The Politics Thread

[Prufrock]

So the smartest lad on the internet has fallen for the media spin on Corbyn's Bin Laden comments.. Who knew?

The hatchet job that is already going on along with so many lies, is actually making me want to support the bloke. Disgusting that we cannot get a neutral press in this day & age.

Camerons tweet that was probably saved in his drafts for weeks show a man who is worried that someone may upset the apple cart... Afterall, if a 'rival' company or party were doing something as in-comprehensively stupid as employing such a massive mistake, then wouldn't you just keep that to yourself and laugh smugly as it all went to shit??

It is a hatchet job, but hidden in that there's enough truth to make me genuinely concerned. The way the press have reported the Bin Laden thing is ridiculous. In terms of the list of reasons I think he's dodgy it's way down my list and I've only mentioned in more than passing because bish decided it needed challenging.

I don't think Corbyn has any sympathy for Bin Laden, but I question the judgement of a man who is stupid enough to call in a tragedy in public. Now in mitigation, when he said it he was a back-bench MP, but, on the other hand, he was a back bench MP! Just don't use that word. Whatever you mean, there's only one way that's getting spun. It's not important in itself, but it's the first of what will be a deluge. Get ready for the Sun on Sunday's weekly photo of Jezza shaking hands with a terrorist. I don't think that necessarily makes him a bad guy, but it makes him an idiot with shit judgement, and that's enough. It's not enough to complain that people will twist what you say. That's the game.

I have some sympathy, I've already seen the Facebook posts not just repeating that Tory tweet but also accusing him of being "anti-British" and a terrorist lover. It's bollocks, but it will work.

What does make him a bad guy (or an idiot again) IMO is the company he keeps. He's happy to share a platform with absolute wankers like Raed Salah, people who call for the destruction of Israel and repeat the age-old scandal of the blood libel. Absolute wankers. He defends Hamas and Hezbollah, telling us that labeling those shitcunts "terrorists" is historically a big mistake, and referring to them as "friends". This is all fine his supporters tell us, he is just being inclusive, talking is the only way to achieve peace, yet he's happy to support Israel's leaders being tried for war crimes. Where's the inclusive talking spirit now? I'm sure Netanyahu's office await their invitation to tea.

If it's American it's bad, if it's anti-American it's good. Tony Blair too is a war criminal, yet Chavez, Castro and f*cking Gaddafi are good guys, whilst Milosevic was hard done to.

He's a lover of liberty who criticised (rightly IMO) the Blair govt for its record on civil liberties, yet he's also happy to go on marches against the Danish cartoons. He's either a bad guy, or a stupid guy, and neither is good.

[BWFC_Insane]

Surely they'd only be worried that he'd f*ck the country up if he got elected? Because, if I'm not mistaken, the narrative also seems to be that he's unelectable? Why the dichotomy? Unless it's based on fear?

They see their chance to bury the Labour party in the sand for a good decade more, at least. They aren't going to pass up an opportunity like that however, irrelevant their chimes may be.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

To be fair, some of the company Cameron and Blair have kept is less than savoury.

We're in an age where every word is carefully written for politicians and repeated ad infinitum to hide what politicians really think and believe in. If they repeat it enough it must be true. I disagree with much of what Corbyn says, but at least it is what he says, what he thinks and what he believes. How many of the wankers in Westminster can you honestly say that about?

[Lord Kangana]

In a nutshell I think you've captured the mood of the country AT. The political class in this country need to be very wary that we as an electorate (and I use that term in its fullest, broadest sense) don't make the trickle to the edges a stampede.

The (quite clearly evident) inequalities in our society need to be more fully addressed by the centre (some would call it mainstream) of politics before the periphery lay claim to the solutions. One can hope.

[Prufrock]

It'll be interesting to see what happens, certainly.

The two parties need to do something (I have no idea what) or there will eventually be an unanswerable case for electoral reform and some sort of PR system. With the death of party/union membership the two party system looks pretty anachronistic.

It's daft that Corbynites and Blairites are in the same party. They agree on enough that in a two-party system they have to make do, with obvious tension, but we'd be much better off with a socialist party and a social democrat party trying to build coalitions. Our current system doesn't allow that. Equally, it's mad that the metropolitan market liberals, and the rural old money, and the raving anti-EU lot all end up in the Tories. As people get more and more independent and narcissistic in their individuality, I only see the trend going one way.

[thebish]

It'll be interesting to see what happens, certainly.

The two parties need to do something (I have no idea what) or there will eventually be an unanswerable case for electoral reform and some sort of PR system. With the death of party/union membership the two party system looks pretty anachronistic.

It's daft that Corbynites and Blairites are in the same party. They agree on enough that in a two-party system they have to make do, with obvious tension, but we'd be much better off with a socialist party and a social democrat party trying to build coalitions. Our current system doesn't allow that. Equally, it's mad that the metropolitan market liberals, and the rural old money, and the raving anti-EU lot all end up in the Tories. As people get more and more independent and narcissistic in their individuality, I only see the trend going one way.

so - if corbyn survives to the general election - where do you think your vote will go now? Tory? Green? UKIP? LibDem? ANother?

[Prufrock]

No idea, depends what's offered, as LK says five years is a LONG time.

I'm not definitely NOT going to vote Labour. My main problem at the moment would be I'd literally have to vote for Corbyn. If he convinces me I'm wrong/ I move and the rest of the party rein him in enough that Labour are offering the best alternative, then I might still vote Labour. I think he's unelectable in a General Election, and I think that's a good reason not to have voted for him in the leadership election, but it's a shit reason not to vote for him in the actual election. So yeah depends.

And hey, I'm an optimist, maybe he'll get a proper team together, stop saying stupid shit, invite Netanyahu to tea, decide to campaign vigorously to stay in Europe, convince middle England they want to pay more taxes to nationalise everything, figure out what he thinks about new technology, not want to leave NATO, not decide on unilateral disarmament, not patronise muslims by arguing they're not grown up enough to deal with people saying mean things about their religion, stop apologising for terrorists, and, and get some proper bloody shoes !

[BWFC_Insane]

It'll be interesting to see what happens, certainly.

The two parties need to do something (I have no idea what) or there will eventually be an unanswerable case for electoral reform and some sort of PR system. With the death of party/union membership the two party system looks pretty anachronistic.

It's daft that Corbynites and Blairites are in the same party. They agree on enough that in a two-party system they have to make do, with obvious tension, but we'd be much better off with a socialist party and a social democrat party trying to build coalitions. Our current system doesn't allow that. Equally, it's mad that the metropolitan market liberals, and the rural old money, and the raving anti-EU lot all end up in the Tories. As people get more and more independent and narcissistic in their individuality, I only see the trend going one way.

so - if corbyn survives to the general election - where do you think your vote will go now? Tory? Green? UKIP? LibDem? ANother?

Did you vote for Blair? Brown? I assume if you did it wasn't because you agreed totally with their policies.

Suspect same will be said for many who vote for a Corbyn led Labour. As Pru says it is a direct choice between two parties. Do you want Osborne/May or Corbyn (if he survives) running the country. The rest is periphery and an irrelevance to most people.

I don't agree with everything Corbyn brings to the table, but unless the Tories move their position to something that is about reducing inequality and improving the living and working conditions of all and stop culling public services like they are a dirty stain on a prized ornament then I suspect for me and many others there still won't be a viable choice.

[thebish]

Did you vote for Blair? Brown? I assume if you did it wasn't because you agreed totally with their policies.

indeed - but at the time I was not as utterly scathing in describing them as utter disaster and danger for the country as Pru has unflinchingly done - "get to feck" was one such phrase...

so I was interested where he'd go given such extreme rejection of Corbyn (and he gave me an answer...) - nothing to see here!

s'all!

[thebish]

I like Corbyn's idea of appointing a shadow Minister for Mental Health - even though there is no Minister for Mental Health... despite lots of talk during the election campaign of making this a priority - and funding it properly (I know a little bit about it as my brother is a Psychiatric nurse) - there seems to have been precious little initiative/change since the election...

I can't help but think that the appointment of John McDonnell - shadow chancellor - is a mistake... Angela Eagle might have been a wiser choice, not simply cos she is a woman (has any party ever had a woman chancellor? we all know the ladies find it hard to get their pretty little heads around the numbers...) - but she is from a "softer" left tradition and has some cabinet experience/profile...

I fear John McDonnell might crash in the same way as the postie did before Balls got the gig...

having said that - I see the Eagle twins are both in the cabinet... kinky!!

[Beefheart]

Problem with Angela Eagle, from what I've seen of her in various interviews/debates, is that she's fecking useless.

[thebish]

Problem with Angela Eagle, from what I've seen of her in various interviews/debates, is that she's fecking useless.

ahhh - well - err... that might be a valid point!

maybe I should look on the bright side.. Osborne had virtually no qualifications whatever to be chancellor - yet - there he is!

The new Labour leader has been criticised for giving the top three shadow cabinet positions to men – with John McDonnell as chancellor, Andy Burnham as home secretary and Hilary Benn foreign secretary

yeah - but c'mon - Hilary is a girl's name - so that has to count for SOMETHING!!

[KeyserSoze]

Article from The New Yorker on yer man Corbs

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk ... -supremacy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[boltonboris]

No idea, depends what's offered, as LK says five years is a LONG time.

I'm not definitely NOT going to vote Labour. My main problem at the moment would be I'd literally have to vote for Corbyn. If he convinces me I'm wrong/ I move and the rest of the party rein him in enough that Labour are offering the best alternative, then I might still vote Labour. I think he's unelectable in a General Election, and I think that's a good reason not to have voted for him in the leadership election, but it's a shit reason not to vote for him in the actual election. So yeah depends.

And hey, I'm an optimist, maybe he'll get a proper team together, stop saying stupid shit, invite Netanyahu to tea, decide to campaign vigorously to stay in Europe, convince middle England they want to pay more taxes to nationalise everything, figure out what he thinks about new technology, not want to leave NATO, not decide on unilateral disarmament, not patronise muslims by arguing they're not grown up enough to deal with people saying mean things about their religion, stop apologising for terrorists, and, and get some proper bloody shoes !

And what good will that have? I'm one of the "raving anti-EU" people.. I fail to see what the benefit is of paying £50m + per day to be in a club that costs us more than it brings in

[thebish]

wikipedia gets temporarily confused!

[Lord Kangana]

No idea, depends what's offered, as LK says five years is a LONG time.

I'm not definitely NOT going to vote Labour. My main problem at the moment would be I'd literally have to vote for Corbyn. If he convinces me I'm wrong/ I move and the rest of the party rein him in enough that Labour are offering the best alternative, then I might still vote Labour. I think he's unelectable in a General Election, and I think that's a good reason not to have voted for him in the leadership election, but it's a shit reason not to vote for him in the actual election. So yeah depends.

And hey, I'm an optimist, maybe he'll get a proper team together, stop saying stupid shit, invite Netanyahu to tea, decide to campaign vigorously to stay in Europe, convince middle England they want to pay more taxes to nationalise everything, figure out what he thinks about new technology, not want to leave NATO, not decide on unilateral disarmament, not patronise muslims by arguing they're not grown up enough to deal with people saying mean things about their religion, stop apologising for terrorists, and, and get some proper bloody shoes !

And what good will that have? I'm one of the "raving anti-EU" people.. I fail to see what the benefit is of paying £50m + per day to be in a club that costs us more than it brings in

Interestingly, supposedly so is Jeremy....

[boltonboris]

and he's right to want out of the EU

[Lost Leopard Spot]

ITK
Having spoken to my Italian landlady/villa owner today (booking another month in her delightful place for next year) she informs me that a certain Swiss canton is surreptitiously bussing the ever constant stream of Africans through to Austria/Germany for free, on expectation that Germany will close the border anytime soon and the Italians are increasingly slipping hundreds of euros per 'Lampedusan' (YHTHF) to increase the rapidity of their dispersal northward.

[Prufrock]

No idea, depends what's offered, as LK says five years is a LONG time.

I'm not definitely NOT going to vote Labour. My main problem at the moment would be I'd literally have to vote for Corbyn. If he convinces me I'm wrong/ I move and the rest of the party rein him in enough that Labour are offering the best alternative, then I might still vote Labour. I think he's unelectable in a General Election, and I think that's a good reason not to have voted for him in the leadership election, but it's a shit reason not to vote for him in the actual election. So yeah depends.

And hey, I'm an optimist, maybe he'll get a proper team together, stop saying stupid shit, invite Netanyahu to tea, decide to campaign vigorously to stay in Europe, convince middle England they want to pay more taxes to nationalise everything, figure out what he thinks about new technology, not want to leave NATO, not decide on unilateral disarmament, not patronise muslims by arguing they're not grown up enough to deal with people saying mean things about their religion, stop apologising for terrorists, and, and get some proper bloody shoes !

And what good will that have? I'm one of the "raving anti-EU" people.. I fail to see what the benefit is of paying £50m + per day to be in a club that costs us more than it brings in

Well I was listing things that might make me actually vote for him, so given I want to stay in, it might have some good .

Your numbers are bollocks, but this debate is going to be had several million times before this referendum so I can't be arsed now!

[Lord Kangana]

ITK
Having spoken to my Italian landlady/villa owner today (booking another month in her delightful place for next year) she informs me that a certain Swiss canton is surreptitiously bussing the ever constant stream of Africans through to Austria/Germany for free, on expectation that Germany will close the border anytime soon and the Italians are increasingly slipping hundreds of euros per 'Lampedusan' (YHTHF) to increase the rapidity of their dispersal northward.

Isn't this rather like the rumour that all Jews prey on our young Aryan women, whilst busily doing us all out of money in corrupt effete professions?