news & politics:discussion

[steviewevie]

27 minutes ago, collectivisedfarming said:

He once, ill advisedly referred to individual members of Hamas as friends. Which he clarified and expressed regret. Not a big deal. 

Anyone who really thinks Corbyn, who has supported human rights and peace more than any other MP, sympathises with the aims of Hamas is either genuinely profoundly stupid or is being performative.

I don't care about the Tories. I think lathing this latest bloodshed into an optics issue or centering British politics within it is a bit suss to be honest. 

sometimes you have to have dialogue with the enemy to find a peace...and this may be true with groups like Hamas too (but I doubt it). 

But that friends with Hamas thing would be a big deal now...although I'm sure a section of the electorate would agree...

Edited October 12, 2023 by steviewevie

[Crazyfool01]

20 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

No I'm talking generally, they set traps with policies, culture wars and other areas. Take HS2 as an example, I expect they wanted him to come out and immediately say Labour will build it then the Tories can say ‘same old Labour’ etc.

I’m sure they would like him to say things that Corbyn used to say on Hamas etc but he’s not doing that. 

When do they stop worrying about what people say ? Do they wait until after they get in , at which point they’ve been elected on a manifesto and will be just like the Tory’s if they break it . What’s this need to pander to everyone?  The whole we need to move right to me is utter rubbish , we need policy’s that are sold well and benefit the electorate and move away from division 

[steviewevie]

3 minutes ago, Crazyfool01 said:

When do they stop worrying about what people say ? Do they wait until after they get in , at which point they’ve been elected on a manifesto and will be just like the Tory’s if they break it . What’s this need to pander to everyone?  The whole we need to move right to me is utter rubbish , we need policy’s that are sold well and benefit the electorate and move away from division 

never stops. There's always another election.

[steviewevie]

7 minutes ago, Crazyfool01 said:

When do they stop worrying about what people say ? Do they wait until after they get in , at which point they’ve been elected on a manifesto and will be just like the Tory’s if they break it . What’s this need to pander to everyone?  The whole we need to move right to me is utter rubbish , we need policy’s that are sold well and benefit the electorate and move away from division 

well we haven't got the manifestos yet...so...

[pink_triangle]

49 minutes ago, Crazyfool01 said:

The Tory’s will also enjoy Starmer having closer policy’s to theirs as he will continue what they want 

That’s just not true, if you ask Tory’s to pick the labour policy on this then they would choose the most pro Palestine approach possible as this gives a dividing line to fight an election, splits the Labour Party and allows them to link Starmer to the previous unpopular leader. Having the same approach pretty much nullifies any attack line.

[pink_triangle]

46 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Blinken is in Israel now...and showing full support for Israel, but I am sure behind the scenes he is asking/telling Israel to show restraint on how far they go. Not sure how much damage they can actually do to Hamas that doesn't end up killing a lot of civilians, including hostages which include kids and Americans...

Agreed the rhetoric will be very much about right to defend, but we all know what’s said in private and public are likely different.

[steviewevie]

Just now, pink_triangle said:

Agreed the rhetoric will be very much about right to defend, but we all know what’s said in private and public are likely different.

Problem is much of Israeli public are hurting and probably very much expecting a response...some more extreme than others...and so the cycle continues forever and ever until oblivion.

[pink_triangle]

11 minutes ago, Crazyfool01 said:

When do they stop worrying about what people say ? Do they wait until after they get in , at which point they’ve been elected on a manifesto and will be just like the Tory’s if they break it . What’s this need to pander to everyone?  The whole we need to move right to me is utter rubbish , we need policy’s that are sold well and benefit the electorate and move away from division 

If you take the topic of Israel/Palestine this is (rightly or wrongly) something the electorate doesn’t really care about. I can quite understand them not wanting to use political capital on such an issue, where what they say will have zero impact anyway. I’m not sure about HS2, I’m personally for it, but again don’t see it as an important issue for most. They are instead focusing on issues that matter to people, we can wish different issues matter to the electorate, but probably can’t change that now.

[steviewevie]

1 minute ago, pink_triangle said:

If you take the topic of Israel/Palestine this is (rightly or wrongly) something the electorate doesn’t really care about. I can quite understand them not wanting to use political capital on such an issue, where what they say will have zero impact anyway. I’m not sure about HS2, I’m personally for it, but again don’t see it as an important issue for most. They are instead focusing on issues that matter to people, we can wish different issues matter to the electorate, but probably can’t change that now.

I mean with HS2 that was tory policy until very recently...do Labour oppose it when Tories are in favour and then switch position as Tories do...just to be different?!

[Neil]

40 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Yeah, would be very awkward for Corbyn if he was still leader.

he'd just be taunted for being friends with hamas.

[pink_triangle]

34 minutes ago, collectivisedfarming said:

He once, ill advisedly referred to individual members of Hamas as friends. Which he clarified and expressed regret. Not a big deal. 

Anyone who really thinks Corbyn, who has supported human rights and peace more than any other MP, sympathises with the aims of Hamas is either genuinely profoundly stupid or is being performative.

I don't care about the Tories. I think lathing this latest bloodshed into an optics issue or centering British politics within it is a bit suss to be honest. 

The electorate had 2 opportunities to choose Corbyn and chose not to. He was a drag on labour as a band, the Tory’s are not trying to link Starmer with Jez because it gives the electorate a warm and fuzzy feeling. 
 

Foreign affairs are an issue of politics, always have been and always will be. The Labour Party exists to get power and sometimes involves pragmatism. 

 

[Crazyfool01]

The movement to the right scares me as does peoples acceptance that it needs to happen . 

[Skip997]

Just now, Crazyfool01 said:

The movement to the right scares me as does peoples acceptance that it needs to happen . 

I'm with you on this.

We no longer have a viable left wing party in this country. It's a choice of right or further right.

Been telling people this was coming for years and no one listens or seems to care.

[gizmoman]

On 10/11/2023 at 6:13 AM, philipsteak said:

It's certainly possible and you're right, there's nothing wrong with a healthy dose of cynicism, but you leapt beyond that to "this was definitely a set up" and the evidence for this (as far as I could work out, he took his jacket off and came out with a good line. Oh, and of course, it fits in with your views) sounds about as plausible as the "evidence" that conspiracy theorists generally come out with

The main issue I have is the fact the BBC reporter used the "rolling his sleeves up and getting stuck in" line before he had actually done it, a bit like they reported the WTC7 collapse before it happened on 9/11. Maybe BBC reporters are just psychic.

[steviewevie]

9 minutes ago, Skip997 said:

I'm with you on this.

We no longer have a viable left wing party in this country. It's a choice of right or further right.

Been telling people this was coming for years and no one listens or seems to care.

Starmer's labour is more left wing than Blair's.

Discuss.

[fraybentos1]

5 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

The main issue I have is the fact the BBC reporter used the "rolling his sleeves up and getting stuck in" line before he had actually done it, a bit like they reported the WTC7 collapse before it happened on 9/11. Maybe BBC reporters are just psychic.

Maybe rolling up your sleeves is a very common metaphor. Numpty.

[steviewevie]

.

Edited October 12, 2023 by steviewevie

[steviewevie]

8 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

The main issue I have is the fact the BBC reporter used the "rolling his sleeves up and getting stuck in" line before he had actually done it

she was reporting it as he did it, not before

[pink_triangle]

16 minutes ago, Crazyfool01 said:

The movement to the right scares me as does peoples acceptance that it needs to happen . 

It depends how you mean by movement to the right, it’s right compared to Corbyn. However I see Starmer labour as mainstream centre left, to the left of Democrats in USA. Similar to Blair/Brown labour. Certainly no more right than the SNP who seem to fool some people.

I do worry about this idea of saying they are another right wing party just leads to a Tory government. I see Starmer as a very able politician and one who is there for the right reasons, he could earn way more money doing something different.

[steviewevie]

18 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

It depends how you mean by movement to the right, it’s right compared to Corbyn. However I see Starmer labour as mainstream centre left, to the left of Democrats in USA. Similar to Blair/Brown labour. Certainly no more right than the SNP who seem to fool some people.

I do worry about this idea of saying they are another right wing party just leads to a Tory government. I see Starmer as a very able politician and one who is there for the right reasons, he could earn way more money doing something different.

yeah, it's kind of just lazy...now that policies are coming out they aren't really right wing. Money is tighter than when Blair got in, but they are still making the case for massive borrowing to invest, are increasing some taxes although admittedly limited, are bringing in new workers rights, collective bargaining and a new minimum wage. They are promising to build new homes and new towns, a state owned green energy company, devolving more power to towns and cities, and renationalising the railways. And we haven't had the manifesto yet. As Ozanne says they are being very cautious not to fall into any Tory traps so not necessarily reversing things (except 2035 electric car thing?), because they are sh*t scared of being caught out with being big spenders and so big tax risers and then losing yet another election. People just say he's right wing because he isn't corbyn and he isn't nationalising everything and taxing high earners and scrapping student fees, and because he speaks to the sun or shows support for Israel after a shocking Hamas attack just a few days ago.

Edited October 12, 2023 by steviewevie

[Ommadawn]

Would people here say Keir Starmer is more or less right wing compared to John Smith who was rightly seen as a PM in waiting before his untimely death? If I remember rightly, Labour were ahead in the polls (largely due to the unpopularity of the Tories). It seems to me similar to the situation we have now.

[lost]

5 minutes ago, Ommadawn said:

Would people here say Keir Starmer is more or less right wing compared to John Smith who was rightly seen as a PM in waiting before his untimely death? If I remember rightly, Labour were ahead in the polls (largely due to the unpopularity of the Tories). It seems to me similar to the situation we have now.

Less but I don't think you can compare because:

1) The overton window moves over time.

2) Kinnock was 22 points ahead of Major at one point and still lost.

[steviewevie]

what were John Smith's policies? I was around...I remember him...but it was the 90s man...

Edited October 12, 2023 by steviewevie

[lost]

Also depends if you mean economically or socially. For example gay marriage being introduced under Cameron but would of been thought too extreme under John Smith for labour.

[cellar]

1 hour ago, lazyred said:

I was answering your final sentance about Hamas acting out of desperation whereas I think they have a strategy. 

On the last 50 years I think it was part of the cold war with the US backing Isreal and USSR backing Arab Govts and various terrorist groups. Even now this is about regional powers involving Iran, Saudis and Isreal. The Palestinians have always been pawns in a bigger game. 

Their problem is old allies slowly losing interest as time passes. Egypt and Jordan made peace with Isreal as did the PLO to some extent. More recently some African and Gulf states have gone the same way. This only ends with recognising Isreal is here to stay and doing a peace deal. 

Ahh gotcha. Yeah I think everything you've said here makes sense. But I don't think being desperate and having a strategy are mutually exclusive - I am sure like you say they will have anticipated the response and will have hoped to capitalise on it.