|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Jeremy Corbyn out?
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
The "trickle-down" theory doesn't work
I think it does. I'd rather be a poor person in a Western democracy than in an African one party state.
You are making the unwarranted assumption that to the extent the West is prosperous that it's down to trickle down economics.
If you want an example of 'trickle down economics', you only have to go back to the 19th century. There are plenty of books about that period, and what a miserable shit-hole it was for the majority of working people.
Alternatively, everything good about this country has been wrested, one concession at a time, from the hands of the rich and powerful. What we're experiencing now is them taking it back, one at time.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Robert Armin
All licens'd fool
# 182
|
Posted
Doc Tor: quote:
everything good about this country has been wrested, one concession at a time, from the hands of the rich and powerful. What we're experiencing now is them taking it back, one at time.
How I wish I could disagree with this. Sadly I can't.
--------------------
Keeping fit was an obsession with Fr Moity .... He did chin ups in the vestry, calisthenics in the pulpit, and had developed a series of Tai-Chi exercises to correspond with ritual movements of the Mass. The Antipope Robert Rankin
Posts: 8927 | From: In the pack | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
It's not that 'Marxist' and 'Trot' are offensive. It's that they're inaccurate. They mean political positions much further to the left than Corbyn or his supporters. It's like describing Michael Gove as a Nazi.
Well Michael Gove has not called for the complete rehabilitation of Adolf Hitler. Jeremy Corbyn on Trotsky, on the other hand...
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
It's not that 'Marxist' and 'Trot' are offensive. It's that they're inaccurate. They mean political positions much further to the left than Corbyn or his supporters. It's like describing Michael Gove as a Nazi.
Well Michael Gove has not called for the complete rehabilitation of Adolf Hitler. Jeremy Corbyn on Trotsky, on the other hand...
If you read the entire article you will see that it wasn't a simple attempt to rehabilitate Trotsky, but an attempt to persuade the Communist Party to add Trotsky to a rehabilitation they were already doing for Bukharin, Zinoviev and others who had been purged by Stalin.
Looks like the object of the Motion was the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, which fell to bits by the end of the next year. Who knows, maybe it played a part in that: 1989 was a strange year.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
It's not that 'Marxist' and 'Trot' are offensive. It's that they're inaccurate. They mean political positions much further to the left than Corbyn or his supporters. It's like describing Michael Gove as a Nazi.
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
Well Michael Gove has not called for the complete rehabilitation of Adolf Hitler. Jeremy Corbyn on Trotsky, on the other hand...
In this context rehabilitation means a reversal of these trial findings. If you want to argue those were just convictions that should stand then fine. Personally I think it is daft to be involving the UK parliament in these deliberations but arguing that Trotsky's trial by Stalin was not entirely just isn't actually the same as being a Trotskyite. This is just a pathetic bit of Telegraph journalism that follows the narrative of its treatment of Corbyn.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
Well Jeremy Corbyn's right hand man John McDonnell isn't afraid to sing Trotsky's praises. He's named him, along with Lenin as the biggest influences on his politics. He calls for a "revolutionary socialist movement." He's also been known to quote from Mao's "Little Red Book." We may have in this country, people who'd like to see a man like this in power. I'm not one of them. But anyone who claims that this isn't a sign of the direction the Labour party is moving in is burying their heads in the sand. It's legitimate politics to admit to wanting this sort of government, but it's disingenuous to deny what's happening in front of us. I will certainly vote for anyone of whatever colour who can help to keep this trash at bay.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
McDonnel spoke of " the importance of Trotskyism for the struggle against the bosses and the Tories, arguing that it should mean a combination of political radicalism and non-sectarian orientation to work in mass labour movement organisations.”
I agree with non-sectarianism in the sense that nebody should face discrimination, positive or negative, on religious grounds, but in all countries where this political ideology has taken hold, it has usually meant banning or persecuting all religion. Don't say that history hasn't warned us of this.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
AFAIK there has never been a Trotskyist state ever, and given that Trotskyism is defined in opposition to 'Socialism in One Country', it's hard to see how there ever could be.
(Hence the self-righteousness of Trots, who unlike most political movements never have to defend the compromises they have made with power, thanks to not having any.)
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Well Jeremy Corbyn's right hand man John McDonnell isn't afraid to sing Trotsky's praises. He's named him, along with Lenin as the biggest influences on his politics. He calls for a "revolutionary socialist movement." He's also been known to quote from Mao's "Little Red Book." We may have in this country, people who'd like to see a man like this in power. I'm not one of them. But anyone who claims that this isn't a sign of the direction the Labour party is moving in is burying their heads in the sand. It's legitimate politics to admit to wanting this sort of government, but it's disingenuous to deny what's happening in front of us. I will certainly vote for anyone of whatever colour who can help to keep this trash at bay.
"This trash" as you put it have been sound on the subject of responsibility for the banking crisis which has plunged most of the world into an economic depression for approaching a decade now. Moreover it's pretty rash to believe anything the Telegraph prints on this and almost any other topic, which you continue to do. Really PaulTH, it's only slightly better than the Daily Mail.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
Even Michael Foot was nothing like as dangerous as this breed.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Even Michael Foot was nothing like as dangerous as this breed.
Trash? Breed? You're really intent on doubling down on this, aren't you?
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Even Michael Foot was nothing like as dangerous as this breed.
Trash? Breed? You're really intent on doubling down on this, aren't you?
So I had a spare moment to read your link.
Really? The meat of it (it's barely 5 paragraphs long) is that Simon Fletcher is Corbyn's chief of staff. This is the same Fletcher who was hired by that arch-Trot Ed Milliband in 2013.
(Also the Social Affairs Unit is a right-wing libertarian 'think tank')
But otherwise, yes, smear away.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
(Also the Social Affairs Unit is a right-wing libertarian 'think tank')
But otherwise, yes, smear away.
When I see links like that, I'm reminded of Jim Hacker's description of newspaper readers, which includes:
"The Morning Star is read by people who think the country should be run by another country. The Daily Telegraph is read by people who think it is"
If "Trots" were so ubiquitous as some of these articles make out, we would have had international socialism in Britain by now ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
[ 16. August 2016, 22:28: Message edited by: chris stiles ]
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Sadiq weighs in. He has to I realise. Doesn't he? But he's on to a loser backing Smith. Especially if he wins ...
How does Sadiq get to be PM?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
Sadiq weighs in. He has to I realise. Doesn't he? But he's on to a loser backing Smith. Especially if he wins ...
How does Sadiq get to be PM?
And Sadiq very convincingly makes the point that the problem with Corbyn is himself, not his policies but his demonstrated lack of ability as a leader of what should be the next governing party in the UK - rather than a rump destined to opposition for the next 2 elections at least. That of course condemns the UK to a Tory government for that period, hacking away at policies extending back to Attlee's government 70 years ago.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sarah G
Shipmate
# 11669
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
Sadiq weighs in. He has to I realise. Doesn't he? But he's on to a loser backing Smith. Especially if he wins ...
How does Sadiq get to be PM?
You start by doing what you can to make your party electable.
That involves swimming against the party tide.
Posts: 514 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Wuntoo
Shipmate
# 5673
|
Posted
I would be interested to know whether those who propose to vote for Corbyn as leader will do so because they blindly follow what they believe to be his ideology / politics or because they think he can win the next election. I suspect the former and that if they vote in sufficient numbers (with their heads in sand) it will end in floods of tears - for them and for the country.
Three cheers for Kezia Dugdale who joins Sadiq Khan in support of Smith.
--------------------
Blessed are the cracked for they let in the light.
Posts: 1950 | From: Somewhere else. | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Wuntoo:
I would be interested to know whether those who propose to vote for Corbyn as leader will do so because they blindly follow what they believe to be his ideology / politics or because they think he can win the next election.
'Blindly'? As if everyone voting for Corbyn is some weak-willed, brainwashed acolyte? ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Wuntoo:
I would be interested to know whether those who propose to vote for Corbyn as leader will do so because they blindly follow what they believe to be his ideology / politics or because they think he can win the next election. I suspect the former and that if they vote in sufficient numbers (with their heads in sand) it will end in floods of tears - for them and for the country. ...
That is what happened in the eighties until Kinnock took over and started to pull his party back from the brink. Even then, it took 9 years before they managed a reasonable showing in an election, and 14 and two leaders later before they actually got back into office.
There seems to be a pattern here. Since 1950, no party has won an election. A party has lost one. When you're out of office, you don't get it back again unless and until both the public are fed up with your opponents, and is persuaded you can be trusted with government.
In 1979, the Labour Party stuck with Callaghan for a year or two, more of the same. In 1997, after losing the election, Major resigned. So the Conservatives had to chose a new leader. They chose Hague, sort of 'more of the same'. In 2010, after losing the election, Brown resigned. So Labour also had to choose a new leader and chose Ed Miliband, again, sort of 'more of the same'. In both cases that didn't deliver the next election (2001 and (2015) - and wasn't all that likely to. The time wasn't ripe yet. So the cry goes up, what the public wants is 'real socialism, or 'clear blue water' or 'more public spending' or 'flat rate taxation' or whatever else political enthusiasts are having orgasms about.
So in the 1980s the Labour Party chose Michael Foot and went down really heavily in 1983.
In 2001 and 2015, Hague and Miliband pulled out. So the Conservatives chose Ian Duncan Smith and Labour chose Jeremy Corbyn, swinging to 'true socialism' or 'clear blue water'. In both cases, at the time they were chosen, there was a shortage of inspirational candidates who had support in the party. And both cases demonstrate that there's a strong element in the party faithful who think it's only because they haven't shifted further into the infra-red or ultra-violet that explains why the public isn't flocking to vote for them.
In the 1980s the Labour Party eventually saw sense, chose Kinnock, and had to accept his determined disconnection of the party from the infra-red end of the spectrum. Even so, it took 12 years before they got back into power.
After only two years of IDS, the Conservatives dumped him, but it was still a long time and two leaders later before they got back into power. Even then, they had to share it with someone else, and look at the mess they've made of it since they've been running things on their own.
Labour seems to be determined to swing into the infra-red. If it stays there rather than returns to the boring centre ground, I regret to say that it's Conservative administrations until another party comes along to replace Labour - as it did the Liberals in the 1920s.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Wuntoo
Shipmate
# 5673
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Wuntoo:
I would be interested to know whether those who propose to vote for Corbyn as leader will do so because they blindly follow what they believe to be his ideology / politics or because they think he can win the next election.
'Blindly'? As if everyone voting for Corbyn is some weak-willed, brainwashed acolyte?
What these voters will be blind to is the sure loss of any chance of winning an election with Corbyn.
--------------------
Blessed are the cracked for they let in the light.
Posts: 1950 | From: Somewhere else. | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Mark Wuntoo
Shipmate
# 5673
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
That's not what you said the first time, is it?
Clumsily yes. Most people would get what I meant, I think.
The choice is clear - vote for him and you lose the chance to win an election. Vote for Smith and at least there is a chance of the PLP getting the party electable.
--------------------
Blessed are the cracked for they let in the light.
Posts: 1950 | From: Somewhere else. | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sarah G:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
Sadiq weighs in. He has to I realise. Doesn't he? But he's on to a loser backing Smith. Especially if he wins ...
How does Sadiq get to be PM?
You start by doing what you can to make your party electable.
That involves swimming against the party tide.
With it, surely Sarah? Thinking as Machiavellianly as possible: Smith loses against Corbyn who loses against May, Khan takes over and wins against May in 2025 by NOT being branded a leftie by having supported Corbyn.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Wuntoo:
I would be interested to know whether those who propose to vote for Corbyn as leader will do so because they blindly follow what they believe to be his ideology / politics or because they think he can win the next election.
Speaking as someone who thinks that Corbyn is unwilling or unable to lead the parliamentary party, and should therefore step down, I think that's unhelpfully pejorative.
People who don't think Corbyn's doing a good job should at least acknowledge that Harman's cunning plan to get elected by not opposing the Tories was a washout. (This is not the same as saying that Labour MPs who obeyed the whip were wrong to do so.)
[ 22. August 2016, 14:27: Message edited by: Dafyd ]
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Wuntoo:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
That's not what you said the first time, is it?
Clumsily yes. Most people would get what I meant, I think.
The choice is clear - vote for him and you lose the chance to win an election. Vote for Smith and at least there is a chance of the PLP getting the party electable.
Has anyone looked at Owen Smith's policies? Why, he's another of the "soft left" and not so very different to Jeremy Corbyn. OK, he doesn't carry some of the back history Corbyn does but most of that is mendacious claptrap drummed up by Murdoch and Tory Party HQ.
I suppose his very obscurity is an asset: that and the name "Smith" which reminds plenty of us of one of the best PMs we never had.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
shamwari
Shipmate
# 15556
|
Posted
No way do I want Corbyn out.
His presence guarantees that somebody else ( anybody else) will win.
Posts: 1914 | From: from the abyss of misunderstanding | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
I suppose his very obscurity is an asset: that and the name "Smith" which reminds plenty of us of one of the best PMs we never had.
Wolfie?
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
Thinking as Machiavellianly as possible: Smith loses against Corbyn who loses against May, Khan takes over and wins against May in 2025 by NOT being branded a leftie by having supported Corbyn.
How about just ditching Corbyn now and doing our best to avoid another 5 years of Tory rule.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Luigi
Shipmate
# 4031
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Wuntoo:
I would be interested to know whether those who propose to vote for Corbyn as leader will do so because they blindly follow what they believe to be his ideology / politics or because they think he can win the next election.
Speaking as someone who thinks that Corbyn is unwilling or unable to lead the parliamentary party, and should therefore step down, I think that's unhelpfully pejorative.
People who don't think Corbyn's doing a good job should at least acknowledge that Harman's cunning plan to get elected by not opposing the Tories was a washout. (This is not the same as saying that Labour MPs who obeyed the whip were wrong to do so.)
I agree with you largely. However, I never thought of it as Harman's idea to get elected by not opposing the Tories. I thought she wanted to avoid the whole 'we always oppose and we are never willing to acknowledge that there are hard choices. If we oppose every cut then the Tories can just tot up the cost of every policy and it makes us seem incredibly profligate.'
I wasn't convinced by the strategy but I think all opposition parties have to wrestle with this issue. Would it have made a blind bit of difference - well not to the Bill getting through.
Posts: 752 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Luigi
Shipmate
# 4031
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Wuntoo:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
That's not what you said the first time, is it?
Clumsily yes. Most people would get what I meant, I think.
The choice is clear - vote for him and you lose the chance to win an election. Vote for Smith and at least there is a chance of the PLP getting the party electable.
Has anyone looked at Owen Smith's policies? Why, he's another of the "soft left" and not so very different to Jeremy Corbyn. OK, he doesn't carry some of the back history Corbyn does but most of that is mendacious claptrap drummed up by Murdoch and Tory Party HQ.
I suppose his very obscurity is an asset: that and the name "Smith" which reminds plenty of us of one of the best PMs we never had.
On the policy issue I don't think the general public look at the full range of policies and work out which party they think will give them the most. I never have, and am a lot more interested in politics than most people I know.
I think when faced with such a complicated question most people replace it with two simple questions. Do I trust this party with the economy? And do I trust this party / leader to deal competently with a crisis - especially relevant in the light of the terrorism attacks in France.
That is where Corbyn is, in the view of many (75%?), unelectable.
And Enoch - spot on!
Posts: 752 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
Thinking as Machiavellianly as possible: Smith loses against Corbyn who loses against May, Khan takes over and wins against May in 2025 by NOT being branded a leftie by having supported Corbyn.
How about just ditching Corbyn now and doing our best to avoid another 5 years of Tory rule.
Impossible. May can't LOSE in 2020. Smith's timing is out by four years.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
Thinking as Machiavellianly as possible: Smith loses against Corbyn who loses against May, Khan takes over and wins against May in 2025 by NOT being branded a leftie by having supported Corbyn.
How about just ditching Corbyn now and doing our best to avoid another 5 years of Tory rule.
Impossible. May can't LOSE in 2020. Smith's timing is out by four years.
All that stands between the Tories being returned in 2020 is a five-star, ocean-going fiasco over leaving the EU. If the practical matters that Liam Fox and David Davis are supposed to implement regarding future trade agreements and the political aspects go pear-shaped, then some Tories might cause a split there and the rest of the House could force a vote on Article 50. If Article 50 fails to get through, all bets are off.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
A choice between two parties - which one am I least tired of? Which will be OK with the economy? Which will manage the terrorist threat reasonably well? And down go voting per centages, up goes the populist share, the vote for a troll share, and the angry, protest anti vote, leave the UK, leave the EU becomes a likelihood. Democracy is at risk.
More of the same is clearly what growing numbers do not want. None of the mainstream has an answer to raging inequality, to tackling terrorism at source (did you see that terrorist ideas are apparently so attractive that we are going to separate terrorists from other prisoners; an ideology so compelling no one must hear it).
May has better ideas than Corbyn, so far. No one, yet, is worth voting for.
I will vote for Corbyn as that seems the best way to try and break politics as we have it, to force something that offers some hope to appear. I don't think Corbyn has any answers, but his movement has some good questions. There's no reason I can see to vote for Smith; no usp, no vision and no chance of being elected.
We have to wait.
--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
All that stands between the Tories being returned in 2020 is a five-star, ocean-going fiasco over leaving the EU.
Probably true. Elections are more often lost than won. If Labour look half-way competent then they will take advantage of a Conservative screwup. And from that point of view, it's fine to get the stupidity out of the way now. As long as the current election actually puts the issue to bed, and the party then unites behind whoever the victor is, then they're able to take advantage of a Tory ball-dropping.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
I noticed that proposal to separate terrorists from the common herd and immediately thought back to the "political status" demands of the paramilitaries in Northern Ireland. Hasn't it occurred to the Powers That Be that this might be just what terrorists want?
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
Thinking as Machiavellianly as possible: Smith loses against Corbyn who loses against May, Khan takes over and wins against May in 2025 by NOT being branded a leftie by having supported Corbyn.
How about just ditching Corbyn now and doing our best to avoid another 5 years of Tory rule.
Impossible. May can't LOSE in 2020. Smith's timing is out by four years.
All that stands between the Tories being returned in 2020 is a five-star, ocean-going fiasco over leaving the EU. If the practical matters that Liam Fox and David Davis are supposed to implement regarding future trade agreements and the political aspects go pear-shaped, then some Tories might cause a split there and the rest of the House could force a vote on Article 50. If Article 50 fails to get through, all bets are off.
That's four low probabilities multiplied.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
They're also going to foul up over the union. But Labour has no prospect of doing any better.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Luigi
Shipmate
# 4031
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by hatless:
A choice between two parties - which one am I least tired of? Which will be OK with the economy? Which will manage the terrorist threat reasonably well? And down go voting per centages, up goes the populist share, the vote for a troll share, and the angry, protest anti vote, leave the UK, leave the EU becomes a likelihood. Democracy is at risk.
More of the same is clearly what growing numbers do not want. None of the mainstream has an answer to raging inequality, to tackling terrorism at source (did you see that terrorist ideas are apparently so attractive that we are going to separate terrorists from other prisoners; an ideology so compelling no one must hear it).
May has better ideas than Corbyn, so far. No one, yet, is worth voting for.
I will vote for Corbyn as that seems the best way to try and break politics as we have it, to force something that offers some hope to appear. I don't think Corbyn has any answers, but his movement has some good questions. There's no reason I can see to vote for Smith; no usp, no vision and no chance of being elected.
We have to wait.
Hatless - thinking of this wider than UK. Is there a political party anywhere amongst the advanced democratic nations that are coming up with the answers. (This desire for some answer to the issues raised by growing inequality, but I'd add in climate change, dealing with the problems of sustainability and soft landing the turbo charged version of capitalism we currently have.)
Posts: 752 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sarah G
Shipmate
# 11669
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60: quote:
That involves swimming against the party tide
With it, surely Sarah? Thinking as Machiavellianly as possible: Smith loses against Corbyn who loses against May, Khan takes over and wins against May in 2025 by NOT being branded a leftie by having supported Corbyn.
The party tide is pro-Corbyn. Whoever takes over from Corbyn won't have worked against him. The party membership is so far to the left at the moment that it'll be a Corbyn mark 2. I rather think the membership have given up on winning, in favour of 'proper' ideology. In time the penny will drop, and reality will sink in:
quote:
“just remember at all times, with all temptations, how you...each and every Labour worker watching this conference, each and every Labour voter, yes, and some others as well, remember how you felt on that dreadful morning of the tenth of June. Just remember how you felt then, and think to yourselves: 'June the ninth, 1983, never ever again will we experience that.”
(Neil Kinnock)
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
If Labour look half-way competent then they will take advantage of a Conservative screwup... As long as the current election actually puts the issue to bed, and the party then unites behind whoever the victor is, then they're able to take advantage of a Tory ball-dropping.
That's the thing. Even if the Tories mess it up, the country still won't vote for Corbyn.
Posts: 514 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
MarsmanTJ
Shipmate
# 8689
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sarah G:
That's the thing. Even if the Tories mess it up, the country still won't vote for Corbyn.
I keep hearing this with very little data beyond (as seen in the last two major elections wildly inaccurate) polling. All I can say is I know a LOT of my contemporaries (mid-late twenties) who didn't vote Labour in the last two elections, but would under Corbyn. I realise the plural of anecdotes isn't data, but surely there's a fairly large commited pool of voters for both parties, and its the undecideds that win the election. From everything I'm seeing in my social circles, the undecideds at the moment are almost universally fans of Corbyn, in part because he is so radically different from a Labour they didn't approve of. The fundamental question is are the New Labour-ites who don't like Corbyn but have voted Labour for the last however many elections really going to jump ship over him? I can't see that happening, for all they might say that in anger now. I think the numbers are a LOT closer than polling indicates.
[ 22. August 2016, 21:44: Message edited by: MarsmanTJ ]
Posts: 238 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
The general election polling overestimated the level of support for Labour, and the referendum polling overestimated the level of support for what was supposed to be Labour's and Mr Corbyn's position.
How one concludes from that that polling companies are now underestimating support for Labour is beyond me.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
The general election polling overestimated the level of support for Labour, and the referendum polling overestimated the level of support for what was supposed to be Labour's and Mr Corbyn's position.
How one concludes from that that polling companies are now underestimating support for Labour is beyond me.
If anything the pre-election polls in 2015 underestimated Tory support, which isn't quite the same.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Luigi
Shipmate
# 4031
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by MarsmanTJ:
quote:
Originally posted by Sarah G:
That's the thing. Even if the Tories mess it up, the country still won't vote for Corbyn.
I keep hearing this with very little data beyond (as seen in the last two major elections wildly inaccurate) polling. All I can say is I know a LOT of my contemporaries (mid-late twenties) who didn't vote Labour in the last two elections, but would under Corbyn. I realise the plural of anecdotes isn't data, but surely there's a fairly large commited pool of voters for both parties, and its the undecideds that win the election. From everything I'm seeing in my social circles, the undecideds at the moment are almost universally fans of Corbyn, in part because he is so radically different from a Labour they didn't approve of. The fundamental question is are the New Labour-ites who don't like Corbyn but have voted Labour for the last however many elections really going to jump ship over him? I can't see that happening, for all they might say that in anger now. I think the numbers are a LOT closer than polling indicates.
Wildly inaccurate? Yes they were out but not by that much - Labour turned out to be 3% lower, Tories 3% higher. All the other parties were incredibly accurate. For Labour to be doing well now the polls would have to be much more than 3% out for the individual parties.
Having said that the polls showed that in the areas of trust on the economy and leadership Labour scored very poorly. These are normally the most accurate indicators of the final result - and they were in 2015. Currently their ratings in these areas are very poor.
Almost all enthusiastic supporters of Corbyn I know were either ex-Green voters or not very enthusiastic Labour voters. Sadly for them a very positive Labour vote is worth the same when it is counted as an unenthusiastic vote.
Posts: 752 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Luigi:
Sadly for them a very positive Labour vote is worth the same when it is counted as an unenthusiastic vote.
True. Also well worth noting that if you can attract one of their guys to vote for you, it's worth the same as attracting two non-voters.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by MarsmanTJ:
All I can say is I know a LOT of my contemporaries (mid-late twenties) who didn't vote Labour in the last two elections, but would under Corbyn.
Certainly among my social circle, Corbyn would handily defeat May. If my social circle had decided the last election, Miliband would be PM and the Leader of the Opposition would be Natalie Bennett. Although I wouldn't swear to it being that way round.
I believe my social circle may not be representative of the wider electorate.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Luigi:
quote:
Originally posted by hatless:
A choice between two parties - which one am I least tired of? Which will be OK with the economy? Which will manage the terrorist threat reasonably well? And down go voting per centages, up goes the populist share, the vote for a troll share, and the angry, protest anti vote, leave the UK, leave the EU becomes a likelihood. Democracy is at risk.
More of the same is clearly what growing numbers do not want. None of the mainstream has an answer to raging inequality, to tackling terrorism at source (did you see that terrorist ideas are apparently so attractive that we are going to separate terrorists from other prisoners; an ideology so compelling no one must hear it).
May has better ideas than Corbyn, so far. No one, yet, is worth voting for.
I will vote for Corbyn as that seems the best way to try and break politics as we have it, to force something that offers some hope to appear. I don't think Corbyn has any answers, but his movement has some good questions. There's no reason I can see to vote for Smith; no usp, no vision and no chance of being elected.
We have to wait.
Hatless - thinking of this wider than UK. Is there a political party anywhere amongst the advanced democratic nations that are coming up with the answers. (This desire for some answer to the issues raised by growing inequality, but I'd add in climate change, dealing with the problems of sustainability and soft landing the turbo charged version of capitalism we currently have.)
No, it's an international plight. And centre left parties are collapsing all around. The Dutch Labour Party has been polling 5% I believe. Iceland is set to be run by pirates (as in anti copyright, and anti corruption).
Maybe the questions are firming up. I agree with the two you added. The BHS collapse has revealed a disgust with capitalism and a concern over our lack of laws to protect workers that seems to be shared even by many Tories. I hear people remark that capitalism has almost never come up with worthwhile inventions.
As I said, I think we have to wait. But the times, they are a-changing. Whither the ants are my friends remains to be seen.
--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by MarsmanTJ:
I keep hearing this with very little data beyond (as seen in the last two major elections wildly inaccurate) polling.
The vagaries of polling are not improved by polling a tiny and biased group (i.e. relying on polling your own social circle).
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by hatless:
I hear people remark that capitalism has almost never come up with worthwhile inventions.
I wonder how many of those people have smartphones? Or own a motor car?
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
The Tang dynasty in China oversaw some remarkable improvements in printing technology, clockwork and gunpowder but were a remarkably repressive and cruel regime.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
