The Chairman Mao resembling, Monarchy hating, threat to Britain, Labour Party thread

[HanoiVillan]

4 hours ago, blandy said:

Sure the polls do vary and aren’t always spot on about election results, but still, see, there you have it. You’re basically (maybe inadvertently) making the same point as me, aren’t you?

My main point was “there isn’t going to be a Corbyn government, it just isn’t going to happen” ..And you’re saying a minority Tory government led by Johnson is the very likely outcome of an election.

A minority Tory government led by Johnson is a more likely outcome than a minority Labour government as the Liberal Democrats have ruled out any formal arrangement with Labour. This means that anything other than a Labour majority is likely to see a continued Tory-led government. 

However, your point seemed to be that neither party would get a majority:

On 13/07/2019 at 13:14, blandy said:

There isn't going to be a Corbyn government. It's about as likely as the tories getting back in. It's just not going to happen.

. . . which I don't see how you can state that with the degree of confidence you do. Stating with absolute certainty that neither of the two main parties will get a majority ('it's just not going to happen') is too strong, when we don't know when the next election will be or have any way of predicting the future. 

In separate news, some recent polls have started to suggest that the '4-way tie' situation may not be the current state of affairs, for instance:

Maybe next week the average will be back to a 4-way tie; maybe in a month Labour and the Tories will be polling in the mid-30's; maybe everything will change in an election campaign. A majority for either party 'is just not going to happen' is way over-confident. 

 

3 hours ago, TrentVilla said:

But the polls are never good for Corbyn, never. That is for a reason, because he can't even reach a lot of people that have historically voted Labour let alone people that haven't.

Even when up against the worst Government in a generation he still has been utterly incapable of making an impact.

The second sentence here is categorically incorrect. The fact that Brexit hasn't happened yet is purely down to the fact that Corbyn's Labour deprived May's Tories of a majority. That's not up for debate, it's a matter of historical fact. Whether he's the right person to lead the party forward is a separate question, but depriving the governing party of a majority obviously counts as 'making an impact'. 

On your evaluation of his abilities, I probably have a different assessment, but your worries aren't baseless. However, if members of the parliamentary Labour Party feel the same way then sooner or later they need to challenge him, and 'it probably won't work, we probably won't win' isn't a good enough excuse. 

[Xann]

25 minutes ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

Still talking about the Tories here?

Tories are the same old shit. Not many from the ethnic minorities in a Farage crowd.

25 minutes ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

Neither party are bearable for me.

As it stands and historically, they'll most likely be what you'll get, plus A.N. Other(s) to make up numbers.

Spent a lot of time in hospitals with loved ones over the past decade, and why are there so many homeless people now anyway ?  

It seems like an obvious lesser of two evils choice to me.

Edited July 14, 2019 by Xann

[blandy]

15 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

I don't see how you can state that with the degree of confidence you do. Stating with absolute certainty that neither of the two main parties will get a majority ('it's just not going to happen') is too strong, when we don't know when the next election will be or have any way of predicting the future.

Fair enough. FWIW, I base it on the last few election results, including European and Local, the current and previous polls over the past couple of years, a perception I have that things have fundamentally changed as a result of the parties stances on Brexit, my assessment of the impact of Brexit, the rise of single issues such as Climate change, the impact of social media and "bunkers" created by it, the nature of the two biggest parties going to the left and right and leaving the middle empty, what's happened in Scotland, where once the Labour party used to run it, for decades, but now it's gone and stayed SNP, and of course the inadequacies of Johnson and Corbyn.

Obviously, others see things differently

20 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

your point seemed to be that neither party would get a majority:

Which seems to be what you were also saying, albeit with not certainty, just a high level of "confidence"

5 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

a minority government of one form or another is still also very likely (of course, said minority government is also almost certainly to be led by either Johnson or Corbyn, almost certainly the former). 

It's all cool. Just discussion, and perhaps my level of confidence right now will look ridiculously misplaced in the future, but I'm just writing how I see it today.

[chrisp65]

Imagine the media and the suits if sterling lost a quarter of its value over the last 5 years under a Labour administration. Whilst Honda and Ford decided to pack up and leave. Whilst British Steel went in to administration, whilst the High Street collapsed, whilst NHS waiting lists climbed, whilst we engaged imaginary ferry companies to ship in emergency medicines. Whilst someone in government or the civil service was leaking and briefing against diplomats and against the opposition, whilst being in a perpetual leadership battle between factions within the party.

I think we'd be **** close to the papers asking for some sort of military or secret service intervention.

 

[blandy]

1 minute ago, chrisp65 said:

Imagine the media and the suits if sterling lost a quarter of its value over the last 5 years under a Labour administration. Whilst Honda and Ford decided to pack up and leave. Whilst British Steel went in to administration, whilst the High Street collapsed, whilst NHS waiting lists climbed, whilst we engaged imaginary ferry companies to ship in emergency medicines. Whilst someone in government or the civil service was leaking and briefing against diplomats and against the opposition, whilst being in a perpetual leadership battle between factions within the party.

I think we'd be **** close to the papers asking for some sort of military or secret service intervention.

And the opposition would be romping it.

[chrisp65]

3 minutes ago, blandy said:

And the opposition would be romping it.

Yep.

We live in interesting times.

I genuinely fear right now that in 5 years time, these will be the good old days.

 

 

 

[bickster]

1 hour ago, HanoiVillan said:

as the Liberal Democrats have ruled out any formal arrangement with anyone

FTFY - what they said was they weren't going to be involved in a formal coalition (mainly because the last one bit them on the arse so much), That's not to say they won't have a supply and confidence arrangement with co-operation on certain issues like referendum / revoke (so referendum given Labour's policy this week, what Labour's policy will be tomorrow or whenever the GE is called is an entirely different thing.

[Xann]

15 hours ago, blandy said:

And the opposition would be romping it.

FFS - Only if they were offering the same old shit, and what f***ing good is that? 

[blandy]

2 minutes ago, Xann said:

FFS - Only if they were offering the same old shit, and what f***ing good is that? 

You know how stuff has got worse under the tories? Well the opposite of that, like when Labour made schools and the NHS and so on better. I’d settle for that as a starting point. Maybe not so war-y, maybe a bit wiser about the very wealthy, but right now I’d settle for basic competence.

[HanoiVillan]

1 hour ago, blandy said:

You know how stuff has got worse under the tories? Well the opposite of that, like when Labour made schools and the NHS and so on better. I’d settle for that as a starting point. Maybe not so war-y, maybe a bit wiser about the very wealthy, but right now I’d settle for basic competence.

The last time reheated New Labourism was tried in a party leadership election, it got crushed. However, if people in the PLP feel that it is the best way forward, then they will have to argue for it, and make a much better and more persuasive case, and then win a leadership election. 

[Dr_Pangloss]

'New Labourism' may not be the answer but neither is Corbyn and his gang of crackpots.

[Xann]

Where's everyone expecting balanced news to come from on which to base their decisions on Labour?

Are Labour really a seething mass of anti Semites, or has grass roots concern about Israel's maxing out belligerence in Lebanon been clumped onto fringe nutters?

Who can tell? Who would tell?

The BBC? Media owned by shell companies in tax havens?

I KNOW that the country's been f***ed over by the Tories who see the state machinery primarily as cash cows.

[VILLAMARV]

3 hours ago, blandy said:

like when Labour made schools and the NHS and so on better.

Que?

[bickster]

1 hour ago, Xann said:

Where's everyone expecting balanced news to come from on which to base their decisions on Labour?

Are Labour really a seething mass of anti Semites,

My own eyes, Wavertree CLP members for starters, some of whom I know

It exists, it is a problem, pretending otherwise because you don't believe what you read is daft. I've said all along some of the antisemitism thing is an over reaction, it is over blown, it is being used as a weapon BUT and its a huge BUT it also exists on a far wider scale than it exists across society, its a problem, a problem I see with my own eyes and one Labour seems reluctant to address apart form attacking anyone who dares mention it.

I don't need the media to tell me it exists

[Xann]

Just now, bickster said:

I don't need the media to tell me it exists

A bigger problem than the Tory fiasco?

[bickster]

Just now, Xann said:

A bigger problem than the Tory fiasco?

Which Tory fiasco is being overshadowed by the Labour Antisemitism fiasco? I'm not sure there is one tbh They are all getting the oxygen of publicity they deserve apart from Islamaphobia in the Tory Party, which could do with ampliifying much more but guess what, when the supposedly non-racist opposition party of equality is actually riddled with antisemitism, them shouting about Islamaphobia in the Tory Party tends not to get heard. This is the very kind of incompetence that Corbyn's Labour is all about

[Dr_Pangloss]

1 hour ago, Xann said:

Where's everyone expecting balanced news to come from on which to base their decisions on Labour?

Are Labour really a seething mass of anti Semites, or has grass roots concern about Israel's maxing out belligerence in Lebanon been clumped onto fringe nutters?

Who can tell? Who would tell?

The BBC? Media owned by shell companies in tax havens?

I KNOW that the country's been f***ed over by the Tories who see the state machinery primarily as cash cows.

In denial, seething mass no, but a problem is clearly there.

Edited July 15, 2019 by Dr_Pangloss

[TrentVilla]

19 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

The second sentence here is categorically incorrect. The fact that Brexit hasn't happened yet is purely down to the fact that Corbyn's Labour deprived May's Tories of a majority. That's not up for debate, it's a matter of historical fact. Whether he's the right person to lead the party forward is a separate question, but depriving the governing party of a majority obviously counts as 'making an impact'. 

On your evaluation of his abilities, I probably have a different assessment, but your worries aren't baseless. However, if members of the parliamentary Labour Party feel the same way then sooner or later they need to challenge him, and 'it probably won't work, we probably won't win' isn't a good enough excuse. 

I think its a one hell of a stretch to say that Brexit hasn't happened purely because of Corbyn and his Labour party. Perhaps Corbyn would like to take public ownership of that claim? It would be surprising given that he has spent several years doing his best to hide his and the parties view on Brexit from the electorate. So no, sorry I'm not accepting that as anything remotely close to historical fact.

In terms of 'making an impact' I think it was perfectly clear the context in which I said that, the above isn't it, it was in relation to being seen as an effective opposition and potential alternative Government. I think it is abundantly clear that Labour under Corbyn has failed to make any kind of impact in this regard as polls, which you are eager to reject, have consistently shown.

I can accept that you have a different view on his abilities but I think the last few years support my view more strongly. Sooner or later the Labour Party and the PLP are going to have to admit that to themselves and do something about it.

[Chindie]

I believe when surveyed Labour support is shown to be less anti-Semitic than the Tories.

Of course any anti-Semitism is too much, but still, I'd rather the figure was as low as possible.

However the prevailing narrative will have the party slightly more anti-Semitic than Hitler.

[TrentVilla]

2 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

The last time reheated New Labourism was tried in a party leadership election, it got crushed. However, if people in the PLP feel that it is the best way forward, then they will have to argue for it, and make a much better and more persuasive case, and then win a leadership election. 

But.... doesn't that perhaps mean the issue is in the Labour party and groups like Momentum?

Yes the rebranded New Labour was defeated in the last leadership contest but how exactly has that worked out for Labour since?

Perhaps the membership of the Labour party needs to think beyond its own internal ballot and think about what an electable leader looks like (I don't mean literally) because its not Corbyn.