went to the Tories. This is a liberal country, but it isn't a left wing one.

I suspect quite a few didn't vote green because they see them as hippy nutters. I didn't see any SWP on my ballot paper, not that it would matter when your constituency would vote for a hat stand if it had a blue rosette.

[Prufrock]

aye - it's labour - it's what the Labour Party is about.

if (to win) you need to be the tories - then just vote tory.

I am not convinced Labour lost because they were too left wing... I think they lost because the leader was perceived as weak and because nobody could fathom what the feck they were FOR - so decided to vote for the real tories...

I think today is a very different age to the Benn days (which people hark back to) - I think there very well MIGHT now or soon be an appetite for a party leader who stands up clearly and unashamedly for the poor and isn't scared to say so - and is absolutely clear and honest about what it believes and gives straight answers.

I may be wrong - but even if I am - I don't think Corbyn is any less likely to get Labour re-elected than any one of the other three lame-o candidates.. Burnham???? so - of those four - Corbyn gets my vote cos I could at least vote with integrity...

now... had Keir Starmer stood - different story!

That makes no sense. If people want to vote for a left-wing party but don't like Labour's leader or know what Labour are for, they don't vote Tory. "I am against X, but I don't like the opposition to it, so i'm voting for the real X". That's bollocks.

It wasn't what the Labour Party was about from 1997, when it made actual changes to actual people's lives. Say what you want them, call them Tory-lite all you want, they made a difference in a way Jeremy Corbyn never has.

If the choice on the one hand is real Tories, not Tory-lite, but unleash markets everywhere, roll back the state and the safety net, let people hunt foxes and all that shit versus Tory-lites who don't know the words to The Internationale but make things less shit, well yes I'm for the second one. That might not be the choice you want but it is a choice, and it's a choice with a right answer that matters.

[boltonboris]

aye - it's labour - it's what the Labour Party is about.

if (to win) you need to be the tories - then just vote tory.

I am not convinced Labour lost because they were too left wing... I think they lost because the leader was perceived as weak and because nobody could fathom what the feck they were FOR - so decided to vote for the real tories...

I think today is a very different age to the Benn days (which people hark back to) - I think there very well MIGHT now or soon be an appetite for a party leader who stands up clearly and unashamedly for the poor and isn't scared to say so - and is absolutely clear and honest about what it believes and gives straight answers.

I may be wrong - but even if I am - I don't think Corbyn is any less likely to get Labour re-elected than any one of the other three lame-o candidates.. Burnham???? so - of those four - Corbyn gets my vote cos I could at least vote with integrity...

now... had Keir Starmer stood - different story!

That makes no sense. If people want to vote for a left-wing party but don't like Labour's leader or know what Labour are for, they don't vote Tory.

I think they do Pru - I reckon a percentage of the population far greater than you reckon, vote for people, as much if not more than policies and they couldn't see past the obvious lack of charisma and leadership that portrayed from Labour

[Prufrock]

So we say every time we lose. If that were the case, the voters Labour needed would have gone to the Greens, or the Socialist Workers Party.

They didn't; they went to the Tories. This is a liberal country, but it isn't a left wing one.

I suspect quite a few didn't vote green because they see them as hippy nutters. I didn't see any SWP on my ballot paper, not that it would matter when your constituency would vote for a hat stand if it had a blue rosette.

I'm pretty sure the Green Party were for every single one of those policies Bish mentioned along with many others that go with it and would go with it with Corbyn. If people thought it was hippy nonsense when it had a green rosette on it, they were going to if it had a red one. That's my point. The electorate doesn't want that.

I don't think they want the Tories either, they want the social policies bish mentioned but if you can't sound credible on the economy you aren't going to get their vote. You'll never get people to vote against their own self-interest in enough numbers to win.

[bobo the clown]

So we say every time we lose. If that were the case, the voters Labour needed would have gone to the Greens, or the Socialist Workers Party.

They didn't; they went to the Tories. This is a liberal country, but it isn't a left wing one.

There's a lot of "we" there given that you spent the election run up claiming not to know how you were planning to vote.

But don't worry. We all knew really.
===========================
The parts of the equation not being taken into account were the collapse of the Liberals ... where did their votes go. Instinctively I'd have expected them to go to Labour (or Green I guess).

... and the votes which went to UKIP. There was huge denial at the time but though it didn't translate to seats a sizeable right-thinking working class base was attracted to them and left Labour to vote with their instinct. We can all scoff at UKIP but they do reflect a sizeable view.

Labour can do whatever they wish for me and can elect a crazy theorist like Corbyn. But people shouldn't fool themselves, and your view is correct, he will not be electable in the UK. So it'd be a protest leader rather than a potential next PM. In fact the party could easily rename itself 'the Unite Party'.

[Prufrock]

aye - it's labour - it's what the Labour Party is about.

if (to win) you need to be the tories - then just vote tory.

I am not convinced Labour lost because they were too left wing... I think they lost because the leader was perceived as weak and because nobody could fathom what the feck they were FOR - so decided to vote for the real tories...

I think today is a very different age to the Benn days (which people hark back to) - I think there very well MIGHT now or soon be an appetite for a party leader who stands up clearly and unashamedly for the poor and isn't scared to say so - and is absolutely clear and honest about what it believes and gives straight answers.

I may be wrong - but even if I am - I don't think Corbyn is any less likely to get Labour re-elected than any one of the other three lame-o candidates.. Burnham???? so - of those four - Corbyn gets my vote cos I could at least vote with integrity...

now... had Keir Starmer stood - different story!

That makes no sense. If people want to vote for a left-wing party but don't like Labour's leader or know what Labour are for, they don't vote Tory.

I think they do Pru - I reckon a percentage of the population far greater than you reckon, vote for people, as much if not more than policies and they couldn't see past the obvious lack of charisma and leadership that portrayed from Labour

That's an argument for electing someone with more charisma though, not someone more left-wing.

I think the majority of the country prefer Labour on social issues than the Tories but, and this has always been the kicker, they aren't going to vote for Labour unless they trust them on the economy. They'd like a proper NHS but if Labour seem shit on the economy then they won't be able to do it anyway so folk might as well vote for the party that will stick more money in their pocket.

I don't think you're right about charisma (yes Ed Miliband is a weird nerd, but then David Cameron comes across as a posh nice person, I don't think many people were charmed by either) but I do think there is an element of personality for lots of people in that Cameron seemed like a "safe pair of hands". "I don't think Miliband can do what he says so I'll stick with Cameron". But those people aren't going to be won over by becoming MORE left-wing. Corbyn on business sounds like a nutter. He sounds like he hates businesses not for avoiding tax or paying poor wages but simply for existing and making money. There's no-way people are voting for that!

[Prufrock]

So we say every time we lose. If that were the case, the voters Labour needed would have gone to the Greens, or the Socialist Workers Party.

They didn't; they went to the Tories. This is a liberal country, but it isn't a left wing one.

There's a lot of "we" there given that you spent the election run up claiming not to know how you were planning to vote.

But don't worry. We all knew really.
===========================
The parts of the equation not being taken into account were the collapse of the Liberals ... where did their votes go. Instinctively I'd have expected them to go to Labour (or Green I guess).

... and the votes which went to UKIP. There was huge denial at the time but though it didn't translate to seats a sizeable right-thinking working class base was attracted to them and left Labour to vote with their instinct. We can all scoff at UKIP but they do reflect a sizeable view.

Labour can do whatever they wish for me and can elect a crazy theorist like Corbyn. But people shouldn't fool themselves, and your view is correct, he will not be electable in the UK. So it'd be a protest leader rather than a potential next PM. In fact the party could easily rename itself 'the Unite Party'.

I didn't vote for Labour in the last election, but joined the day after.

The Lib Dem votes went to the Tories in Southern England and the SNP in Scotland. In southern England their vote is(/was) people who are socially liberal but economically centrist or centre-right. Tory party that legalises gay marriage made more sense than a Labour party with nothing to say about the economy.

The UKIP vote made no difference to the Labour result. They had the same problem the Lib Dems used to have of having low-level but wide support that doesn't translate into seats.