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 (2,216 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:
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Why Brown lost the election ?

"Posted on 19 August 2013 | 9:08am ​​
I am indebted to Professor Vernon Bogdanor, who among other things was David Cameron’s tutor at Oxford, for drawing my attention to a recent report by the LSE Growth Commission. Anyone who looks at the mix of academics, business leaders, economists and banking experts on the Commission will be unable to dismiss them as Labour stooges. Professor Bogdanor had read my recent blog suggesting Labour need to do more to rebut the Tory attack on the so-called ‘mess we inherited,’ and so thought I would be interested in the Growth Commission’s overwhelmingly positive view of the economic performance of the Labour government between 1997-2010 – and, in particular, between 2007-10. Indeed I am.
Among its conclusions: – British economic performance was strong throughout the period of Labour government, and GDP per head grew faster in the UK than in France, Germany, Italy or Japan. – Productivity growth in terms of GDP per hour was second only to the US, and improvements in employment rates were better than in the US. – This success, they say, was NOT due to an unsustainable bubble in finance, property or public spending". - See more at: http://www.alastaircampbell.org/blog/2013/08/19/the-mess-we-inherited-some-facts-with-which-to-fight-the-tory-big-lies/#sthash.ljXNEZLr.dpuf
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
^ Ok so the academics supporting that report aren't "Labour stooges", but then that is not at all surprising as NuLab weren't Labour - they were, if you care to plot their policies on a comparison matrix, Tory-Lite.

But then everyone except you, and apparently SteveK, knew that anyway.

All The Best
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Aug 20 2015, 10:12 AM
^ Ok so the academics supporting that report aren't "Labour stooges", but then that is not at all surprising as NuLab weren't Labour - they were, if you care to plot their policies on a comparison matrix, Tory-Lite.

But then everyone except you, and apparently SteveK, knew that anyway.

All The Best
My post was about the Tory propaganda that IMO played a major part in Brown losing the election. Your reply does a huge swerve around the gist of my post. Why ?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/14/jeremy-corbyn-labour-leadership-most-popular-candidate-voters-all-parties

Would Labour really prefer to stand petulantly in the political wilderness adhering blindly to stale Blairite ideals?

Or would it actually do Labour (real Labour, not NuLab) some good to listen to the people it claims to serve?

All The Best
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
papasmurf
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Aug 20 2015, 10:38 AM

Would Labour really prefer to stand petulantly in the political wilderness adhering blindly to stale Blairite ideals?

Or would it actually do Labour (real Labour, not NuLab) some good to listen to the people it claims to serve?

I suspect after five years of Tory disasters leaving more of the electorate in the deep poo than out of it, a Labour party that actually is a Labour party will stand a far better chance of election than a Tory mark 2 will.
The level of incompetence of the Tory government is unprecedented why the media props them up is a mystery. Unless the Tories have some hold those in charge of the media to blackmail them to keep quiet.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
ACH1967
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
papasmurf
Aug 20 2015, 10:45 AM
Pro Veritas
Aug 20 2015, 10:38 AM

Would Labour really prefer to stand petulantly in the political wilderness adhering blindly to stale Blairite ideals?

Or would it actually do Labour (real Labour, not NuLab) some good to listen to the people it claims to serve?

I suspect after five years of Tory disasters leaving more of the electorate in the deep poo than out of it, a Labour party that actually is a Labour party will stand a far better chance of election than a Tory mark 2 will.
The level of incompetence of the Tory government is unprecedented why the media props them up is a mystery. Unless the Tories have some hold those in charge of the media to blackmail them to keep quiet.
Lets' deal with facts. You don't have a particularly good track record with your suspicions coming true.

Back to the issue at hand. Most of what Corbyn says sounds lovely and idealistic but does seem to be both economically illiterate and not what the voters want.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
ACH1967
Aug 20 2015, 11:28 AM

Back to the issue at hand. Most of what Corbyn says sounds lovely and idealistic but does seem to be both economically illiterate and not what the voters want.
So if the voters don't want it why:

A) Has he been re-elected for 32 years, this time round with the largest majority on the largest turnout?
B) Is he already at over 50% of support from the grassroots of the Labour party.

We keep being told he is not what the voters want when all the evidence is that he is exactly what the voters want.

As to his policies being economically illiterate, well given the "literate economics" of the last two decades have just authored the biggest slump in global economic activity since the great depression, the largest fall in living standards since the great depression and the longest recession since the great depression then perhaps not being "literate" is a bonus.

But hey, why let facts get in the way of things.


All The Best
Edited by Pro Veritas, Aug 20 2015, 12:10 PM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Aug 20 2015, 12:09 PM
ACH1967
Aug 20 2015, 11:28 AM

Back to the issue at hand. Most of what Corbyn says sounds lovely and idealistic but does seem to be both economically illiterate and not what the voters want.
So if the voters don't want it why:

A) Has he been re-elected for 32 years, this time round with the largest majority on the largest turnout?
B) Is he already at over 50% of support from the grassroots of the Labour party.

We keep being told he is not what the voters want when all the evidence is that he is exactly what the voters want.

As to his policies being economically illiterate, well given the "literate economics" of the last two decades have just authored the biggest slump in global economic activity since the great depression, the largest fall in living standards since the great depression and the longest recession since the great depression then perhaps not being "literate" is a bonus.

But hey, why let facts get in the way of things.

All The Best
Being literate or not, would not, did not, defend any British politician from the seedy deed of hiding toxic debts in parcels and slipping them into the international financial markets via Wall Street.

Your imagination is your strength. It's time for you to start writing Fiction Stories in the form of a book, instead of wasting your talents on this forum. :)
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Aug 20 2015, 10:38 AM
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/14/jeremy-corbyn-labour-leadership-most-popular-candidate-voters-all-parties

Would Labour really prefer to stand petulantly in the political wilderness adhering blindly to stale Blairite ideals?

Or would it actually do Labour (real Labour, not NuLab) some good to listen to the people it claims to serve?

All The Best
There are many wonderful sweeties for lefties in left wing policies. The art is in separating those that are gettable from those that are no more than wished for. Corbyn doesn't bother to attempt to separate the two, he wouldn't be a leftie if he did.


Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
Aug 20 2015, 12:34 PM
Being literate or not, would not, did not, defend any British politician from the seedy deed of hiding toxic debts in parcels and slipping them into the international financial markets via Wall Street.
You are correct.

Now, what caused those toxic debts to be hidden and packaged in such a way as to confuse those buying them?

The "grammar" of the economics of the last 20-30 years.

Grammar that NuLab embraced.

The bundling of toxic debts was inevitable the moment the "economic grammar" of the day dictated that profit was an end in and of itself.

Once the "grammar" of the economic paradigm wove a tale of "third way" economics, of "capitalism with a social conscience" in which laissez faire capitalism became the dominant narrative, with soft-touch regulation, and myopic and turned-blind-eye oversight it was a certainty that the economic meltdown would happen.

But that economic reality didn't just invent itself out of thin air - governments created that reality based on ideology.

Thus the governments that allowed that reality to come into being also share responsibility for the outcomes of it doing so.

New Labour were very, very "tory lite" when it came to economic policy and oversight of financial systems.

The idea that British politicians were the unlucky, unwitting, and innocent victims of the meltdown is ludicrous - they were, in part, its architects.

NuLab facilitated the economic meltdown.

Why would the working class of the UK want to let the fox-cub back into the henhouse, just because it may kill a few less chickens than the fox?

As long as NuLab and Blairite "third way" thinking remain core principles of the Labour Party then they are still a "part of the problem" and not a part of the solution.

All The Best
Edited by Pro Veritas, Aug 20 2015, 12:52 PM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
ACH1967
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Aug 20 2015, 12:09 PM
ACH1967
Aug 20 2015, 11:28 AM

Back to the issue at hand. Most of what Corbyn says sounds lovely and idealistic but does seem to be both economically illiterate and not what the voters want.
So if the voters don't want it why:

A) Has he been re-elected for 32 years, this time round with the largest majority on the largest turnout?
B) Is he already at over 50% of support from the grassroots of the Labour party.

We keep being told he is not what the voters want when all the evidence is that he is exactly what the voters want.

As to his policies being economically illiterate, well given the "literate economics" of the last two decades have just authored the biggest slump in global economic activity since the great depression, the largest fall in living standards since the great depression and the longest recession since the great depression then perhaps not being "literate" is a bonus.

But hey, why let facts get in the way of things.


All The Best
The Voters I refer to are not:

a.) His constituency. There are many constituencies where Labour get in. I am talking about the nation.
b.) Labour supporters already

He is exactly what “which” voters want the nation or the labour party?
Ed Milliband drifted left and lost do you believe that he wasn’t left enough?
Do you think that printing money to nationalise industries is economically literate?
If you think the nation is crying out for a more leftist party then it is not I who doesn’t want to deal in facts.



Offline Profile Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Aug 20 2015, 10:38 AM
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/14/jeremy-corbyn-labour-leadership-most-popular-candidate-voters-all-parties

Would Labour really prefer to stand petulantly in the political wilderness adhering blindly to stale Blairite ideals?

Or would it actually do Labour (real Labour, not NuLab) some good to listen to the people it claims to serve?

All The Best
NL did serve the people. The discontents yearn for old Labour forgetting that old Labour has its roots in the awfulness of the early 1900s. Times have moved on since then, and so too must Labour.

---- "The survey of 1,000 people found that Corbyn scored the highest when they were asked about his personal qualities and which candidate would be the best at holding the government to account as the leader of the opposition". !jk!
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
ACH1967
Aug 20 2015, 01:20 PM
1) He is exactly what “which” voters want the nation or the labour party?
2) Ed Milliband drifted left and lost do you believe that he wasn’t left enough?
3) Do you think that printing money to nationalise industries is economically literate?
4) If you think the nation is crying out for a more leftist party then it is not I who doesn’t want to deal in facts.



1) So far it seems both the Labour party (membership not MPs) and his constituency want him.

2) Ed lost because he was wet, had the charisma and convictions of a raw kipper, and was damned by his previous association with the NuLab project.

3) There's no need to print money to renationalise the railways. Just payback whatever the initial share price was when the shares were first offered to the market.

4) NuLab are almost as far right as the Tories, so under Corbyn even a shift towards the centre if "more leftist" than anything currently on offer.

All The Best
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
Aug 20 2015, 01:28 PM

---- "The survey of 1,000 people found that Corbyn scored the highest when they were asked about his personal qualities and which candidate would be the best at holding the government to account as the leader of the opposition". !jk!
Well, if a Labour leader can't cut it as leader of the opposition they stand no chance as PM.

So that's kind of damned the other three as well.

All The Best
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
ACH1967
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Aug 20 2015, 01:31 PM
ACH1967
Aug 20 2015, 01:20 PM
1) He is exactly what “which” voters want the nation or the labour party?
2) Ed Milliband drifted left and lost do you believe that he wasn’t left enough?
3) Do you think that printing money to nationalise industries is economically literate?
4) If you think the nation is crying out for a more leftist party then it is not I who doesn’t want to deal in facts.



1) So far it seems both the Labour party (membership not MPs) and his constituency want him.

2) Ed lost because he was wet, had the charisma and convictions of a raw kipper, and was damned by his previous association with the NuLab project.

3) There's no need to print money to renationalise the railways. Just payback whatever the initial share price was when the shares were first offered to the market.

4) NuLab are almost as far right as the Tories, so under Corbyn even a shift towards the centre if "more leftist" than anything currently on offer.

All The Best
OK so we were referring to different sets of voters.

Reasons why Ed Miliband just ends up being a matter of opinion and your opinion is just as valid as mine on this.

But he was talking about quantative easing to then spend this on stuff though wasn’t he (this is where my claims of economic illiteracy come from). Can you legally buy back the shares at the price they were offered plus inflation and if so how much would this cost?

I don’t agree that NuLab are almost as far right as the Tories. I think both of them are pretty centrist.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Aug 20 2015, 12:50 PM
C-too
Aug 20 2015, 12:34 PM
Being literate or not, would not, did not, defend any British politician from the seedy deed of hiding toxic debts in parcels and slipping them into the international financial markets via Wall Street.
You are correct.

Now, what caused those toxic debts to be hidden and packaged in such a way as to confuse those buying them?

The "grammar" of the economics of the last 20-30 years.

Grammar that NuLab embraced.

The bundling of toxic debts was inevitable the moment the "economic grammar" of the day dictated that profit was an end in and of itself.

Once the "grammar" of the economic paradigm wove a tale of "third way" economics, of "capitalism with a social conscience" in which laissez faire capitalism became the dominant narrative, with soft-touch regulation, and myopic and turned-blind-eye oversight it was a certainty that the economic meltdown would happen.

But that economic reality didn't just invent itself out of thin air - governments created that reality based on ideology.

Thus the governments that allowed that reality to come into being also share responsibility for the outcomes of it doing so.

New Labour were very, very "tory lite" when it came to economic policy and oversight of financial systems.

The idea that British politicians were the unlucky, unwitting, and innocent victims of the meltdown is ludicrous - they were, in part, its architects.

NuLab facilitated the economic meltdown.

Why would the working class of the UK want to let the fox-cub back into the henhouse, just because it may kill a few less chickens than the fox?

As long as NuLab and Blairite "third way" thinking remain core principles of the Labour Party then they are still a "part of the problem" and not a part of the solution.

All The Best
A marvellous narrative of imagination, only the making of and the hiding of those toxic debts had nothing to do with the UK.

The environment the toxic debts arrived in was, as it had always been, a gambler led quick deal, 'aren't I clever' mentality of the international financial market dealers, where time is of the essence and an element of a free hand was the norm enjoyed by dealers across the world. In an act now or lose the opportunity environment, honesty is essential and wholesale fraud is unexpected.


Offline Profile Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Aug 20 2015, 01:32 PM
C-too
Aug 20 2015, 01:28 PM

---- "The survey of 1,000 people found that Corbyn scored the highest when they were asked about his personal qualities and which candidate would be the best at holding the government to account as the leader of the opposition". !jk!
Well, if a Labour leader can't cut it as leader of the opposition they stand no chance as PM.

So that's kind of damned the other three as well.

All The Best
Another nice twist on permanent opposition under Corbyn. :)

While ignoring a very relevant comment.
Edited by C-too, Aug 20 2015, 01:43 PM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
Aug 20 2015, 01:41 PM
Pro Veritas
Aug 20 2015, 01:32 PM
C-too
Aug 20 2015, 01:28 PM

---- "The survey of 1,000 people found that Corbyn scored the highest when they were asked about his personal qualities and which candidate would be the best at holding the government to account as the leader of the opposition". !jk!
Well, if a Labour leader can't cut it as leader of the opposition they stand no chance as PM.

So that's kind of damned the other three as well.

All The Best
Another nice twist on permanent opposition under Corbyn. :)

While ignoring a very relevant comment.
Do you honestly think that one of the other three could survive as LotO for long enough to gain sufficient credibility to stand a chance of being elected PM in 2020?

All three are "too NuLab" for the core voters that left Labour over the last decade to head back, and without those core voters no amount of appealing to the centre ground is going to put Labour in power.

Even if you don't think Labour needs to shift left to regain purpose (and I do understand why you might think that) you must surely accept that more NuLab will not win the next election either.

NuLab worked (in terms of being electable) for a while in very favourable economic conditions that, I suggest, even Michael Foot could have led the party to victory under.

Sure Blair had to make that initial breakthrough, even if I despise the man's politic he knew how to play the media game well, but Blair was shrewd - he got out as the economic conditions started to shift.

Brown as PM was an unmitigated disaster - and the only thing that kept him as leader was the cowardice of the Labour parliamentarians.

The fairweather NuLab policies of Blair's heyday will not work in the current socio-economic climate, and without winning back the grassroots support that floated away over the last decade Labour (NuLab or Post NuLab) will not have the support needed to be elected to government.

The only way to win back those voters is a shift left back towards the centre of the political spectrum - and that means abandoning Blairism.

It seems to me that many Labour MPs and supporters are stuck in some fantasy where all they need is another Blair-saviour in the exact same way that many Tories think about Thatcher - it really is quite sad.

You are correct Labour can't just go back to 1900 style policies and expect to win the next general election (and indeed if that was what Corbyn suggests I wouldn't offer any support to him at all); but neither can it simply go back to 2000 - the world has moved on since then.

All The Best
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
papasmurf
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
ACH1967
Aug 20 2015, 11:28 AM
Lets' deal with facts. You don't have a particularly good track record with your suspicions coming true.
Actually I do, but with the media not reporting what is happening you will just have to wait until the truth slaps you in the face.
For a start outside of Britain Osborne, Cameron, and IDS are treated as big jokes and also treated with the contempt they deserve.
Cameron is trying to kill off Freedom Of Information because the current government is having to do so much dodging of FOIs that hurt.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Heinrich
Member Avatar
Regular Guy
[ *  *  *  * ]
I have noticed the English media, press, radio, and TV, are making a concerted effort to join with the Jewish Cronicle in branding Jeremy Corbyn as Antisemitic. I have never seen such a unanimous smear campaign before. It looks like the Establishment have taken-off the gloves for a knockout blow.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
ACH1967
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Heinrich
Aug 20 2015, 03:22 PM
I have noticed the English media, press, radio, and TV, are making a concerted effort to join with the Jewish Cronicle in branding Jeremy Corbyn as Antisemitic. I have never seen such a unanimous smear campaign before. It looks like the Establishment have taken-off the gloves for a knockout blow.
It looks like the conspiracy theorists are making a mess in their pants
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Heinrich
Member Avatar
Regular Guy
[ *  *  *  * ]
ACH1967
Aug 20 2015, 03:31 PM
Heinrich
Aug 20 2015, 03:22 PM
I have noticed the English media, press, radio, and TV, are making a concerted effort to join with the Jewish Cronicle in branding Jeremy Corbyn as Antisemitic. I have never seen such a unanimous smear campaign before. It looks like the Establishment have taken-off the gloves for a knockout blow.
It looks like the conspiracy theorists are making a mess in their pants
But have you not noticed they are all talking about Jeremy Corbyn's alleged Antisemitism this week and all of a sudden? Even Channel 4 "News" went on about it yesterday and Tuesday, two days in a row. It is quite a phenomenon to see all the media in step on this smear.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
ACH1967
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Heinrich
Aug 20 2015, 03:59 PM
ACH1967
Aug 20 2015, 03:31 PM
Heinrich
Aug 20 2015, 03:22 PM
I have noticed the English media, press, radio, and TV, are making a concerted effort to join with the Jewish Cronicle in branding Jeremy Corbyn as Antisemitic. I have never seen such a unanimous smear campaign before. It looks like the Establishment have taken-off the gloves for a knockout blow.
It looks like the conspiracy theorists are making a mess in their pants
But have you not noticed they are all talking about Jeremy Corbyn's alleged Antisemitism this week and all of a sudden? Even Channel 4 "News" went on about it yesterday and Tuesday, two days in a row. It is quite a phenomenon to see all the media in step on this smear.
No phenomenon just news as usual. I have seen it happen many times with lots of other things.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Aug 20 2015, 02:03 PM
C-too
Aug 20 2015, 01:41 PM
Pro Veritas
Aug 20 2015, 01:32 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deepand which candidate would be the best at holding the government to account as the leader of the opposition
Another nice twist on permanent opposition under Corbyn. :)

While ignoring a very relevant comment.
Do you honestly think that one of the other three could survive as LotO for long enough to gain sufficient credibility to stand a chance of being elected PM in 2020?

All three are "too NuLab" for the core voters that left Labour over the last decade to head back, and without those core voters no amount of appealing to the centre ground is going to put Labour in power.

Even if you don't think Labour needs to shift left to regain purpose (and I do understand why you might think that) you must surely accept that more NuLab will not win the next election either.

NuLab worked (in terms of being electable) for a while in very favourable economic conditions that, I suggest, even Michael Foot could have led the party to victory under.

Sure Blair had to make that initial breakthrough, even if I despise the man's politic he knew how to play the media game well, but Blair was shrewd - he got out as the economic conditions started to shift.

Brown as PM was an unmitigated disaster - and the only thing that kept him as leader was the cowardice of the Labour parliamentarians.

The fairweather NuLab policies of Blair's heyday will not work in the current socio-economic climate, and without winning back the grassroots support that floated away over the last decade Labour (NuLab or Post NuLab) will not have the support needed to be elected to government.

The only way to win back those voters is a shift left back towards the centre of the political spectrum - and that means abandoning Blairism.

It seems to me that many Labour MPs and supporters are stuck in some fantasy where all they need is another Blair-saviour in the exact same way that many Tories think about Thatcher - it really is quite sad.

You are correct Labour can't just go back to 1900 style policies and expect to win the next general election (and indeed if that was what Corbyn suggests I wouldn't offer any support to him at all); but neither can it simply go back to 2000 - the world has moved on since then.

All The Best
You are off on a tangent. My point was about Corbyn being in permanent opposition. Whoever the next Labour PM will be, there is no chance of it being Corbyn.

New Labour is the way, it's just a case of either exposing the lies and insinuations of Tory propaganda or disguising New Labour in what appears to be new clothing. Any new NL will be different because the financial climate is different and the die cast by Thatcher has been well and truly smashed. But they will retain their commitment 'for the many'.

Experience suggests that the deeper this country gets into the mire the further to the right it goes. IMO NL in a new form is the only defence against that.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
papasmurf
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
Aug 20 2015, 04:25 PM


New Labour is the way,
It isn't unless it remembers it HAS to protect the poor and vulnerable. Something that seem to be missing from three out of the four leadership contenders.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
Aug 20 2015, 04:25 PM
New Labour is the way, it's just a case of either exposing the lies and insinuations of Tory propaganda or disguising New Labour in what appears to be new clothing.
How very soviet, and undemocratic of you.

Either re-write history, or lie to the electorate - all to preserve a stagnant and faded ideology that isn't fit for purpose in the current decade.

All The Best
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Ewill
Aug 19 2015, 10:52 PM
Rich
Aug 19 2015, 09:16 PM




But WERE they taken out of poverty or merely recruited as life members of a reliant on the state party?
!clp! !clp! !clp!
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
But the numbers for those claiming benefits always increases under the Tories and fell when Blair was PM .... so the post is completely idiotic1
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
I see Rupert Murdoch has backed Corbyn now! With reservations of course after all Rupe might be dead in five years time, it does seem though that Corbyn has struck a chord with a very large group of people usually totally ignored by the red or blue neo liberal parties, the young and dispossessed, watch the shite right wing press attempt a hatchet job on Corbyn.

And an interesting fact regarding the mainstream national newspapers, all but one are owned by wankers who are only partly British, and all for tax reasons! Vermin.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Phoenix One UK
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Paddy Power has already paid out to punters conceding Corbyn will win the Labour leadership.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Heinrich
Member Avatar
Regular Guy
[ *  *  *  * ]
ACH1967
Aug 20 2015, 04:15 PM
Heinrich
Aug 20 2015, 03:59 PM
ACH1967
Aug 20 2015, 03:31 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
But have you not noticed they are all talking about Jeremy Corbyn's alleged Antisemitism this week and all of a sudden? Even Channel 4 "News" went on about it yesterday and Tuesday, two days in a row. It is quite a phenomenon to see all the media in step on this smear.
No phenomenon just news as usual. I have seen it happen many times with lots of other things.
Far from the usual news.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Ewill
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Aug 20 2015, 06:32 PM
Ewill
Aug 19 2015, 10:52 PM
Rich
Aug 19 2015, 09:16 PM




But WERE they taken out of poverty or merely recruited as life members of a reliant on the state party?
!clp! !clp! !clp!
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
But the numbers for those claiming benefits always increases under the Tories and fell when Blair was PM .... so the post is completely idiotic1
Nope

Your mates Tone and Gordon invented yet another raft of benefits they could handout with abandon to increase their client base

Only they didn't call them ''benefits'' , they called them ''tax credits''
My knowledge of double entry book-keeping is that in order to have a ''credit'' there should be a corresponding ''debit''

That rule doesn't seem to followed in Labourspeak
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
There are two basic flaws in the Corbyista posts above

1. They think that the 600,000 people apparently entitled to vote in this election are all Labour supporters. If they were they'd have been members when it mattered in May this year when there was a real need to work to get the Tory heartless policies on welfare opposed and out of government.

2. That 600,000 dilitante Labour supporters have the right to get the other 99% of the UK population to fall in line with Corbyn's Hamas/IRA loving, economy destroying, job destroying, defence of the realm annihilating (and if Pro V 's post is believed) thieving policies. They won't.

This whole fiasco has been exactly what the far right of the Tory party wanted. Well done Corbynistas I so hope you are the first to feel the misery he will vest on the UK by letting the Tories run riot.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Aug 20 2015, 11:45 PM
There are two basic flaws in the Corbyista posts above

1. They think that the 600,000 people apparently entitled to vote in this election are all Labour supporters. If they were they'd have been members when it mattered in May this year when there was a real need to work to get the Tory heartless policies on welfare opposed and out of government.

2. That 600,000 dilitante Labour supporters have the right to get the other 99% of the UK population to fall in line with Corbyn's Hamas/IRA loving, economy destroying, job destroying, defence of the realm annihilating (and if Pro V 's post is believed) thieving policies. They won't.

This whole fiasco has been exactly what the far right of the Tory party wanted. Well done Corbynistas I so hope you are the first to feel the misery he will vest on the UK by letting the Tories run riot.
Is an opposition party essential?

have a quick read.

http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/599422/Labour-election-the-myth-strong-Opposition
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
papasmurf
Aug 20 2015, 04:36 PM
C-too
Aug 20 2015, 04:25 PM


New Labour is the way,
It isn't unless it remembers it HAS to protect the poor and vulnerable. Something that seem to be missing from three out of the four leadership contenders.
Taking 1.6 million out of relative poverty is not protecting the poor and the vulnerable ?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Rich
Aug 21 2015, 12:17 AM
Steve K
Aug 20 2015, 11:45 PM
There are two basic flaws in the Corbyista posts above

1. They think that the 600,000 people apparently entitled to vote in this election are all Labour supporters. If they were they'd have been members when it mattered in May this year when there was a real need to work to get the Tory heartless policies on welfare opposed and out of government.

2. That 600,000 dilitante Labour supporters have the right to get the other 99% of the UK population to fall in line with Corbyn's Hamas/IRA loving, economy destroying, job destroying, defence of the realm annihilating (and if Pro V 's post is believed) thieving policies. They won't.
This whole fiasco has been exactly what the far right of the Tory party wanted. Well done Corbynistas I so hope you are the first to feel the misery he will vest on the UK by letting the Tories run riot.
Is an opposition party essential?
have a quick read.

http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/599422/Labour-election-the-myth-strong-Opposition
Have a quick read of a distorted/misleading version/interpretation of history by what appears to be a would be dictatorship encouraging individual. Not recommended reading except for the occasional chuckle.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Ewill
Aug 20 2015, 11:11 PM
Affa
Aug 20 2015, 06:32 PM
Ewill
Aug 19 2015, 10:52 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
But the numbers for those claiming benefits always increases under the Tories and fell when Blair was PM .... so the post is completely idiotic1
Nope

Your mates Tone and Gordon invented yet another raft of benefits they could handout with abandon to increase their client base
Only they didn't call them ''benefits'' , they called them ''tax credits''
My knowledge of double entry book-keeping is that in order to have a ''credit'' there should be a corresponding ''debit''

That rule doesn't seem to followed in Labourspeak
As the rich continued to get richer and the call for a reduction in the number of skilled workers created an ever growing number of low paid workers. (A situation created by Thatcher) It became a necessity to financially help those at the bottom of the economic pile. Thatcher and Co. ignored that fact (just as they ignored the state of the NHS and state schools), NL picked up the tab.
Tax credits were there to encourage/help people to take low paid jobs. Having to take low paid jobs was a situation created by Thatcher.

Even so, no reasonable individual could see 18 years of unemployment ranging from well over 2 million to close on 4 million, along with the giant increase in the numbers on IB, then point an accusing finger at NL. To do so would just add to the list of lying insinuations that Tories have so often indulged in.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Apparently Corbyn is to apologise for his party taking the country into the Iraq war. He will not of course explain what should have been done about Saddam's refusal to allow UN inspectors into Iraq (1998/2002), or why Saddam should have been allowed to produce his Jinin missiles that had a range more than six times greater than that allowed by the ceasefire agreement signed by him.

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Lewis
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
ACH1967
Aug 19 2015, 01:41 PM
Quick quiz.
Which of these is extreme right wing behavior?

A Introducing a bedroom tax that costs 14 quid more a week
B Gassing millions of Jews
Answer both are. £14 could mean the difference between eating or not to those who are being punished by this nasty horrible right wing EXTREMIST government.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Cymru
Alt-Right
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
Aug 21 2015, 06:41 AM
papasmurf
Aug 20 2015, 04:36 PM
C-too
Aug 20 2015, 04:25 PM


New Labour is the way,
It isn't unless it remembers it HAS to protect the poor and vulnerable. Something that seem to be missing from three out of the four leadership contenders.
Taking 1.6 million out of relative poverty is not protecting the poor and the vulnerable ?
Not when you preside over a lack of regulation over the financial markets which causes a crash that results in much more than 1.6 million going back into poverty.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
papasmurf
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Lewis
Aug 21 2015, 07:36 AM
£14 could mean the difference between eating or not to those who are being punished by this nasty horrible right wing EXTREMIST government.
Where I live the bedroom tax is causing severe hardship due to the near total lack of one bedroom accommodation.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create a free forum in seconds.
Learn More · Sign-up for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »
Locked Topic