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

[bickster]

13 hours ago, Demitri_C said:

Thats what im asking your position is unclear

It really isn’t 

[bickster]

4 hours ago, Jareth said:

It's absolutely absurd. Labour have gone from increased democracy to zero democracy. That the leadership can dictate who can stand is a massive back step. There has been a lot of desire on here for PR - but Labour now only allow candidates that agree with the leadership, they will never allow PR. 

It’s the leadership dictating who can’t stand not who can, that’s a bit different to what you said. But the idea of Labour being democratic was never true, organisations such as Unions or Momentum or Militant etc have always stuffed local parties with “new members” to ensure their preferred candidate got the nomination.

What is currently happening in Leicester and previously in Liverpool isn’t about the candidates politics re left or right of the party, it’s about those candidates desire to remove a layer of local democracy in removing directly elected mayors, so there is an argument  they are trying to preserve a layer of local democracy for the population. In both those cases, they want to get rid of the DEM because they don’t like the incumbent anymore, the democratically elected incumbent and nothing more. In Liverpool the DEM was Joe Anderson, he was a corrupt word removed and everyone knew it, yet Unite backed him for the nomination every single time. They should have been trying to get rid of him not the position but you know… Unions and democracy.

FWIW, I agree with you on the PR bit. Labour getting a huge majority will not help the campaign for PR.

[Jareth]

2 hours ago, bickster said:

It’s the leadership dictating who can’t stand not who can,

In fairness that is a very deceiving explanation. You block who you don't want - you allow who you want. Corbyn was a product of increased democracy in the party, the members got to choose him. As it stands, the only people allowing anyone to represent Labour at any level of power is the leadership. MPs traditionally have been the king makers, now they are again, and the only way you can be an MP is to agree with the leadership. The party is answerable to only itself. In power, I don't think that's very healthy.  

[MakemineVanilla]

Questions:

When Labour get into power after the next election, will it be with a workable majority or in a coalition?

And obviousy, should it be a coalition, which party would be aceptable?

[ml1dch]

1 hour ago, MakemineVanilla said:

Questions:

When Labour get into power after the next election, will it be with a workable majority or in a coalition?

And obviousy, should it be a coalition, which party would be aceptable?

The former as things stand, but it wouldn't take a huge amount of movement for there to be no majority. 

And I wouldn't expect any formal coalition, but an attempt to govern as a minority Government followed by another election within a year.

[ml1dch]

6 hours ago, bickster said:

It really isn’t 

Given I broadly read your point as something along the lines of "it's a video that won't appeal to hardcore politicos but might appeal to people who don't really have much of an idea about politics or pay much attention"

 

...how confident are you with your original premise now? 

Edited April 2, 2023 by ml1dch

[bickster]

4 hours ago, Jareth said:

In fairness that is a very deceiving explanation.

It really isn't. The local branches still decide who they want out of the acceptable candidates. Currently this is not an attack on the broad church, I doubt the affiliated Unions would allow that. Currently they are using it to deselect candidates who want to remove a layer of local democracy. A local Mayor gets elected on a platform and he/she should be allowed to carry on with that mandate, what these people are effectively saying is, I don't like that mandate so lets get rid of the position. How can someone interested in being more democratic want to remove a pillar of democracy because they don't like the incumbent's mandate?

At present, Starmer appears to be using it to protect local democracy, not in the party but the wider community

[bickster]

41 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

Given I broadly read your point as something along the lines of "it's a video that won't appeal to hardcore politicos but might appeal to people who don't really have much of an idea about politics or pay much attention"

 

...how confident are you with your original premise now? 

Well I'm at least glad one person can read to the end of a post

But yes, I see your point

[Jareth]

15 minutes ago, bickster said:

It really isn't. The local branches still decide who they want out of the acceptable candidates. 

Islington North too? What about Paul Mason being parachuted into a Welsh seat?  

[ml1dch]

41 minutes ago, Jareth said:

What about Paul Mason being parachuted into a Welsh seat?  

He isn't is he? I thought he put himself forward and didn't even make the longlist for selection?

Edited April 2, 2023 by ml1dch

[chrisp65]

1 hour ago, Jareth said:

Islington North too? What about Paul Mason being parachuted into a Welsh seat?  

 

1 hour ago, ml1dch said:

He isn't is he? I thought he put himself forward and didn't even make the longlist for selection?

Yeah weird innit, he wanted to be the MP for a constituency plagued by second home owners killing communities.

He targeted that specific seat because he has a second home there.

[Jareth]

1 hour ago, ml1dch said:

He isn't is he? I thought he put himself forward and didn't even make the longlist for selection?

My bad - yer right. 

[markavfc40]

Given what is happening with the SNP you've got to be looking at Labour picking up plenty of their seats at the next election.

It is all falling into place nicely for Labour isn't it without them having to do too much other than look reasonably competent. 

[Amsterdam_Neil_D]

4 minutes ago, markavfc40 said:

Given what is happening with the SNP you've got to be looking at Labour picking up plenty of their seats at the next election.

It is all falling into place nicely for Labour isn't it without them having to do too much other than look reasonably competent. 

Open goal now,  SNP are finished as political force now IMO.

A few stragglers will go to the frankly insane ALBA party but not many as there is clearly something wrong with Salmond.

[ml1dch]

 

Hopefully winning over that one focus group in Mansfield means that all this horrible shit ends up being worthwhile. 

[Jareth]

To personalise it to Sunak, in a week when the right are merrily stating child abusing gangs are composed mostly of ethnic minorities - is pretty grim. I'd be fascinated to hear the Labour defence of this. 

[Amsterdam_Neil_D]

9 hours ago, Jareth said:

To personalise it to Sunak, in a week when the right are merrily stating child abusing gangs are composed mostly of ethnic minorities - is pretty grim. I'd be fascinated to hear the Labour defence of this. 

I don't know why but some Labour shadow cabinet don't interview well and come across unprepared and seem to think they can run the interview down the subjects they want to highlight.

Lucy Powell got destroyed on BBC Breakfast today.  "Do you stand by the tweet yes or know",  would not answer. 
The tweet will damage Labour far more than the Tories now.  The tweet seems out of character for Labour and a mistake.

[desensitized43]

13 hours ago, ml1dch said:

 

Hopefully winning over that one focus group in Mansfield means that all this horrible shit ends up being worthwhile. 

You mean that group of right wing skinheads that weren’t going to vote labour anyway?

[Amsterdam_Neil_D]

13 hours ago, ml1dch said:

 

Hopefully winning over that one focus group in Mansfield means that all this horrible shit ends up being worthwhile. 

It will damage Labour more than anyone else.
A child like attempt at being clever on Twitter.

[meregreen]

It was a silly tweet, especially as there’s a debate to be had about the number of child abusers escaping gaol. It will also, despite the best efforts of the Tory press, be forgotten in a week. People have far more concerns in their lives at the moment to argue over tweets.