news & politics:discussion

[Zoo Music Girl]

40 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

 

Although clearly sometimes you can!

[SheffJeff]

16 minutes ago, Zoo Music Girl said:

Although clearly sometimes you can!

I think 23% ticked the "fuck this" option.

[mattiloy]

On 2/12/2022 at 11:14 AM, Ozanne said:

Some parts of the left doing their very best to disrupt Labour when they are in the best position for years. 

So your position is:

If Corbyn doesn’t win, it’s because he didn’t appeal to enough of the electorate, it’s his fault.

If Starmer doesn’t win it’s the left’s fault for not voting for something they don’t believe in - it’s the electorate’s fault.

The UKs shit system requires building these broad coalition right? If Starmer has alienated a segment of the electorate to the point where they don’t vote or vote green and then he doesn’t win, it’s on him.

Much of his actions are absolutely needless. Moving away from Corbynism is one thing, but 90% of voters don’t give a shit about stop the war, probably wouldn’t have known of its existence, his decision to attack is and lie about what Corbyn said after Salisbury is a net vote loser, similar to kicking out various Labour factions from the party, to stopping Corbyn from rejoining the party - most people don’t care much, but the punitive, aggressive and at this point v personal, attitude towards Corbyn the individual is going to permanently put off those on the left. When Starmer loses, it’s on him. It’s on new new Labour. It’s on their decision to stir up factionalism to an unnecessary degree.

[Guest]

34 minutes ago, Zoo Music Girl said:

This basically. Also you can't force someone to make a choice. I used to do surveys over the phone and you don't need to give them much of an excuse to go "fuck this" and hang up. Same if it was online. If I was filling in a survey and it wouldn't let me choose an option I wanted I'd just quit it.

I take part in the Opinium polls (all of them not much political ones), they regularly give options that don’t really match up with my ideal choice and I find the next best option. Maybe I’m just an anomaly though? 😂

[steviewevie]

 

[mattiloy]

1 hour ago, mattiloy said:

So your position is:

If Corbyn doesn’t win, it’s because he didn’t appeal to enough of the electorate, it’s his fault.

If Starmer doesn’t win it’s the left’s fault for not voting for something they don’t believe in - it’s the electorate’s fault.

The UKs shit system requires building these broad coalition right? If Starmer has alienated a segment of the electorate to the point where they don’t vote or vote green and then he doesn’t win, it’s on him.

Much of his actions are absolutely needless. Moving away from Corbynism is one thing, but 90% of voters don’t give a shit about stop the war, probably wouldn’t have known of its existence, his decision to attack is and lie about what Corbyn said after Salisbury is a net vote loser, similar to kicking out various Labour factions from the party, to stopping Corbyn from rejoining the party - most people don’t care much, but the punitive, aggressive and at this point v personal, attitude towards Corbyn the individual is going to permanently put off those on the left. When Starmer loses, it’s on him. It’s on new new Labour. It’s on their decision to stir up factionalism to an unnecessary degree.

No response to your hypocrisy @Ozanne?

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

No response to your hypocrisy @Ozanne?

There’s no point replying to you as you aren’t discussing in good faith. You have made up something that I’ve said to drive your narrative so I won’t engage.

[fraybentos1]

Glad to see the ‘discussion’ and ‘debate’ in this thread is as rigorous as ever 🤣

 

[Guest]

 

[Kurosagi]

2 hours ago, mattiloy said:

If Corbyn doesn’t win, it’s because he didn’t appeal to enough of the electorate, it’s his fault.

If Starmer doesn’t win it’s the left’s fault for not voting for something they don’t believe in - it’s the electorate’s fault.

It would be an interesting thought experiment to consider John McDonnell rather than Corbyn being the token leftie on the leadership election ballot back in 2015. When in Corbyn's shadow cab he came across as far more engaging and natural when dealing with the media, Corbyn could be quite stiff and awkward and easily caught in knots when faced with journalist traps. I'm guessing that McDonnell had many more skeletons in his closet than Corbyn to have gone for the position?

With the polls showing support for windfall tax, state intervention to keep basic food prices and petrol down, solid support for the NHS still, it does seem the UK public likes a touch of socialism as long as it's never called socialism. Let's hope that Starmer is paying attention that the 'centre' is potentially to the left and not the right...

[steviewevie]

3 minutes ago, Kurosagi said:

It would be an interesting thought experiment to consider John McDonnell rather than Corbyn being the token leftie on the leadership election ballot back in 2015. When in Corbyn's shadow cab he came across as far more engaging and natural when dealing with the media, Corbyn could be quite stiff and awkward and easily caught in knots when faced with journalist traps. I'm guessing that McDonnell had many more skeletons in his closet than Corbyn to have gone for the position?

With the polls showing support for windfall tax, state intervention to keep basic food prices and petrol down, solid support for the NHS still, it does seem the UK public likes a touch of socialism as long as it's never called socialism. Let's hope that Starmer is paying attention that the 'centre' is potentially to the left and not the right...

Yeah, I liked McDonnell, but he didn't look so cute in a beret.

[steviewevie]

3 hours ago, mattiloy said:

So your position is:

If Corbyn doesn’t win, it’s because he didn’t appeal to enough of the electorate, it’s his fault.

If Starmer doesn’t win it’s the left’s fault for not voting for something they don’t believe in - it’s the electorate’s fault.

The UKs shit system requires building these broad coalition right? If Starmer has alienated a segment of the electorate to the point where they don’t vote or vote green and then he doesn’t win, it’s on him.

Much of his actions are absolutely needless. Moving away from Corbynism is one thing, but 90% of voters don’t give a shit about stop the war, probably wouldn’t have known of its existence, his decision to attack is and lie about what Corbyn said after Salisbury is a net vote loser, similar to kicking out various Labour factions from the party, to stopping Corbyn from rejoining the party - most people don’t care much, but the punitive, aggressive and at this point v personal, attitude towards Corbyn the individual is going to permanently put off those on the left. When Starmer loses, it’s on him. It’s on new new Labour. It’s on their decision to stir up factionalism to an unnecessary degree.

I guess the calculation, rightly or wrongly, might be that labour has a better chance of winning the seats it needs to win by shifting to the middle, and doing the patriotic flag waving thing. I don't know but I expect most of the left wing vote is from younger voters, graduates etc, who live in cities which are pretty safe labour seats anyway...whereas labour need to win in towns where population tends to be older and not so left wing?

[steviewevie]

8 minutes ago, Kurosagi said:

It would be an interesting thought experiment to consider John McDonnell rather than Corbyn being the token leftie on the leadership election ballot back in 2015. When in Corbyn's shadow cab he came across as far more engaging and natural when dealing with the media, Corbyn could be quite stiff and awkward and easily caught in knots when faced with journalist traps. I'm guessing that McDonnell had many more skeletons in his closet than Corbyn to have gone for the position?

With the polls showing support for windfall tax, state intervention to keep basic food prices and petrol down, solid support for the NHS still, it does seem the UK public likes a touch of socialism as long as it's never called socialism. Let's hope that Starmer is paying attention that the 'centre' is potentially to the left and not the right...

Apparently they had a meeting to decide who should run for the left, McDonnell had done it before so corbyn said he'd do it. Probably a bit reluctantly but thanks to momentum and the membership rule change he suddenly found himself leader.

[Kurosagi]

2 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

I guess the calculation, rightly or wrongly, might be that labour has a better chance of winning the seats it needs to win by shifting to the middle, and doing the patriotic flag waving thing. I don't know but I expect most of the left wing vote is from younger voters, graduates etc, who live in cities which are pretty safe labour seats anyway...whereas labour need to win in towns where population tends to be older and not so left wing?

I've not seen the breakdowns beyond the headline support in the polls for things like windfall tax etc. I would hazard a guess that inflation and the current cost of living crisis is having a cut through beyond young left voters and could have a lasting impact come the next election.

[Kurosagi]

2 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Apparently they had a meeting to decide who should run for the left, McDonnell had done it before so corbyn said he'd do it.

Ha, didn't know that. That's a sliding doors moment right there, can't imagine McDonnell would have made such a mess of the brexit referendum, wouldn't have given the opportunity for the Johnson mess. But then Corbyn had the better name to fit the chants, so there's that.

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, Kurosagi said:

I've not seen the breakdowns beyond the headline support in the polls for things like windfall tax etc. I would hazard a guess that inflation and the current cost of living crisis is having a cut through beyond young left voters and could have a lasting impact come the next election.

Labour policy at the moment is for a windfall tax against energy firms which is supported by a majority of the electorate. 
 

 

[fraybentos1]

1 hour ago, mattiloy said:

No response to your hypocrisy @Ozanne?

 

1 hour ago, Ozanne said:

There’s no point replying to you as you aren’t discussing in good faith. You have made up something that I’ve said to drive your narrative so I won’t engage.

'Not arguing in good faith' equals I have no idea how to respond to this so I'll put my fingers in my ears.

[Kurosagi]

8 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Labour policy at the moment is for a windfall tax against energy firms which is supported by a majority of the electorate.

I was probably being clumsy earlier. My wariness with Starmer, probably somewhat similar to @mattiloy's view, is that Starmer has picked fights with the left to do a Kinnock style clearing house behind the scenes at the very time that the cost of living crisis has created a resurgence of interest in left wing policies amongst the general population (tories and labour alike, as your post helpfully shows). 

It's an interesting time when a majority of tory voters are essentially waving their hands in the air for a socialist policy. And you're right, it is Starmer's policy and it is good for labour that tory voters are gobbling it up. But it's a long standing policy of the left that most previous labour leaders would also have pushed.

If I'm to be constructively critical, I can't help but think that a 'stronger' leader should be trying to keep all wings of the party in the tent as they build momentum across the country before taking power.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Kurosagi said:

I was probably being clumsy earlier. My wariness with Starmer, probably somewhat similar to @mattiloy's view, is that Starmer has picked fights with the left to do a Kinnock style clearing house behind the scenes at the very time that the cost of living crisis has created a resurgence of interest in left wing policies amongst the general population (tories and labour alike, as your post helpfully shows). 

It's an interesting time when a majority of tory voters are essentially waving their hands in the air for a socialist policy. And you're right, it is Starmer's policy and it is good for labour that tory voters are gobbling it up. But it's a long standing policy of the left that most previous labour leaders would also have pushed.

If I'm to be constructively critical, I can't help but think that a 'stronger' leader should be trying to keep all wings of the party in the tent as they build momentum across the country before taking power.

I get those concerns, I would imagine that in Labour focus groups they are hearing about views of certain parts of the Labour and are acting to address that (also partly self preservation to prevent another Corbyn style leader again).

You are right that a stronger leader would’ve been able to unite the Party but Starmer isn’t perfect and this is one of the weaknesses in some regards. Although I would imagine he would argue it’s a version of strong leadership, clearing out the Party of some of the more perceived toxic elements. The other aspect is that even if he accommodated that wing of the Party completely, are they acting in good faith? Or would they still find something to criticise him with no matter how small?

At the end of the day though this Labour Party under this leader are the best chance of kicking the Tories out of power that we currently available to us so I feel we should give them the best possible chance of doing that. 

[steviewevie]

1 minute ago, Kurosagi said:

I was probably being clumsy earlier. My wariness with Starmer, probably somewhat similar to @mattiloy's view, is that Starmer has picked fights with the left to do a Kinnock style clearing house behind the scenes at the very time that the cost of living crisis has created a resurgence of interest in left wing policies amongst the general population (tories and labour alike, as your post helpfully shows). 

It's an interesting time when a majority of tory voters are essentially waving their hands in the air for a socialist policy. And you're right, it is Starmer's policy and it is good for labour that tory voters are gobbling it up. But it's a long standing policy of the left that most previous labour leaders would also have pushed.

If I'm to be constructively critical, I can't help but think that a 'stronger' leader should be trying to keep all wings of the party in the tent as they build momentum across the country before taking power.

when people want more left wing policies what does that mean? They want more state spending? They want higher taxes to pay for it? They want energy companies to be state owned? Are Tory voters really clamouring for socialist policies?! We'll see. Seems a bit optimistic to me. Maybe some of the so called red wall voters who voted tory to get brexit done...maybe. In the end labour are doing better in the polls recently, how long that lasts depends on lots of factors...but I'm not sure being more left wing will help them.

[Kurosagi]

11 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Are Tory voters really clamouring for socialist policies?! We'll see.

Nope, wouldn't suggest they're clamouring for it. However, I am enjoying seeing voters aligning with what's more in their interest if that makes sense i.e. we've had years of voters putting in the tories when it demonstrably hurts their interests (socialism for the rich, austerity for the rest of us etc.).

I suppose I'm wrestling with what is essentially a branding issue: if it's branded left wing or socialist it puts centre-right people off. Presumably because of the easy associations made with the 70s.

18 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

At the end of the day though this Labour Party under this leader are the best chance of kicking the Tories out of power that we currently available to us so I feel we should give them the best possible chance of doing that.

Agreed, but I personally would be happier if the anti-Corbyn kicking took a rest. For some of us old-timers it was the first time in decades that we've been able to vote labour without having to grimace and hold our noses.

[steviewevie]

7 minutes ago, Kurosagi said:

Nope, wouldn't suggest they're clamouring for it. However, I am enjoying seeing voters aligning with what's more in their interest if that makes sense i.e. we've had years of voters putting in the tories when it demonstrably hurts their interests (socialism for the rich, austerity for the rest of us etc.).

I assume people want better services and more stuff...but the complications arises with how we pay for it.

Johnson is all for spend spend spend, and leaves the how to someone else to think about.

Edited February 13, 2022 by steviewevie

[Kurosagi]

23 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Johnson is all for spend spend spend, and leaves the how to someone else to think about.

Yep, he's stitched Sunak up like a kipper...and Sunak will respond with austerity 2.0 for the next 50 years!

[steviewevie]

1 hour ago, Kurosagi said:

If I'm to be constructively critical, I can't help but think that a 'stronger' leader should be trying to keep all wings of the party in the tent as they build momentum across the country before taking power.

Is that even possible? 

But I do think Starmer taking on the left is a battle that he might lose...and then fucks knows what happens after that.

[squirrelarmy]

24 minutes ago, Kurosagi said:

Yep, he's stitched Sunak up like a kipper...and Sunak will respond with austerity 2.0 for the next 50 years!

It’s not even the fact that money was spent on things that were needed. It was how much public money can be siphoned off into Spaffers mates bank accounts