news & politics:discussion

[Ommadawn]

6 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

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

From his Wiki -

After Labour leader Neil Kinnock resigned following the Party's surprise loss in the 1992 general election to new Conservative leader John Major, Smith was elected his successor in July 1992. He continued Kinnock's moves to reform Labour, abolishing the trade union block vote at Labour party conferences and replacing it with "one member, one vote" at the 1993 party conference. However, his overall cautious approach to reform, which was dubbed "one more heave", sought to avoid controversy and win the next election by capitalising on the unpopularity of the Conservative government. This frustrated Tony Blair and Gordon Brown as well as Peter Mandelson.

Following Smith's sudden death in May 1994, he was succeeded as leader by Blair, who led the party to victory at the next general election in 1997.

It doesn't say that much about his policies unfortunately.

Edited October 12, 2023 by Ommadawn

[fred quimby]

45 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 your TV is out of sync 😁

[fraybentos1]

11 minutes ago, Ommadawn said:

From his Wiki -

After Labour leader Neil Kinnock resigned following the Party's surprise loss in the 1992 general election to new Conservative leader John Major, Smith was elected his successor in July 1992. He continued Kinnock's moves to reform Labour, abolishing the trade union block vote at Labour party conferences and replacing it with "one member, one vote" at the 1993 party conference. However, his overall cautious approach to reform, which was dubbed "one more heave", sought to avoid controversy and win the next election by capitalising on the unpopularity of the Conservative government. This frustrated Tony Blair and Gordon Brown as well as Peter Mandelson.

Following Smith's sudden death in May 1994, he was succeeded as leader by Blair, who led the party to victory at the next general election in 1997.

It doesn't say that much about his policies unfortunately.

Smith would have won, just maybe not as convincingly as Blair did 

[steviewevie]

17 hours ago, Crazyfool01 said:

Fake news 

apparently very much true.

[Ommadawn]

1 hour ago, steviewevie said:

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?!

I would prefer it if they just simply said whether they were in favour or not. It's an area that affects a large number of their traditional supporters. To simply not commit to either yes or no makes the leadership look weak. Hopefully things will become clearer nearer the election.

Edited October 12, 2023 by Ommadawn

[steviewevie]

4 minutes ago, Ommadawn said:

I would prefer it if they just simply said whether they were in favour or not. It's an area that affects a large number of their traditional supporters. To simply not commit to either yes or no makes the leadership look weak. Hopefully things will become clearer nearer the election.

it's not happening. So over budget and money already been allocated for other things. RIP HS2.

[Neil]

1 hour ago, Crazyfool01 said:

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

i've seen enough lost elections to know that a movement to the right needed to happen, the electorate is what the electorate is. it'll keep voting stupid if you give it a stupid option.

[Ozanne]

1 hour ago, steviewevie said:

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.

It’s also the case that Labour offered 2 left wing manifestos which were roundly rejected by the electorate so of course Labour needed to shift more towards the centre. They would be morons to carry on with the same policy offering after those defeats.

Labour also realise as they did under Blair that elections are won mainly from the centre in the UK so they need adapt their policy offering to be in-line with that. It isn’t to say that it will be a purely centrist manifesto, it will possibly be more left wing than people realise but there’s a reasoning why they are doing what they are doing. 

[Rufus Gwertigan]

21 hours ago, steviewevie said:

 

f**king jazz bucket. Thankfully we never did the same in Northern Ireland. Just lost my vote.

[fraybentos1]

1 hour ago, steviewevie said:

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.

You're totally ignoring the fact that he got elected labour leader while pledging to implement some of these radical policies. He outright lied, there's no doubt about it. Don't bother saying well covid blah blah or the economic picture has changed blah blah. He had no intention of doing it. It's no wonder people are/were annoyed.

[Neil]

2 minutes ago, fraybentos1 said:

You're totally ignoring the fact that he got elected labour leader while pledging to implement some of these radical policies. He outright lied, there's no doubt about it. Don't bother saying well covid blah blah or the economic picture has changed blah blah. He had no intention of doing it. It's no wonder people are/were annoyed.

Those people were always going to be annoyed by anyone that wasn't his jezness.

[fraybentos1]

13 minutes ago, Neil said:

Those people were always going to be annoyed by anyone that wasn't his jezness.

or maybe it is just plain deceitful? I notice you've just totally ignored my simple point to bang on again about Corbyn. Everything you say comes back to Corbyn, snp or (for a period) guns n roses. Change the record!

[Rufus Gwertigan]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-67087861

Sounds like 15 minute cities. Call the cops.

[Ozanne]

39 minutes ago, Neil said:

Those people were always going to be annoyed by anyone that wasn't his jezness.

His main pledge was to make the Labour electable/ready for government and he’s doing that much quicker than anyone thought was possible.

It’s no shock that the membership that elected Corbyn voted for a leftist leadership candidate. The country though roundly rejected those left policies twice so Labour had to move away from them. 

[steviewevie]

54 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

It’s also the case that Labour offered 2 left wing manifestos which were roundly rejected by the electorate so of course Labour needed to shift more towards the centre. They would be morons to carry on with the same policy offering after those defeats.

Labour also realise as they did under Blair that elections are won mainly from the centre in the UK so they need adapt their policy offering to be in-line with that. It isn’t to say that it will be a purely centrist manifesto, it will possibly be more left wing than people realise but there’s a reasoning why they are doing what they are doing. 

wasn't really roundly rejected in 2017.

[Ozanne]

23 minutes ago, Rufus Gwertigan said:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-67087861

Sounds like 15 minute cities. Call the cops.

This is actually very important, we need the infrastructure round the houses too. 

[Ozanne]

Just now, steviewevie said:

wasn't really roundly rejected in 2017.

I mean Labour in 2017 couldn’t beat Theresa May and were nowhere near the largest party. May was awful so if the country were chomping at the bit for those policies then it should’ve been easy (arguably if you had a better leader in 2017 that might have changed things).

[steviewevie]

48 minutes ago, Neil said:

Those people were always going to be annoyed by anyone that wasn't his jezness.

I mean, he did tell some fibs, no doubt about it....but a man's got to do what a man's got to do...

[philipsteak]

4 hours 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. 

https://megaphone.link/NSR6112440939

This is an interesting discussion (Conflicted Podcast) about it. It's also a very interesting podcast generally. I don't always agree with them and the jokiness can be a bit annoying at times but they do know what they are talking about, certainly more than me! I've learnt a lot from them.

(basically what you said, Iran and Saudi Arabia, mostly Iran)

[philipsteak]

3 hours ago, fraybentos1 said:

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

Thanks, saved me having to bother replying.

2 hours ago, fred quimby said:

Maybe your TV is out of sync 😁

That sounds like just the sort of sneaky, underhand thing the mainstream media would do!

[steviewevie]

 

[steviewevie]

7 minutes ago, philipsteak said:

https://megaphone.link/NSR6112440939

This is an interesting discussion (Conflicted Podcast) about it. It's also a very interesting podcast generally. I don't always agree with them and the jokiness can be a bit annoying at times but they do know what they are talking about, certainly more than me! I've learnt a lot from them.

(basically what you said, Iran and Saudi Arabia, mostly Iran)

I'll have a listen to that...thanks.

This is interesting too although no doubt someone will come back with baldy centrist w*nkers or something...anyway two podcasts about history of zionism which tries to be impartial on the whole israel/palestine thing...but probably won't be for everyone..

Origin Story: Zionism Part 1 on Apple Podcasts

Origin Story: Zionism Part 2 on Apple Podcasts

[philipsteak]

2 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

I'll have a listen to that...thanks.

This is interesting too although no doubt someone will come back with baldy centrist w*nkers or something...anyway two podcasts about history of zionism which tries to be impartial on the whole israel/palestine thing...but probably won't be for everyone..

Origin Story: Zionism Part 1 on Apple Podcasts

Origin Story: Zionism Part 2 on Apple Podcasts

One of the presenters is a former Jihadi turned Mi6 double agent originally from Saudi Arabia, the other is an American former Orthodox monk (he still follows Orthodox Christianity but isn't a monk anymore). 

They're an interesting pair.

[steviewevie]

3 minutes ago, philipsteak said:

One of the presenters is a former Jihadi turned Mi6 double agent originally from Saudi Arabia, the other is an American former Orthodox monk (he still follows Orthodox Christianity but isn't a monk anymore). 

They're an interesting pair.

blimey.

[steviewevie]

For @Neil