Jump to content

news & politics:discussion

zahidf

By zahidf,
in Discussions

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 44.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Neil

    4946

  • steviewevie

    13383

  • Crazyfool01

    2320

  • Ozanne

    6897

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Kurosagi
Kurosagi

Don't post on here often, but read it every day. Can't sit by and watch @Ozanne getting picked on for doing little other than make a polite 'point of order' request without my saying something. F

maelzoid
maelzoid

Obviously horrible news. But I think pointing the finger at Rayner is not only unfair to her, but also serves to help silence critics of the Tories. Don't forget that over the years, BJ's words h

Zoo Music Girl
Zoo Music Girl

Man I'm furious. He's not remotely apologetic. Look at his face while Starmer is talking. I've tried to avoid taking this too personally but my mum died in hospital last summer and I wasn't allow

Posted Images

not worthy Enthusiast

not worthy

Posted
Posted

How many of the electorate care about policies, care about PMQ's or any of the behavior we have seen from the likes of Johnson?

Could it be that folk just vote for those that they see as most charismatic and positive?

Starmer doesn't inspire optimism or a simple message of 'do this' and things we be better because.

It's the same basis as Farage - he just blatantly ignored any criticism or 'complicated' arguments and told people it was the 'establishment'. To a lot of voters he had a simple positive message of 'do this' and things will be better....with a smile on his face.

So, if we end up in a personality contest, who wins over the conservatives from the current Labour line-up. Hard to see anyone. Could Andy Burnham carry it off or are Labour still desperate for the return of David Miliband.

Any negative brexit impact hasn't landed on the doorstep of the tories yet. Can't see labour getting anywhere near power in the next couple of elections - at best they may end up needing the SNP in a coalition but would have to risk the union to do so

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mattiloy Mentor

mattiloy

Posted
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, not worthy said:

Why? Not that I am a fan, just interested why he is such a negative for them?

Further, anyone else in labour you can think of as a possible?


The right will tell you the problem is they are still dealing with Corbyn's legacy - the truth is, they are still dealing with Blair's. The reason there is such a dearth of talent as a viable choice for leader, or even the shadow cabinet for that matter, it because until Corbyn the party machinery was dominated by the rump of Blairism with a disengaged membership left behind after the Blair years, so the candidates for MPs were drawn from that pool.

There are good candidates for the future but I think they'd be seen as a little green and not so high profile, perhaps a bit 'lightweight' - Dan Carden being one of them.

Miliband was never seen as a good choice outside of the same type of neoliberal, globalist, remainiac, establishment folks who think Starmer is doing a good job now. Its so detached from reality to think that this kind of individual, selling those kind of policies is what is necessary to win back 'the red wall'.

He was exactly this type of Blair acolyte who was parachuted into the red wall, did the square root of fuck all for his constituents and then eventually hopped onto some other gravy train when he got tired of it. South Shields had a majority of 56%, by the time he left it was less than half of that.

Right now if there was a leadership election tomorrow I'd still say Lisa Nandy is labour's best bet of regaining ground in the North. In 3 years time, a Burnham/Rotheram leader/deputy combo would have wide appeal within and outside the party.

Edited by mattiloy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
eFestivals Mentor

eFestivals

Posted
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, mattiloy said:


The right will tell you the problem is they are still dealing with Corbyn's legacy - the truth is, they are still dealing with Blair's. The reason there is such a dearth of talent as a viable choice for leader, or even the shadow cabinet for that matter, it because until Corbyn the party machinery was dominated by the rump of Blairism with a disengaged membership left behind after the Blair years, so the candidates for MPs were drawn from that pool.

There are good candidates for the future but I think they'd be seen as a little green and not so high profile, perhaps a bit 'lightweight' - Dan Carden being one of them.

Miliband was never seen as a good choice outside of the same type of neoliberal, globalist, remainiac, establishment folks who think Starmer is doing a good job now. Its so detached from reality to think that this kind of individual, selling those kind of policies is what is necessary to win back 'the red wall'.

He was exactly this type of Blair acolyte who was parachuted into the red wall, did the square root of fuck all for his constituents and then eventually hopped onto some other gravy train when he got tired of it. South Shields had a majority of 56%, by the time he left it was less than half of that.

Right now if there was a leadership election tomorrow I'd still say Lisa Nandy is labour's best bet of regaining ground in the North. In 3 years time, a Burnham/Rotheram leader/deputy combo would have wide appeal within and outside the party.

David miliband would have probably won in 2015. Bandy is making zero impact in her current role. I can't see why she'd go better as leader. 

Edited by eFestivals
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mimo Newbie

Mimo

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, eFestivals said:

There's too many people who'd have issues with parts of that inclusive vision.bcause not everyone is gay or trans or black.trans rights are exclusionary of woman's rights. Rights which many woman alive today helped to fight for such as one gender hospital wards. I know someone who works in a prison and self defining trans right would create a whole load of new issues there. 

When I say inclusive I’m really not referring to people putting she/her in twitter bios etc all of which has been hijacked by many competing ideologies. What I mean is countering this very narrow and intentionally divisive white nationalist version of our cultural identity that’s increasingly being presented as True Britishness (or Englishness, to be more precise). I want someone to stand up and loudly counter all that by claiming Britishness on behalf of EVERYONE who contributes to our society.

I’m as white English as they come with family history going back about as far you can go, I don’t identify with all this nationalist bullshit whatsoever and I’m heartily sick of the implication that to not be right wing is to not love your country. I’d like a political leader who will fight back against that forcefully and not tip toe around it for fear of losing votes.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mimo Newbie

Mimo

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, Mimo said:

When I say inclusive I’m really not referring to people putting she/her in twitter bios etc all of which has been hijacked by many competing ideologies. What I mean is countering this very narrow and intentionally divisive white nationalist version of our cultural identity that’s increasingly being presented as True Britishness (or Englishness, to be more precise). I want someone to stand up and loudly counter all that by claiming Britishness on behalf of EVERYONE who contributes to our society.

I’m as white English as they come with family history going back about as far you can go, I don’t identify with all this nationalist bullshit whatsoever and I’m heartily sick of the implication that to not be right wing is to not love your country. I’d like a political leader who will fight back against that forcefully and not tip toe around it for fear of losing votes.

Further point to add to my waffle, in future I most certainly will not be voting for any party that doesn’t proudly stand for an inclusive British identity. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Homer Proficient

Homer

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, steviewevie said:

maybe...but...also Johnson is funny, right? He's likeable, the horrible twat. Whereas Starmer is boring.
 

Labour was set up to represent industrial working class people in a totally different age...when working class people had only just been allowed the vote. We're in a very different world now. There's a lot less industry, and most working class now dont' belong to a union. But, also Labour from the start had a middle class intellectual side to it.

I've never got the 'Bpris is funny' thing. I honestly thought 30 years ago on HIGNFY that we were all laughing AT what a twat he was.

He makes a speech that has the acronym 'dude' in it and that apparently qualifies as a 'joke'. I don't get it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
steviewevie Grand Master

steviewevie

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, Homer said:

I've never got the 'Bpris is funny' thing. I honestly thought 30 years ago on HIGNFY that we were all laughing AT what a twat he was.

He makes a speech that has the acronym 'dude' in it and that apparently qualifies as a 'joke'. I don't get it.

he does the posh but dim thing.

Apparently he is very good when meeting people on campaign trails too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Homer Proficient

Homer

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, steviewevie said:

he does the posh but dim thing.

Apparently he is very good when meeting people on campaign trails too.

Yeah, my colleague used to work for the BBC and the broadsheets and her husband has spent a bit of time with him. Said that one to one he is very personable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...