blandy Posted October 30, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 30, 2020 3 minutes ago, Xann said: By peddling fantasy as fact on public forums. opinion as opinion, I'd say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted October 30, 2020 Share Posted October 30, 2020 5 minutes ago, blandy said: One vote. And that's without considering the voter's reasoning. Without getting personal, I don't agree with @Awol on the B word, but his reasoning was thoughtful, and not at all based around what is actually being done in the name of the B word by the Baby Eaters. He might be wrong (OK he is wrong ) but there's no "selling out the country" - that was done by the throbbers, whoppers and grifters in and around power that lied to us all.. I agree to an extent; people fooled by the throbbers, whoppers etc. But Awol has, quite often, stated his Brexit vote was ideological regardless of the detriment of the country. That's a little bit selfish in my view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted October 30, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 30, 2020 8 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said: Awol has, quite often, stated his Brexit vote was ideological regardless of the detriment of the country I must have missed that. But to get back on topic, I've heard it said that Politics and (parliamentary) voting is not a Valentine, but a game of chess - i.e. if someone simply always votes with their heart' "this is wrong, I will vote against it", rather than "this is wrong, but in this instance, abstaining, allows me to get into a position where I can win my prize later", they will never end up with what they want. Labour appears to have perhaps adopted that (chess) once more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted October 30, 2020 Share Posted October 30, 2020 1 minute ago, blandy said: opinion as opinion, I'd say. Ha - Brexit's hasn't aged well already. It's f***ing fantasy Pete. Wait til it really bites next year. Jacob Rees Mogg says Brexit benefits will take 50 years. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted October 30, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 30, 2020 3 hours ago, Awol said: @OutByEaster? We’ll see when Johnson gets hoofed next year whether the old school Tories get control back, lurch right economically and sink them for good. If they lurch any further right they'll fall off (they may already have fallen off any sort of normal scale). The worry for Labour and for Starmer is that the Conservatives will revert back to a centre right position and reclaim all of their traditional voters (the currently disgusted of Tunbridge Wells) - if they do that, Starmer will have no chance. Starmer is essentially sacrificing a proportion of traditional Labour voters in order to gain a big(ger) chunk of traditionally Conservative voters - it's what worked for Blair - but if the Tories suddenly become attractive to those voters again, Starmer is left worse off than he started. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted October 30, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 30, 2020 8 minutes ago, Xann said: Ha - Brexit's hasn't aged well already. It's f***ing fantasy Pete. Wait til it really bites next year. Jacob Rees Mogg says Brexit benefits will take 50 years. Aye, I know. We knew yonks ago. I genuinely don't blame people who voted for it, for the clusterpork, though. Some were ignorant, some blind ideologues, some nostalgic, some hold different principles in different orders to us... but absolutely everyone, leaver, remainer, undecided, was lied to by the throbbers and grifters and career opportunists - people who already held those grifters in utter contempt were always going to be more able and or willing to detect the lies and self interest than those voters whose sympathies might have been more to the right of centre. And then you had the likes of Gisella Stuart, Kate Howey and a bunch of Anti EU lefties aiding and abetting the grifters and throbbers. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted October 30, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 30, 2020 All that said, Starmer still has a real opportunity to retain more of the traditional Labour voters when he publishes his first policies - he hasn't had that opportunity yet and it could well be that the policies are much softer than the centre right presentation of the Leader. He may take Boris Johnson's lead in presenting one thing to the public through the media and having a set of policies that do the opposite thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted October 30, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 30, 2020 10 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said: Starmer is left worse off than he started. He is currently worse off than any Labour Leader since WWII 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted October 30, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 30, 2020 2 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said: The worry for Labour and for Starmer is that the Conservatives will revert back to a centre right position and reclaim all of their traditional voters (the currently disgusted of Tunbridge Wells) - if they do that, Starmer will have no chance. Starmer is essentially sacrificing a proportion of traditional Labour voters in order to gain a big(ger) chunk of traditionally Conservative voters - it's what worked for Blair - but if the Tories suddenly become attractive to those voters again, Starmer is left worse off than he started. Hmmm. I see it slightly differently, tbh. Labour clearly needed to change leader. It did that. But (and I don't keep up with the detail) I haven't detected a shift in kind of manifesto type "big policy" - there's been nothing said there at all. Some (IMO) idiots have helped Starmer by being idiotic and getting themselves de-jobbed (RLB), or having the whip taken away (hwsnbn). So that's put some kind of "signal" out that "I'm not like hwsnbn". But that's all it is really, so far. When it comes to Labour making actual policy, as opposed to (so far) making a decent, but not brilliant job of actually opposing the government's incompetence, greed, cruelty, cronyism and nest lining, I suspect the policy will not be massively different to what it was the last 2 or 3 elections. Trim some of the fluff out, make it a bit more achievable for a Government in a 5 year period, and crack on. I dunno if it'll win, given they start from -81 or whatever the number of seats is, but they'll surely do better than last time, and if the baby eaters keep stuffing up they'll have a chance of winning - especially if they are smarter about seats they can't win, but the LDs or Greens might. I don't think they need to abandon their left voters to get central voters, other than at the fringes of the left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted October 30, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 30, 2020 2 minutes ago, blandy said: I don't think they need to abandon their left voters to get central voters, other than at the fringes of the left. I agree with a lot of your post, I think maybe the biggest difference in our opinions is in how far in we'd draw the line of that fringe. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted October 30, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 30, 2020 5 minutes ago, bickster said: He is currently worse off than any Labour Leader since WWII He's currently leading a party ahead in the polls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted October 30, 2020 Share Posted October 30, 2020 2 minutes ago, blandy said: I genuinely don't blame people who voted for it.... I read the Tory thread from the very beginning and the Brexit thread from around the same time. It's cringey stuff. Even when issues were explained or balanced, many preferred the fantasy. A total collapse in critical thinking got us here, and the people are going to suffer for it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted October 30, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 30, 2020 1 minute ago, OutByEaster? said: He's currently leading a party ahead in the polls. Yes, agreed. However, I'm not sure that's that relevant right now. Let's hope his lead translates to seats in four years time. BUT in terms of votes the current Corbyn situation will only assist. It will be a very small minority of voters who care enough to not vote Labour at the next election. Come election time even the SWP types will "Vote Labour but with no allusions." The clusterf**k of Bre*** might even persuade the old red wall that they were wrong. Labour is currenly very much on the rise from a post war low but its a big hill to climb. I just hope people remember what this government have done in four years time 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted October 30, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 30, 2020 14 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said: I agree with a lot of your post, I think maybe the biggest difference in our opinions is in how far in we'd draw the line of that fringe. Yeah, accepted. I think my take comes from a perception (it might be wrong, I dunno) that a huge number of voters/people want simple things. Things like "I want to keep my job" or "I want to be paid fairly", or "I just want the trains to run properly" or "I like the Royal Family" or "I support the Armed forces" and stuff like "we need a socialist revolution" or "Solidarity with Venezuela against imperialism" don't register, or if they do, they register negatively - basically a heck of a lot of people want "things to be OK, with hope they'll get a bit better" and will vote from a party who seems to be credibly offering that. And that's why the Tories come out with all those 3 word slogans - "get Brexit done", "oven ready deal", "save the NHS". Now we might know they're lying with these slogans, but for many that's what sticks. And because "fairness" is in the eye of the beholder - "it's not fair that this person is homeless and this person is a Tory Lord" / "it's not fair that someone who works hard should pay for a scroungers Sky subscription" or whatever, there's no universal fairness agenda. Fairness isn't universal, but everybody wants their version of it. I think I'm saying for a lot of voters, they don't identify as "I'm labour" or I'm left wing" or "I'm Tory" or "I'm right wing" - they just vote for who they think will look after them and make things OK. these are the people who Starmer needs to persuade. I think Labour until December last year definitely had a problem with those people. They were sometimes slagged off, or discounted, or even considered an enemy "as not virtuous" because they didn't believe in hwsnbn. And I reckon it's a huge part of the electorate. The committed Labour voter or committed Tory voters is only a relatively smaller part of the electorate. I acknowledge there are a lot of safe seats - Mine won't change colour, even if hell freezes over, But in these times, (as we've just seen last year) even safe seats can change hands in big numbers, and that's likely to become more of a thing in the future, I reckon. Just rambling, really. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted October 30, 2020 Share Posted October 30, 2020 1 hour ago, StefanAVFC said: I agree to an extent; people fooled by the throbbers, whoppers etc. But Awol has, quite often, stated his Brexit vote was ideological regardless of the detriment of the country. That's a little bit selfish in my view. Wanting Brexit to happen because you believe it’s a better solution for national governance is no more ideological than believing EU integration is better for that purpose. Ideology literally means ‘a system of ideas and ideals, especially one which forms the basis of economic or political theory and policy.’ So in this case selfish = voting for the thing you think is best, i.e. what everyone did (unless they were at Glastonbury getting blitzed and forgot to vote). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted October 30, 2020 Share Posted October 30, 2020 1 hour ago, OutByEaster? said: If they lurch any further right they'll fall off (they may already have fallen off any sort of normal scale). Sunak instituted one of the most generous pandemic support packages in the world, with government paying 80% of wages for 11-12 million people. Necessary yes, but by any conceivable measure it wasn’t right wing economics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted October 30, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 30, 2020 5 minutes ago, Awol said: Sunak instituted one of the most generous pandemic support packages in the world, with government paying 80% of wages for 11-12 million people. Necessary yes, but by any conceivable measure it wasn’t right wing economics. And Sunak himself didn't want to do it at all, it was forced on him then he seemed to bask in the glory 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted October 30, 2020 Share Posted October 30, 2020 Just now, bickster said: And Sunak himself didn't want to do it at all, it was forced on him then he seemed to bask in the glory Fair one. I’m not giving personal credit to any of them, just trying to keep some grounding in reality. By necessity or otherwise, this is the most economically left wing Conservative government since the Conservatives became a thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted October 30, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 30, 2020 12 minutes ago, Awol said: Fair one. I’m not giving personal credit to any of them, just trying to keep some grounding in reality. By necessity or otherwise, this is the most economically left wing Conservative government since the Conservatives became a thing. In their actions yes In their ideology, absolutely the opposite When we're though the other side of this, is when the ideology will kick in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrenm Posted October 30, 2020 Share Posted October 30, 2020 It's a good job Peter Oborne isn't Labour member otherwise he would be suspended for questioning some of the EHRC findings. https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/ehrc-labour-antisemitism-starmer-corbyn-soul Quote In large measure Corbyn is being held responsible for the failures of party officials who were not just his political opponents, but also among his principal accusers when it came to allegations of antisemitism. He is being simultaneously condemned for failing to show leadership, and for interfering in the complaints procedure – even when that interference was aimed at speeding up investigations I feel like I'm living in the upside down world where white is black and black is white. The failings were quite obviously by political opponents hostile to the left, McNicol and Matthews, and once Corbyn could get Formby in, things dramatically improved. Yet no-one's mentioning this. The whole media narrative is about Corbyn. McNicol took out an advert in the Guardian criticising Corbyn for failing to get a grip on antisemitism while McNicol was GS, and Matthews was given a 3 figure pay off while the EHRC report said the email inbox for complaints he was supposed to be monitoring wasn't checked (yet gave no context to it, making it seem like a leadership failing again). Well done to Peter Oborne for having the balls to speak out. No doubt someone will be along in a minute to discredit him as a crank. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts