Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Uk Debate Mk 2, the UK's liveliest political and social debate site.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Locked Topic
Labour Leadership Contest; merged thread
Topic Started: May 15 2015, 01:02 PM (2,224 Views)
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Chuka Umunna withdraws Labour leader bid, Who is left to lead them? The BBC has been attacking UKIP and Farrage for days, but at least they have a leader. Labour are in a state of uncertainty, and we do need a good opposition in the HOC,
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Replies:
RJD
Member Avatar
Prudence and Thrift
[ *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
Labour is not experiencing a political crisis, it’s experiencing an identity crisis. It’s a party that doesn’t know who it is, who wants to be or who it should be. And after this leadership election is over it’s going to have to sit down, and find out.
- Dan Hodges

What is Labour for?

As I asked many months ago, "what is Labour for"? Hodges sums up the situation nicely. The question is how will Cooper and Corbyn now coexist in the future.

Quote:
 
Jeremy Corbyn isn’t going to ban the bomb, or drag us out of Nato, or repeal the Tory’s trade union legislation. Either the bulk of the Labour Party membership will stop him, or Labour MPs will stop him, or eventually the voters will stop him.


For those who do not know Hodges is a long standing Labourite who has his articles printed in the Torygraph.

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
Aug 6 2015, 10:16 PM
Pro Veritas
Aug 6 2015, 02:46 PM
C-too
Aug 6 2015, 02:34 PM
Until an opposition to the party and politics that dominated the UK during its economic demise in the 20th century, I guess Labour will have to have a leader and do its bit as an opposition party.
Labour are, of course, reaping what they sowed here.

Had they supported electoral reform we would no longer be stuck in the rut of a dysfunctional two-party system.

Voters have moved beyond that paradigm, hence the increased support for the SNP, Plaid Cymru, The Greens etc.

However, Labour betrayed its socialist principles and sought to maintain the broken status quo of FPTP, and it looks increasingly like they'll not manage to obtain that first place anytime soon.

All The Best
I have a preference for the FPTP system, IMO the main parties are a coalition of different people with different political opinions but who have many political opinions in common. Thus they come together to form an opposition, to take the country in a particular direction.

There is no system that will accommodate all the different political opinions.

The biggest single problem with British politics is the political bias in the media and in newspapers in particular. Until that is corrected we will not get full value from our politicians. That fact will not change just by changing the political system.

And yes, Labour will face a gigantic uphill battle to get elected, just as they did back in the 80s and 90s.
Yes and no Ctoo, for it is a well known fact that broadcasters on the BBC are unashamedly on the left, are you saying that they are not biased? you should give more credit to Joe public who is more than capable of discerning common sense and pragmatism from bullshit, voters will only vote by balancing anecdotal performances in the past with expectations in the future, sadly Labour gave the electorate no hope in May 2015......I do not blame the media for that............go speak to Ed as he had enough media coverage in the run up to the GE, or even ask Russel Brand, or search out a "edstone", I am sorry to say that Labour themselves made them unelectable and now we have no opposition worthy of note.

You cannot blame the media for that.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Rich
Aug 7 2015, 08:48 AM
it is a well known fact that broadcasters on the BBC are unashamedly on the left, are you saying that they are not biased?

I am! Or rather they are biased towards honesty and in the public interest, which their Charter demands they are.

Are you saying they should not be critical of government?
btw the BBC and Blair had a difficult relationship - which some seem to have forgotten.


Edited by Affa, Aug 7 2015, 10:25 AM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Aug 7 2015, 10:22 AM
Rich
Aug 7 2015, 08:48 AM
it is a well known fact that broadcasters on the BBC are unashamedly on the left, are you saying that they are not biased?

I am! Or rather they are biased towards honesty and in the public interest, which their Charter demands they are.

Are you saying they should not be critical of government?
btw the BBC and Blair had a difficult relationship - which some seem to have forgotten.


Well, I tend to disagree, but then beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Rich
Aug 7 2015, 11:16 AM
Affa
Aug 7 2015, 10:22 AM
Rich
Aug 7 2015, 08:48 AM
it is a well known fact that broadcasters on the BBC are unashamedly on the left, are you saying that they are not biased?

I am! Or rather they are biased towards honesty and in the public interest, which their Charter demands they are.

Are you saying they should not be critical of government?
btw the BBC and Blair had a difficult relationship - which some seem to have forgotten.


Well, I tend to disagree, but then beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
What do you disagree with?
Does the BBC break its Charter?
Do you believe that the BBC should toe the government line?
Did the BBC and the Blair government not have disagreements?
Quote:
 

The Agreement
The Agreement with the Secretary of State sits alongside the Charter. It provides detail on many of the topics outlined in the Charter and also covers the BBC's funding and its regulatory duties. The Agreement is an important constitutional document because together with the Charter, it establishes the BBC's independence from the Government.

BBC Charter and AGREED protocols.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]

I regard Conservatives attempts to re-write the BBC Charter as Political interference - based on Party dogma and not in the public interest - which is served when political interference is forbidden.

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Aug 7 2015, 11:35 AM
Rich
Aug 7 2015, 11:16 AM
Affa
Aug 7 2015, 10:22 AM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Well, I tend to disagree, but then beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
What do you disagree with?
Does the BBC break its Charter?
Do you believe that the BBC should toe the government line?
Did the BBC and the Blair government not have disagreements?
Quote:
 

The Agreement
The Agreement with the Secretary of State sits alongside the Charter. It provides detail on many of the topics outlined in the Charter and also covers the BBC's funding and its regulatory duties. The Agreement is an important constitutional document because together with the Charter, it establishes the BBC's independence from the Government.

BBC Charter and AGREED protocols.
for my money, just for instance, whenever I listen to R4 news programmes, the Tories get a much more gruelling interview than does Labour, but as I say, that is my personal opinion, yes there are Tory papers but there are Labour papers too, if people believe what they read an hear and are guided by the media, then that is up to them, for my own part I go by anecdotal history and what is in my bank account.

BTW, have you or anyone else noticed just how many Scottish accents there are when one listens to R4?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Rich
Aug 7 2015, 12:00 PM

for my money, just for instance, whenever I listen to R4 news programmes, the Tories get a much more gruelling interview than does Labour,

Does it not occur to you that if this is so it quite possibly is because Conservative governments frequently act against the public BEST interest?
It would aid debate if you could cite examples, instances of when you believed the BBC was being unreasonable in its reporting of Tory policy .......????
Edited by Affa, Aug 7 2015, 12:26 PM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Nonsense
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Rich
Aug 7 2015, 12:00 PM
Affa
Aug 7 2015, 11:35 AM
Rich
Aug 7 2015, 11:16 AM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
What do you disagree with?
Does the BBC break its Charter?
Do you believe that the BBC should toe the government line?
Did the BBC and the Blair government not have disagreements?
Quote:
 

The Agreement
The Agreement with the Secretary of State sits alongside the Charter. It provides detail on many of the topics outlined in the Charter and also covers the BBC's funding and its regulatory duties. The Agreement is an important constitutional document because together with the Charter, it establishes the BBC's independence from the Government.

BBC Charter and AGREED protocols.
for my money, just for instance, whenever I listen to R4 news programmes, the Tories get a much more gruelling interview than does Labour, but as I say, that is my personal opinion, yes there are Tory papers but there are Labour papers too, if people believe what they read an hear and are guided by the media, then that is up to them, for my own part I go by anecdotal history and what is in my bank account.

BTW, have you or anyone else noticed just how many Scottish accents there are when one listens to R4?
"BTW, have you or anyone else noticed just how many Scottish accents there are when one listens to R4"?

Can't say I have,but,I have noticed how many 'gay' accents there are when I watch BBC. !moon!
Edited by Nonsense, Aug 7 2015, 01:25 PM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
marybrown
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Nonsense
Aug 7 2015, 01:25 PM
Rich
Aug 7 2015, 12:00 PM
Affa
Aug 7 2015, 11:35 AM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deepBBC Charter and AGREED protocols.
for my money, just for instance, whenever I listen to R4 news programmes, the Tories get a much more gruelling interview than does Labour, but as I say, that is my personal opinion, yes there are Tory papers but there are Labour papers too, if people believe what they read an hear and are guided by the media, then that is up to them, for my own part I go by anecdotal history and what is in my bank account.

BTW, have you or anyone else noticed just how many Scottish accents there are when one listens to R4?
"BTW, have you or anyone else noticed just how many Scottish accents there are when one listens to R4"?

Can't say I have,but,I have noticed how many 'gay' accents there are when I watch BBC. !moon!
I agree..and how many African and Asian reporters?..

Not many white people at all.. :facepalm:

The ''gays'' use CBBC...

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
Aug 6 2015, 10:16 PM
1) I have a preference for the FPTP system, IMO the main parties are a coalition of different people with different political opinions but who have many political opinions in common. Thus they come together to form an opposition, to take the country in a particular direction.

2) There is no system that will accommodate all the different political opinions.

3) The biggest single problem with British politics is the political bias in the media and in newspapers in particular. Until that is corrected we will not get full value from our politicians. That fact will not change just by changing the political system.

4) And yes, Labour will face a gigantic uphill battle to get elected, just as they did back in the 80s and 90s.
1) Of course you do, you'd support Labour no matter what they did, as long as it had the Labour badge on it. Heck you even support, and praise, the Tory Lite incarnation of NuLab. The Problem with FPTP is the Whip system, once someone is elected they stop representing the electorate and represent the party, they can be told how to vote in line with party preference, and the trumps the preferences of the electorate; thus creating a significant democratic deficit,

2) Possibly true, but genuine PR stands a better chance of doing so than FPTP ever will.

3) No. The single biggest problem with British politics is the party-political system (see 1 above). There are papers that are left-wing biased, and papers that are right-wing biased, and some that try their damndest to walk a middle-line with as little overt bias as possible. In general these biases cancel one another out. How would you seek to remove this perceived bias (that you think this bias is the main problem leads me to conclude that there is an anti-Labour bias); would you prefer a State Newspaper only permitted to push the "party line"?

4) Corbyn could, by the looks of it, make Labour more electable than at any time since Blair left the helm.

If you haven't read it you should read the piece Corbyn has in today's i, he makes a better case for his politics than Miliband ever made for his.

All The Best
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Aug 7 2015, 11:38 AM
I regard Conservatives attempts to re-write the BBC Charter as Political interference - based on Party dogma and not in the public interest - which is served when political interference is forbidden.

You would! But it doesn't mean your right., Fact is the BBC funding is by taxation
Licence fee} legislated for by the government. They have every right to interfere in the cost of funding , and the cost an efficiency in running the service. There are numerous other means to day of broadcasting what people want, and the need for their service is declining. from being a monoply to a multi supply of services.
Their own lack of impartiality and objectiveness in news reporting {IMO} is bound to antagonise their paymasters, but then they did not expect to see a Conservative Government running the show.
Now how does it go?

If you prick us, do we not bleed?
if you tickle us, do we not laugh? if you poison
us, do we not die? and if you wrong us, shall we not
revenge?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tytoalba
Aug 7 2015, 09:49 PM
Affa
Aug 7 2015, 11:38 AM
I regard Conservatives attempts to re-write the BBC Charter as Political interference - based on Party dogma and not in the public interest - which is served when political interference is forbidden.

You would! But it doesn't mean your right., Fact is the BBC funding is by taxation
Licence fee} legislated for by the government. They have every right to interfere in the cost of funding , and the cost an efficiency in running the service. There are numerous other means to day of broadcasting what people want, and the need for their service is declining. from being a monoply to a multi supply of services.
Their own lack of impartiality and objectiveness in news reporting {IMO} is bound to antagonise their paymasters, but then they did not expect to see a Conservative Government running the show.
Now how does it go?

If you prick us, do we not bleed?
if you tickle us, do we not laugh? if you poison
us, do we not die? and if you wrong us, shall we not
revenge?
It is suggested that part of the Tory approach is to force the BBC to seek other forms of funding. If not paid for by Taxation then by who ?

What's the old saying about 'he who pays the piper' ?

I think you probably watch the TV channels where the payer calls (influences) the tunes, thus leading you to feel that the BBC is biased.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
Pro Veritas.

1) Of course you do, you'd support Labour no matter what they did, as long as it had the Labour badge on it.
Not just a total lie, but a silly comment that exposes your shallow thinking.

PS I have already made it clear that if Corbin becomes leader I will not vote Labour. (40 years of opposition since 1951 under Old Labour).
Edited by C-too, Aug 7 2015, 10:12 PM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Aug 7 2015, 04:19 PM
C-too
Aug 6 2015, 10:16 PM
1) I have a preference for the FPTP system, IMO the main parties are a coalition of different people with different political opinions but who have many political opinions in common. Thus they come together to form an opposition, to take the country in a particular direction.

2) There is no system that will accommodate all the different political opinions.

3) The biggest single problem with British politics is the political bias in the media and in newspapers in particular. Until that is corrected we will not get full value from our politicians. That fact will not change just by changing the political system.

4) And yes, Labour will face a gigantic uphill battle to get elected, just as they did back in the 80s and 90s.
1) Of course you do, you'd support Labour no matter what they did, as long as it had the Labour badge on it. Heck you even support, and praise, the Tory Lite incarnation of NuLab. The Problem with FPTP is the Whip system, once someone is elected they stop representing the electorate and represent the party, they can be told how to vote in line with party preference, and the trumps the preferences of the electorate; thus creating a significant democratic deficit,

2) Possibly true, but genuine PR stands a better chance of doing so than FPTP ever will.

3) No. The single biggest problem with British politics is the party-political system (see 1 above). There are papers that are left-wing biased, and papers that are right-wing biased, and some that try their damndest to walk a middle-line with as little overt bias as possible. In general these biases cancel one another out. How would you seek to remove this perceived bias (that you think this bias is the main problem leads me to conclude that there is an anti-Labour bias); would you prefer a State Newspaper only permitted to push the "party line"?

4) Corbyn could, by the looks of it, make Labour more electable than at any time since Blair left the helm.

If you haven't read it you should read the piece Corbyn has in today's i, he makes a better case for his politics than Miliband ever made for his.

All The Best
I cannot recall millibore ever making a case for his party other than...."that's a good question" and "let me tell you".........historical twat.

He only ever had time to treat the coalition policies with contempt without offering an alternative....hence his invisibility now, perhaps he has moved in with Gordy. ;D
Edited by Rich, Aug 7 2015, 10:47 PM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Heinrich
Member Avatar
Regular Guy
[ *  *  *  * ]
The Times reports tonight on the result of the latest survey which puts Jeremy Corbyn as heading for a “knockout victory” in the Labour leadership race after almost doubling his lead over rival candidates.
YouGov poll
Tories, the media, and New Labour MPs are keeping their powder dry in case the only socialist candidate actually wins. They will all have him in their crosshairs.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
May 25 2015, 08:53 AM
jaguar
May 24 2015, 11:49 AM
TAKEN FROM ANOTHER FORUM.

Lord Prescott backing Andy Burnham

He was Health Secretary at height of the Mid Staffs hospital scandal

Andy Burnham presided over a culture of denial and cover-up over NHS care scandals that cost lives in failing hospitals across the country.
'From ignoring repeated warnings about high hospital death rates, to dodging calls for a public inquiry, Andy Burnham put politics before patients every time.
'Worse still, several experts have independently testified that under his leadership there was political pressure to present good news rather than expose poor care.
'Still today, he shows no remorse, has offered no apology and accepts no wrongdoing.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz3b3SwohsH
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
You could begin with finding a more politically reliable source of assessment than the Daily Mail. Then you might look at the appalling state of the NHS during the 18 years of Tory administration along with their failure to avoid a deadly Hospital Acquired Infection spreading through the NHS, just for comparisons and background. And then look at the amazing transformation of the NHS under New Labour.

Your hatchet job on Burnham requires an unbiased objective assessment of the situation, otherwise much/all of it might be dismissed as insinuations and propaganda produced by the Tory fear of NL making a come back. ;D .


Burnham aside, do you think we should take notice of Prescotts recommendations, do you consider his judgement to be sound? Prescott is the same man who said he backed the Maastricht treaty to the hilt and when asked what was in the treaty he openly admitted he had never read it, one must question also the judgement of whoever made him the deputy leader.
Edited by Rich, Aug 10 2015, 10:16 PM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Rich
Aug 10 2015, 10:14 PM
Prescott is the same man who said he backed the Maastricht treaty to the hilt and when asked what was in the treaty he openly admitted he had never read it, one must question also the judgement of whoever made him the deputy leader.
Was that back in 1992 Rich? ;-)

Let's face it our low grade politicians are all show an no go.....
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
You have to say that Blair, Prescott and now apparently Campbell criticising Corbyn is just making his election more likely

Maybe we need that idiot victory to finally lance the boil. 2 years of Corbyn dribbling at the ballot box and being humiliated by his own MPs rebelling and the polls destroying Labour then someone will do a Geoffrey Howe on him and get rid

And maybe by then Chukka will be prepared to stand - now he could be a serious Labour leader.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Aug 10 2015, 10:50 PM
Rich
Aug 10 2015, 10:14 PM
Prescott is the same man who said he backed the Maastricht treaty to the hilt and when asked what was in the treaty he openly admitted he had never read it, one must question also the judgement of whoever made him the deputy leader.
Was that back in 1992 Rich? ;-)

Let's face it our low grade politicians are all show an no go.....
When it was is quite irrelevant, who in their right mind votes for something that they know SFA about.....oh, hold on....yes, Europhiles.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
I suspect Corbyn is very cleverly targeting younger and new voters who quite frankly have been completely ignored and repeatedly stuffed by the boomers party, ie the Conservatives.

If Corbyn succeeds, and lets face it every debt fuelled, housing boom Tory "recovery" has hit the buffers very hard leaving a very nasty residue behind it, Corbyn could well find a very receptive audience.............

The shit stirring in the rabid press could also backfire given the changing demographics and the boomers slowly stacking up in the nations graveyards........
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Heinrich
Member Avatar
Regular Guy
[ *  *  *  * ]
Liz Kendall and Yvette Cooper reject Jeremy Corbyn's suggestion that New Labour's rewritten Clause Four which currently means nothing should revert back to its original meaning regarding public ownership of enterprises.
Morning Star
Not to worry; Jeremy has the working class and middle income citizens nodding approval more and more. Do not be surprised when loads of the four millions who voted UKIP at the last general election start joining the bandwagon.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
AndyK
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
I suspect the Lib Dems would be very happy with a Corbyn victory, the centre ground would be all theirs and a very real chance of Labour MP's jumping ship.
Edited by AndyK, Aug 11 2015, 07:06 PM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
AndyK
Aug 11 2015, 07:06 PM
I suspect the Lib Dems would be very happy with a Corbyn victory, the centre ground would be all theirs and a very real chance of Labour MP's jumping ship.
The Liberals no longer have a ship to jump onto, it's more of a saggy inflatable air bed, with a slow leak.....
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Aug 11 2015, 09:16 PM
AndyK
Aug 11 2015, 07:06 PM
I suspect the Lib Dems would be very happy with a Corbyn victory, the centre ground would be all theirs and a very real chance of Labour MP's jumping ship.
The Liberals no longer have a ship to jump onto, it's more of a saggy inflatable air bed, with a slow leak.....
And that is just the leader, what of the party? !dvl!
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Aug 10 2015, 11:07 PM
I suspect Corbyn is very cleverly targeting younger and new voters who quite frankly have been completely ignored and repeatedly stuffed by the boomers party, ie the Conservatives.

If Corbyn succeeds, and lets face it every debt fuelled, housing boom Tory "recovery" has hit the buffers very hard leaving a very nasty residue behind it, Corbyn could well find a very receptive audience.............

The shit stirring in the rabid press could also backfire given the changing demographics and the boomers slowly stacking up in the nations graveyards........
If ‘ifs’ and ‘ands’ were pots and pans there would be no work for tinkers. ~ English Proverb [1708]
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
The Buccaneer
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Tigger
Aug 11 2015, 10:12 PM
Rich
Aug 10 2015, 11:02 PM
When it was is quite irrelevant, who in their right mind votes for something that they know SFA about.....oh, hold on....yes, Europhiles.
Really?

I'd suggest you get reading, after all you constantly remind us how clever you are compared to younger folks who apparently can neither count, spell or remember basic facts!

;-)
Neither can they be bothered to actually find out about Labour's appalling record of hurling the country into meltdown, time after time.

But, we'll let that pass if voters actually DO bother to look at records, what is being claimed as current manifesto, oh yes, and the actual record of effective governance by whichever party was in control.

So, you lefties have crapped out yet again !
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Heinrich
Member Avatar
Regular Guy
[ *  *  *  * ]
The worried New Labour nervous Nellies are banning so-called “entryists” who fail background checks of their posts on the internet and social media to see if they once voted for someone who was not an official Labour candidate. Among such is British film director Ken Loach who founded Left Unity.
Morning Star
These are the people who want to run the government and they are practicing their snooping skills already. Think what they will be able to do when they control MI5 and the police.


Video from June this year
Edited by Heinrich, Aug 12 2015, 02:11 AM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
The Buccaneer
Aug 12 2015, 12:14 AM
Neither can they be bothered to actually find out about Labour's appalling record of hurling the country into meltdown, time after time.

But, we'll let that pass if voters actually DO bother to look at records, what is being claimed as current manifesto, oh yes, and the actual record of effective governance by whichever party was in control.

So, you lefties have crapped out yet again !
Bend over and take your punishment! :rubchin:

Recessions since the end of WW2, 1956, 1961-62, 1973-76, 1980-83, 1990-93, 2008-

Now even a semi coherent right winger like you who has trouble with his memory can work out who was in power during these recessions.

The power of propaganda and not thinking eh? ;-)

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Aug 12 2015, 09:39 PM
The Buccaneer
Aug 12 2015, 12:14 AM
Neither can they be bothered to actually find out about Labour's appalling record of hurling the country into meltdown, time after time.

But, we'll let that pass if voters actually DO bother to look at records, what is being claimed as current manifesto, oh yes, and the actual record of effective governance by whichever party was in control.

So, you lefties have crapped out yet again !
Bend over and take your punishment! :rubchin:

Recessions since the end of WW2, 1956, 1961-62, 1973-76, 1980-83, 1990-93, 2008-

Now even a semi coherent right winger like you who has trouble with his memory can work out who was in power during these recessions.

The power of propaganda and not thinking eh? ;-)

Ok, back to the thread title.......the "esteemed faux" statesman has been spouting again, he fear annihilation if Corbyn is elected, one gets the feeling that he and other Grandees are now resigned to the outcome.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33896414
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
The Buccaneer.

"Neither can they be bothered to actually find out about Labour's appalling record of hurling the country into meltdown, time after time.
Not only is that a complete falsehood, but the TRUTH has been pointed out to you on more than one occasion.

Be as biased as you like, but at least find out the reality, (not the Tory press version) before posting.

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Rich
Aug 12 2015, 10:04 PM
Tigger
Aug 12 2015, 09:39 PM
The Buccaneer
Aug 12 2015, 12:14 AM
Neither can they be bothered to actually find out about Labour's appalling record of hurling the country into meltdown, time after time.

But, we'll let that pass if voters actually DO bother to look at records, what is being claimed as current manifesto, oh yes, and the actual record of effective governance by whichever party was in control.

So, you lefties have crapped out yet again !
Bend over and take your punishment! :rubchin:

Recessions since the end of WW2, 1956, 1961-62, 1973-76, 1980-83, 1990-93, 2008-

Now even a semi coherent right winger like you who has trouble with his memory can work out who was in power during these recessions.

The power of propaganda and not thinking eh? ;-)

Ok, back to the thread title.......the "esteemed faux" statesman has been spouting again, he fear annihilation if Corbyn is elected, one gets the feeling that he and other Grandees are now resigned to the outcome.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33896414
I think it's more a case of insight and understanding than being resigned to the outcome. That would be insight and understanding as he/they showed when in office.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
marybrown
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Corbyn is the wrong choice..He seems more of a ''Green'' than Labourite..

He has no charisma..and seems very friendly with the Muslim faction...

He's creepy...
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
ACH1967
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
For me the key issue is simple is he economically illiterate or not
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
marybrown
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
ACH1967
Aug 13 2015, 02:01 PM
For me the key issue is simple is he economically illiterate or not
Well H.R.H. Blair doesn't seem to think so..I have never heard such damning rhetoric from a former prime minister concerning a potential labour party leader..

TB hates him...
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
ACH1967
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
marybrown
Aug 13 2015, 02:08 PM
ACH1967
Aug 13 2015, 02:01 PM
For me the key issue is simple is he economically illiterate or not
Well H.R.H. Blair doesn't seem to think so..I have never heard such damning rhetoric from a former prime minister concerning a potential labour party leader..

TB hates him...
Yes but Pv has made an interesting point many times that Quantative Easing was used to prevent the banks going bust without any negative impact on the economy so why can't QE be used to pay for Corbins pet projects that are far more likely to benefit the common man than helping to pay bankers bonuses. Obviously i don't understand QE enough to know whether these is feasible or coherent.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
marybrown
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
ACH1967
Aug 13 2015, 02:51 PM
marybrown
Aug 13 2015, 02:08 PM
ACH1967
Aug 13 2015, 02:01 PM
For me the key issue is simple is he economically illiterate or not
Well H.R.H. Blair doesn't seem to think so..I have never heard such damning rhetoric from a former prime minister concerning a potential labour party leader..

TB hates him...
Yes but Pv has made an interesting point many times that Quantative Easing was used to prevent the banks going bust without any negative impact on the economy so why can't QE be used to pay for Corbins pet projects that are far more likely to benefit the common man than helping to pay bankers bonuses. Obviously i don't understand QE enough to know whether these is feasible or coherent.
I think it would be that Corbyn has some really strange Ideas..

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/steerpike/2015/08/jeremy-corbyn-appears-to-endorse-diane-abbott-for-london-mayor-again/
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
ACH1967
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
what is starnge about that
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
ACH1967
Aug 13 2015, 02:51 PM
marybrown
Aug 13 2015, 02:08 PM
ACH1967
Aug 13 2015, 02:01 PM
For me the key issue is simple is he economically illiterate or not
Well H.R.H. Blair doesn't seem to think so..I have never heard such damning rhetoric from a former prime minister concerning a potential labour party leader..

TB hates him...
Yes but Pv has made an interesting point many times that Quantative Easing was used to prevent the banks going bust without any negative impact on the economy so why can't QE be used to pay for Corbins pet projects that are far more likely to benefit the common man than helping to pay bankers bonuses. Obviously i don't understand QE enough to know whether these is feasible or coherent.
QE was about stopping the economy going bust. The banks had stopped lending to ensure they could survive the inevitable collapse of businesses leaving bad debts and the money supply was in danger of a severe collapse. Most of the banks received no bailout money.

It was a one off dilution of the currency that could not easily be repeated now other countries of note have stabilised and the money supply is steadily growing organically. Any repeat in those circumstances would see a collapse of the pound, a massive balance of payments crisis, crippling inflation and a long term increase in unemployment and poverty.

Ultimately you have to earn the money you spend
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
marybrown
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
ACH1967
Aug 13 2015, 03:23 PM
what is starnge about that
Because Diane Abbot is a black racist...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ca-hlQGrUes
Edited by marybrown, Aug 13 2015, 03:32 PM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »
Locked Topic