Jump to content

When will this shit end?


Chrisp1986

Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

have a chance of what? ;) 

Another split in the not-tory vote only gives the tories a bigger victory.

Yep yep yep. 

People can’t seriously think a pure left wing party can actually win an election in the UK do they? It’s either a Labour Party representing the centre, centre left and left or it’s the Tories. It’s a pretty simple equation.

The best you’d end up with is a Labour/Corbynite coalition which sorta defeats the point probably still wouldn’t have the votes.

edit: definitely wouldn’t have the votes!

Edited by jparx
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

The EHRC findings were not Starmer's fault, or how Corbyn reacted to them.

What by telling the truth?

In any case this started shorty after his election, well before the publication of the EHRC report. The loading of his shadow cabinet with right wing provocateurs. The laughable sacking of rebecca long bailey and the implication that maxine peake was an antisemite. The appointment of David evans as general secretary. The comments from nandy saying that starmer would likely renege on his left wing policy manifesto for the leadership.

Since the Corbyn suspension Starmer changed the NEC procedure to appoint his choice of chair, suspended members for expressing support for Corbyn and has written threatening suspension to any CLP chair and secretary that discusses the Corbyn case in meetings.

Contrast this to Corbyn’s premiership When he tolerated all kinds of abuse from sitting MPs and members, populated his shadow cabinet with people from the right and centre until they revolted a few months later, changed internal procedures to amplify the ordinary member’s voice.

This is less about Corbyn than you think. It suits the right to use him as a scapegoat.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

 

or alternatively, it's all about Corbyn. And that's the problem. For Corbyn it's always got to be about Corbyn. ;) 

Or alternatively for insecure egomaniac Keith Starmer, its all about image and winning to appear like a ’strong man’. Whilst for Corbyn its about principles, honesty and campaigning to affect real change.

If we get a blairite government or a tory government there is no difference to me so the internal machinations of the labour party are important. And at least you expect to get fucked when its coming from the tories so you have time to lube up.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

 

or alternatively, it's all about Corbyn. And that's the problem. For Corbyn it's always got to be about Corbyn. ;) 

And for Corbynites his way is the only way. They can’t see any other alternative. Even when it’s clear that he lost. You can see why there is comparison with the fanatical Trump supporters. 
 

Time to put a line under it and move on. If you don’t think Labour are left wing enough for you then vote elsewhere. The Greens would love a boost in their popularity. Get enough Green MP’s and Labour could form a coalition with them in the future. 
 

The reality is that we don’t have a majority left wing voter base. To gain power you have to appeal to the majority of the country. Corbyn failed to do that on multiple occasions including the heaviest opposition defeat in recent history. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

What by telling the truth?

In any case this started shorty after his election, well before the publication of the EHRC report. The loading of his shadow cabinet with right wing provocateurs. The laughable sacking of rebecca long bailey and the implication that maxine peake was an antisemite. The appointment of David evans as general secretary. The comments from nandy saying that starmer would likely renege on his left wing policy manifesto for the leadership.

Since the Corbyn suspension Starmer changed the NEC procedure to appoint his choice of chair, suspended members for expressing support for Corbyn and has written threatening suspension to any CLP chair and secretary that discusses the Corbyn case in meetings.

Contrast this to Corbyn’s premiership When he tolerated all kinds of abuse from sitting MPs and members, populated his shadow cabinet with people from the right and centre until they revolted a few months later, changed internal procedures to amplify the ordinary member’s voice.

This is less about Corbyn than you think. It suits the right to use him as a scapegoat.

poor jezza being persecuted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

Or alternatively for insecure egomaniac Keith Starmer, its all about image and winning to appear like a ’strong man’. Whilst for Corbyn its about principles, honesty and campaigning to affect real change.

real change happens via holding power. ;) 

 

5 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

If we get a blairite government or a tory government there is no difference to me so the internal machinations of the labour party are important. And at least you expect to get fucked when its coming from the tories so you have time to lube up.

that's your own failure then, because there clearly is. 

Ultimately, your take on things of only-my-way enables the tories. When we could have something better, even if we don't think it's perfect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

You really need to pay more attention. 

Is a Blairite government good enough? Of course not. 
Is it as bad as the Conservatives? Absolutely fucking no way!

The new labour years also coincided with a strong positive global macro trend but even given that they spurned the chance to change things for the better for ordinary people.

Brown had committed to austerity if he won in 2010.

Yes the tories have been bad in bad times, but i’m skeptical that new labour would’ve done anything much different.

https://www.google.se/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2010/mar/25/alistair-darling-cut-deeper-margaret-thatcher

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@mattiloy I think the approach of ideological purity you have is one of the main reasons why labour have got a complete arse whacking for the last 10 years with the electorate. 
 

You have some conservatives that are probably more conservative than Boris and Rishi, but they put that aside and support the party.

The search for a ideologically pure labour leader leads to too much infighting, and the people don’t want to vote for it.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The issue as I see it is many members on the left of Labour 'lent' Starmer their vote for the very reason that Labour needed to win power to stop this most right-wing of governments. They were prepared to compromise. In turn, Starmer promised to honour many of policy positions that had been established under Corbyn - policies which have widespread support. However, since he took over, members have seen him waterdown or row-back on many of these commitments and hence the trust is disappearing fast and people are regretting that they voted for him. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

 

The reality is that we don’t have a majority left wing voter base. To gain power you have to appeal to the majority of the country. Corbyn failed to do that on multiple occasions including the heaviest opposition defeat in recent history. 

We also dont have a centrist population. By my reckoning its approximately 1/3rd centrist 1/3rd left and 1/3rd right. So the art is the art of pissing off any two out of the three less than the other guy. Starmer has sadly alienated much of the left.

 

1 minute ago, Matt42 said:

@mattiloy I think the approach of ideological purity you have is one of the main reasons why labour have got a complete arse whacking for the last 10 years with the electorate. 
 

You have some conservatives that are probably more conservative than Boris and Rishi, but they put that aside and support the party.

The search for a ideologically pure labour leader leads to too much infighting, and the people don’t want to vote for it.


Sorry to burst your bubble but I voted nandy in the leadership election and lib dem in 2010. As did many of my peers.

Most on the left are far more open minded than those to the right because critical thinking is a prerequisite to reach the conclusions that those who support progressive, democratic politics do. Otherwise you’d just buy whatever the press was selling - the mirror or the daily Mail if you’re working class - the Guardian or the telegraph if you’re middle class.

2 minutes ago, Gingerfish79 said:

The issue as I see it is many members on the left of Labour 'lent' Starmer their vote for the very reason that Labour needed to win power to stop this most right-wing of governments. They were prepared to compromise. In turn, Starmer promised to honour many of policy positions that had been established under Corbyn - policies which have widespread support. However, since he took over, members have seen him waterdown or row-back on many of these commitments and hence the trust is disappearing fast and people are regretting that they voted for him. 

This. Absolutely this. If there was a rerun of the election there is no way he’d win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

We also dont have a centrist population. By my reckoning its approximately 1/3rd centrist 1/3rd left and 1/3rd right. So the art is the art of pissing off any two out of the three less than the other guy. Starmer has sadly alienated much of the left.

 

We’ll do some rough maths based on your figures. 
 

Centrists will support Starmer, that’s a third of the vote right there. The Left aren’t going to vote Right. And the Right aren’t going to vote Left. Their views aren’t going to change. 
 

The key is getting enough Left and Right wing voters to swallow their pride and switch to a more centrist approach which is better for everyone at this point. 
 

Blair was too centrist for much of the left but he got enough votes to get the Tories out of office which is a feat that not many Labour leaders have managed to do. 
 

The priority is getting these corrupt goons out of power. If that means having the so called Tory Lite in there it’s still far better than the shitshow we currently have. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Gingerfish79 said:

The issue as I see it is many members on the left of Labour 'lent' Starmer their vote for the very reason that Labour needed to win power to stop this most right-wing of governments. They were prepared to compromise. In turn, Starmer promised to honour many of policy positions that had been established under Corbyn - policies which have widespread support. However, since he took over, members have seen him waterdown or row-back on many of these commitments and hence the trust is disappearing fast and people are regretting that they voted for him. 

that might be how it is within sections of the membership, but in the wider voting public it's different.

And if Labour are ever going to win power, it's that wider voting public it needs on side ... and ultimately, if it comes to it, not the purist-left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, JoeyT said:

Unless virus related politics should be in it's own thread.

*puts tin hat on*

It’s all linked in a way, Starmer/Labours handling of this will impact public perception of the Labour Party, plus their standing in the polls and as such their ability to hold the government to account.

This thread has become a broad discussion thread on various things that connect into UK politics. Plenty of people clearly find it interesting and it generates plenty of discussion so it’s definitely a good thing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

We’ll do some rough maths based on your figures. 
 

Centrists will support Starmer, that’s a third of the vote right there. The Left aren’t going to vote Right. And the Right aren’t going to vote Left. Their views aren’t going to change. 
 

The key is getting enough Left and Right wing voters to swallow their pride and switch to a more centrist approach which is better for everyone at this point. 
 

Blair was too centrist for much of the left but he got enough votes to get the Tories out of office which is a feat that not many Labour leaders have managed to do. 
 

The priority is getting these corrupt goons out of power. If that means having the so called Tory Lite in there it’s still far better than the shitshow we currently have. 

Corrupt goons? 

Unlike labour’s cash for honours, the expenses scandal, or this:

https://www.google.se/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2002/feb/17/labour.politicalcolumnists

Whats different?

’The key is getting enough Left and Right wing voters to swallow their pride and switch to a more centrist approach which is better for everyone at this point.’

So you’re saying its impossible to capture the middle from the left or right? But not impossible to capture left and right from centre? So who are the real inflexible ones?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

that might be how it is within sections of the membership, but in the wider voting public it's different.

And if Labour are ever going to win power, it's that wider voting public it needs on side ... and ultimately, if it comes to it, not the purist-left.

Completely agree, but if the infighting persists the voting public will think 'same old Labour' and vote elsewhere. The infighting has to stop and that needs trust and compromise on both sides. Many 'lefties' held out an Olive branch when they voted for him, but he doesn't seem to want to give anything back. Even Boris knows he has to give the odd  concession to all parts of his party.

Edited by Gingerfish79
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

So you’re saying its impossible to capture the middle from the left or right? But not impossible to capture left and right from centre? So who are the real inflexible ones?

The centrists are the ones who have already realised that polarised political views don’t get you anywhere. 
 

A bit more reality for you. The last few successive Tory Governments have been the worst in a generation. That is an undisputed fact. 
 

Any half competent opposition would have been able to wipe the floor with them and at least hold them to account and should have easily gained power. 
 

The opposition they were up against was Corbyn. He was so ineffective as an opposition leader that the Tories nominated Boris The Clown Johnson to be their leader and The Clown won by a landslide. 
 

Corbyn completely failed as an opposition leader. The country would never get behind him. 
 

Starmer takes over and the effectiveness of the opposition shot up rapidly. We actually have an opposition leader who is actually opposing the government. 
 

Everything was starting to go smoothly until the last week until Corbyn decided he wants the attention to be back on him and now all the talk is about the divisions in Labour and not on how we are going to get rid of the incredibly corrupt government in power. 
 

If Corbyn really wanted what was best for the country he would resign from his seat. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...