The Labour Party. All discussion here please

[Anna B]

3 hours ago, tinfoilhat said:

But clearly, people don't want a labour government. Look at the Tories. Just take 5 minutes to look at the halfwits who have  had ministerial roles over the past couple of years. Take another 5 minutes and cast your eyes over a decade of austerity. Then look at the leadership.

 

Then ask yourself why Labour hasn't won an election. Is it really because ed Miliband couldn't eat a bacon sandwich? Is it because corbyn is so prone to media gaffs (my god, I typed "prone" and media gaffs came up on it's own) and he is the very best the Labour party can come up with or is it because the country feels safest down the middle.

 

I say down the middle, brexit has tossed out the handbook. But still he can't get ahead in the polls. I'd be embarrassed and pass the torch on if you can't get ahead against the maybot and her merry team of incompetent ****wits.

 

This bunch of independents might rock the boat until the next election then theyre all out on their electoral ears. Then it's business as usual with two parties with internal divisions, the country going nowhere fast and Labour in opposition. Again.

A lot of people do want a Labour government, especially with Corbyn in charge, we're just being told different.

Similarly, I agree the Tories are halfwits who have cocked things up over and over again, created austerity politics and have the worst leader ever, but you wouldn't know it from the media who are generally supportive of Mrs May no matter how inept

 

I also agree that the British electorate are by nature probably middle hugging moderates, but the Tories have moved seriously to the right, but Brexit has dominated the agenda, so that, and  the unmitigated bias of the media has masked  it.  

[Bob Arctor]

47 minutes ago, tinfoilhat said:

Even trump and/or corbyn are only ****ing about round the edges, they’re both just waving something appealing in one hand, knowing full well they’re going to have to shake hands with the global economy on with the other. There isn’t a politician on the planet who has the will or support to do what really needs doing, and it needs to be global. You’re dead right with your last sentence.

I wouldn't consider Trump or Corbyn to be radicals. Of the Labour front bench, John McDonnell is probably the most radical thinker in that he is interested in new ideas and willing to explore them, but I doubt he's radical enough to meet the challenges we're going to face.

[ECCOnoob]

Waaaa media bias....  waaaaa its all just so unfair.     waaaa Jeremy is treated so badly by  the press. 

 

Goodness sake.  Change the record Anna.     Have you seen what Teresa May gets on a daily basis?    You are aware that papers such as The Mirror and The Guardian exist right?

 

NOT ENOUGH want Corbyn's Labour.   That is the simple fact.   IF they did they would have stormed in front at the last election.  They didn't.       They would be getting repeated polling figures showing a landslide over the tories.  Guess what, they arn't.

 

Corbyn is a marmite leader and despite your wild assertions and completely inaccurate statements its not all the doing of the press.  Its simply because he is crap.  

 

His hypocracy, his childish tantrums, his decision making (or more accurate, dithering), his dubious connections and company, his history, his inexperience and his incompetence is out there for everyone to see with people perfectly capable of making their own minds irrelevant of what the press try to assert upon them.

 

He is a failure.  He has turned a successful party with mass appeal to the wider electorate to a rediculous and ever increasing personality cult who now barely can keep level in the polls with what those very same "media" are declaring the most shambolic tory government in history .

 

You really think that kind of failed performace is a signal that Saint Jezza is the new Messiah just ready and waiting to be our PM of choice?     I dont think so.

 

 

 

Edited February 21, 2019 by ECCOnoob

[tinfoilhat]

1 hour ago, Anna B said:

A lot of people do want a Labour government, especially with Corbyn in charge, we're just being told different.

Similarly, I agree the Tories are halfwits who have cocked things up over and over again, created austerity politics and have the worst leader ever, but you wouldn't know it from the media who are generally supportive of Mrs May no matter how inept

 

I also agree that the British electorate are by nature probably middle hugging moderates, but the Tories have moved seriously to the right, but Brexit has dominated the agenda, so that, and  the unmitigated bias of the media has masked  it.  

Not enough people want a labour government - given recent election results that's pretty self evident.

1 hour ago, Bob Arctor said:

I wouldn't consider Trump or Corbyn to be radicals. Of the Labour front bench, John McDonnell is probably the most radical thinker in that he is interested in new ideas and willing to explore them, but I doubt he's radical enough to meet the challenges we're going to face.

Corbyn is more radical than most of our political leaders since Thatcher, but given the state of the planet it needs something more radical than him or McDonnell.

[Longcol]

3 hours ago, WiseOwl182 said:

Has it though? Really? You're deluded. The 1970s were surely much worse and generally living standards have only improved with time.

In the early to mid 70's it was easy to get a non-skilled labouring job that paid £50 a week top line - about £400pw today.  Housing costs were fairly minimal  - rents were cheap or if you were buying tax relief on the mortgage interest (MIRAS) was very generous - pubs / clubs were full most nights - cars / holidays abroad / household appliances were becoming affordable to the average family for the first time...........

[Top Cats Hat]

4 hours ago, WiseOwl182 said:

Has it though? Really? You're deluded. The 1970s were surely much worse and generally living standards have only improved with time.

That depends on who you are! 

 

One of the biggest changes from those times is a job and a pension for life. Now most jobs are on renewable contracts and a large number of new jobs are zero hours contracts with very little security. Also we had much more society in the 70s. Community cohesion was far stronger then. Demographic changes now spread people out all over the place where they feel isolated and unsupported.

 

In the '70s you could get into a good school and get a good education and go on and do what you wanted even if you were poor. Now in many areas you have to pay a premium for your house or the rent you pay to get your child into a decent school.

 

In the '70s if you were bright enough, you could get into college or university and your local authority would pay your fees and in many cases pay you a maintenance grant. 

 

In the '70s we could all turn on our televisions and watch football, cricket, boxing, Formula One. Now if you want to watch any of those things you have to pay Rupert Murdoch for the privelige. And even if you pay for your football or boxing, if there is a top match or fight on, you have to pay even more.

 

We are being mugged off all over the place.

 

These are mainly economic advantages. If you were black, Asian, Jewish, LBGTQ, disabled or a woman maybe things were not so great but most people were better off.

[blake]

On 19/02/2019 at 12:48, banjodeano said:

 

I hear George Galloway has asked to come back to the fold, a man i have a lot of respect for

I kind of like Galloway too. He does at least have a sense of theatre, and even if he talks nonsense, at least he does it  with some style. Together with P.G. Wodehouse, and never having been a particular fan of TS Eliot,  all things considered, George Galloway is my favourite antisemite. 

 

I'm not  surprised if they're letting him back in together with Derek Hatton as it just confirms what everybody has now known for years - that left wing racist Jew haters like those two are warmly welcomed, in today's Jeremy Corbyn Labour party. 

[melthebell]

47 minutes ago, blake said:

I kind of like Galloway too. He does at least have a sense of theatre, and even if he talks nonsense, at least he does it  with some style. Together with P.G. Wodehouse, and never having been a particular fan of TS Eliot,  all things considered, George Galloway is my favourite antisemite. 

 

I'm not  surprised if they're letting him back in together with Derek Hatton as it just confirms what everybody has now known for years - that left wing racist Jew haters like those two are warmly welcomed, in today's Jeremy Corbyn Labour party. 

Why? Did he mention the Israeli state?

[banjodeano]

43 minutes ago, blake said:

I kind of like Galloway too. He does at least have a sense of theatre, and even if he talks nonsense, at least he does it  with some style. Together with P.G. Wodehouse, and never having been a particular fan of TS Eliot,  all things considered, George Galloway is my favourite antisemite. 

 

I'm not  surprised if they're letting him back in together with Derek Hatton as it just confirms what everybody has now known for years - that left wing racist Jew haters like those two are warmly welcomed, in today's Jeremy Corbyn Labour party. 

Can you direct me to one link where Galloway shows any hatred to the Jewish people? or Hatton for that matter..

Of course you will find them stating their outrage on Israel breaking international law, but that is not the same is it?

Its pretty much like me stating i hate the fact that American governments try to crush smaller nations that are of the socialist persuasion, but i dont hold any hatred of the American people

[Robin-H]

8 hours ago, Top Cats Hat said:

That depends on who you are! 

 

One of the biggest changes from those times is a job and a pension for life. Now most jobs are on renewable contracts and a large number of new jobs are zero hours contracts with very little security. Also we had much more society in the 70s. Community cohesion was far stronger then. Demographic changes now spread people out all over the place where they feel isolated and unsupported.

 

In the '70s you could get into a good school and get a good education and go on and do what you wanted even if you were poor. Now in many areas you have to pay a premium for your house or the rent you pay to get your child into a decent school.

 

In the '70s if you were bright enough, you could get into college or university and your local authority would pay your fees and in many cases pay you a maintenance grant. 

 

In the '70s we could all turn on our televisions and watch football, cricket, boxing, Formula One. Now if you want to watch any of those things you have to pay Rupert Murdoch for the privelige. And even if you pay for your football or boxing, if there is a top match or fight on, you have to pay even more.

 

We are being mugged off all over the place.

 

These are mainly economic advantages. If you were black, Asian, Jewish, LBGTQ, disabled or a woman maybe things were not so great but most people were better off.

I'd like to see your working on that one. So most people were better off in the 70s, unless you were a woman, or black, or Asian, or Jewish, or LGTBQ, or disabled?