snowychap Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 16 minutes ago, Chindie said: Officially of course you vote for an individual but the practical reality will be for the vast majority of voters that they vote for the party. I would think the number of voters that support (or even frankly have experience of) their MP personally is going to be vanishingly small. Again, that's their problem. It is also their problem if they choose not to go and see the MP that they didn't vote for to ask for their assistance. Our MPs are our representatives, whether or not we have voted for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 3 minutes ago, snowychap said: But that election was played out in the circumstances that were relevant at the time, i.e. that both parties had the same view about article 50 and leaving the EU. What if there had been an actual campaign against the invocation of A50? Sure, it may have played out as you've suggested but an actual campaign may well have changed things dramatically. Add in to that the idea that the 'leave constituency' thing now is being seriously questioned, i.e. it isn't necessary for a labour MP in a constituency that may have voted leave to advocate 'leave' in order to win that seat. Clearly we are talking about counterfactuals, but the reality is that essentially every newspaper in the land supports Brexit, mostly of the hard variety, and I personally have no doubt that they would have kicked Labour from pillar to post. Remember how judges ruling that parliament should even have a vote at all were 'enemies of the people'? A further counterfactual I also believe, though this one is of necessity based less in empirical evidence, is that since lots of people in the Labour party quite firmly believe that there is a solid democratic mandate for Brexit, fighting the triggering of article 50 in 2017 might well have led to a splinter of the same size or even larger back then. Of course that's hypothetical, but it's hardly unimaginable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 This raises the question of where one should direct complaints of racism in respect of the new grouping. I suspect the answer is "there is no channel for dealing with this". I wonder if they are keeping stats on the number of complaints of racism made against their number, the proportion of their group against whom complaints have been made, the outcome of investigations, and the sanctions levied against them. I rather suspect they won't be bothering with any of that stuff. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 1 minute ago, HanoiVillan said: Clearly we are talking about counterfactuals, but the reality is that essentially every newspaper in the land supports Brexit, mostly of the hard variety, and I personally have no doubt that they would have kicked Labour from pillar to post. Remember how judges ruling that parliament should even have a vote at all were 'enemies of the people'? A further counterfactual I also believe, though this one is of necessity based less in empirical evidence, is that since lots of people in the Labour party quite firmly believe that there is a solid democratic mandate for Brexit, fighting the triggering of article 50 in 2017 might well have led to a splinter of the same size or even larger back then. Of course that's hypothetical, but it's hardly unimaginable. I take your points though I still think that you write off the potential opposing arguments in the light of a truth already made. As far as the practicalities of supporting invoking A50, that was done before the GE, wasn't it? It was done when a GE was specifically ruled out by the PM, wasn't it? Support for it can't have been an electoral ploy, can it? - It was a political decision made by the leadership of the Labour party at the time. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 20 minutes ago, PompeyVillan said: I don't think they do so with that intention though to be honest snowy. I think a vast majority believe they are voting for a party. I'd go further than that, I'd say a good few people see the tv analysis of Corbyn vs May and think they're voting for a president. Many do indeed just vote for the blue or red rosette. Some vote tactically against the candidate they can't stomach. I think a relatively small number of people vote for the local individual candidate. Would be interesting to ask two questions on an exit poll. Which party did you vote for? What was the candidate's name? I personally woke up to Labour putting up absolute career donkeys in my local const., and I switched my vote accordingly. When they put up someone that knows the area and can think for themselves, I'll give them another punt. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 10 minutes ago, peterms said: I suspect the answer is "there is no channel for dealing with this". Does the Scottish Green Party not give you an avenue for your complaint? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NurembergVillan Posted February 18, 2019 Moderator Share Posted February 18, 2019 3 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: I'd go further than that, I'd say a good few people see the tv analysis of Corbyn vs May and think they're voting for a president. Many do indeed just vote for the blue or red rosette. Some vote tactically against the candidate they can't stomach. I think a relatively small number of people vote for the local individual candidate. Would be interesting to ask two questions on an exit poll. Which party did you vote for? What was the candidate's name? I personally woke up to Labour putting up absolute career donkeys in my local const., and I switched my vote accordingly. When they put up someone that knows the area and can think for themselves, I'll give them another punt. It's the footballisation of everything. Rabid partisan support or traitor. Pick your side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 4 minutes ago, snowychap said: I take your points though I still think that you write off the potential opposing arguments in the light of a truth already made. As far as the practicalities of supporting invoking A50, that was done before the GE, wasn't it? It was done when a GE was specifically ruled out by the PM, wasn't it? Support for it can't have been an electoral ploy, can it? - It was a political decision made by the leadership of the Labour party at the time. I don't think it was only an electoral ploy, and as you say the vote happened before the campaign began, though despite May's denial there were rumours that she planned to call an election throughout that winter. It was also as you say a political decision made by the leadership, that there was an easier path in acknowledging the mandate given by the referendum result. I just think that the election result validates that decision as the correct one at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted February 18, 2019 VT Supporter Share Posted February 18, 2019 23 minutes ago, snowychap said: Again, that's their problem. It is also their problem if they choose not to go and see the MP that they didn't vote for to ask for their assistance. Our MPs are our representatives, whether or not we have voted for them. Agreed (x8 ) My point was more that the practical reality should perhaps lead to updated precedents, methods, whatever. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 6 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: I don't think it was only an electoral ploy, and as you say the vote happened before the campaign began, though despite May's denial there were rumours that she planned to call an election throughout that winter. It was also as you say a political decision made by the leadership, that there was an easier path in acknowledging the mandate given by the referendum result. I just think that the election result validates that decision as the correct one at the time. I am minded to agree with some of what you say but doesn't that feed back in to the idea that the A50 thing was a political decision made by the leadership of the Labour Party, likely without influence from the Tory party's thoughts on a GE? Again, saying that the 'election result validates...' is just doubling down on what you've already claimed, isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 18 minutes ago, Chindie said: Agreed (x8 ) My point was more that the practical reality should perhaps lead to updated precedents, methods, whatever. Ah, gotcha. Apologies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted February 19, 2019 Moderator Share Posted February 19, 2019 9 hours ago, HanoiVillan said: Triggering article 50 is pretty badly glossed as 'supporting the Tories'... And I don't agree that these are some great unknowables about the election either. A 3 line whip of labour MPs to vote for a Tory government motion. hypotheticals are what they are. whatever, we clearly disagree on this little bit of the discussion. I see they’ve let that bell derek Hatton back in now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted February 19, 2019 Share Posted February 19, 2019 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted February 19, 2019 Share Posted February 19, 2019 1 hour ago, blandy said: A 3 line whip of labour MPs to vote for a Tory government motion. Triggering A50 early was a tactical mistake which undermined our negotiating position. But people like Umunna were in favour of it, they weren't pushed into supporting it by the whips against their better judgement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted February 19, 2019 Moderator Share Posted February 19, 2019 1 hour ago, peterms said: Triggering A50 early was a tactical mistake which undermined our negotiating position. But people like Umunna were in favour of it, they weren't pushed into supporting it by the whips against their better judgement. It was and it did, yes. There was, despite Corbyn's 3 line whip, quite a lot of labour rebelling done wasn't there? - was that the one where even the whips rebelled? Might be wrong, there. But anyway, there was, at the time, a strong realisation within non-Corbyn Labour that what both the Tories and the Corbynites were doing was effing idiotic. That the likes of chucky and whoever failed to do their jobs of opposition along with Corbyn and his chums who actually enthusiastically supported the tories in their idiocy was as you understate "a tactical mistake" [an act of gross negligence, appalling judgement and general stupidity]. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted February 19, 2019 Share Posted February 19, 2019 19 minutes ago, blandy said: as you understate I've always been known for understatement. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted February 19, 2019 Share Posted February 19, 2019 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desensitized43 Posted February 19, 2019 Share Posted February 19, 2019 https://news.sky.com/story/former-militant-figure-derek-hatton-readmitted-to-labour-33-years-after-being-kicked-out-11641528 Quote Former hard left politician Derek "Degsy" Hatton has told Sky News he has been readmitted to the Labour Party. The 71-year-old, a member of the Militant tendency that infiltrated Labour in the 1970s and 1980s, was expelled from the party in 1986 after being found in breach of their rules. Mr Hatton was deputy leader of Liverpool City Council, which Militant took control of in 1983. Under the Trotskyist group's direction, the council set an illegal budget in 1985 - spending more than its income - in a stand against Margaret Thatcher's government. Crazy stuff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted February 19, 2019 Moderator Share Posted February 19, 2019 19 minutes ago, desensitized43 said: Crazy stuff I think that other tube, George Galloway is also on his way back in to Labour, isn't he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts