Oh dear news keeps getting worse for COrbyn, with his Shadow Justice Minister today coming out to back Owen Smith. Below is from the Guardian but the story is also on the other main news sites.
Cardiff Central MP Jo Stevens, one of Jeremy Corbyn’s most loyal backers, has switched allegiance and called on party members to back rival leadership candidate Owen Smith.In an email to Labour members, Stevens wrote: “During the past two weeks it has become painfully obvious that we have been unable to fulfil the very basic day to day operation as the official opposition in Parliament. We cannot present ourselves as a government in waiting without leadership and a leadership team that commands the respect and support of not only members....but Labour voters and potential Labour voters.”
She added: “I want to let you know I will be supporting Owen Smith.”
The death threats and house bricks will be on there way already, no doubt
It's all about principles. And sniping from the sidelines, safely tucked up in the welcome echo-chamber embrace of your comrades in the PFJ
There is really nothing wrong with standing for parliament based on principles OTHER than the desire to say anything to win the vote and gain power
you actually have to represent something other than just the desire to rule [ at any cost].
Personally I dont want any political party conducting themselves like vite leave to and peddling fear and half truths but i think its almost inevitable that this is what will happen.
There is really nothing wrong with standing for parliament based on principles OTHER than the desire to say anything to win the vote and gain power
Thats all very well. Everyone slags Blair off for apparently doing this - selling out the labour party to win power - yet imagine what this country would presently look like if instead of Brown and Blair, we;d have had 13 years of the Tories instead?
Makes you think eh? Or maybe not....
Interesting choice of word - "success"
We have centrist politics and have done for a long long time - hence the need to "pretend" that parties are R or LW
May has just shifted the bus back in the centre of centre - no lurch in evidence
Meanwhile others are driving the bus into an electoral wasteland having misunderstood why people jumped off originally
Junky, principles are a good thing, but largely pointless if you're unable to do anything about them because you're in opposition.
we;d have had 13 years of the Tories instead?
40 years.
I doubt it would be any different to today though. Politicians don't have any real control over anything.
In which case, why don't we sack the whole thing off and just get Tesco to sort the logistics?
"I doubt it would be any different to today though. Politicians don't have any real control over anything."
This.
Did the SNP tax and spend when they got the chance?
[quote=CaptainFlashheart ]Junky, principles are a good thing, but largely pointless if you're unable to do anything about them because you're in opposition.
Its also pretty pointless to abandon them to then get into power and then just be like the Tories anyway
I dont see a shit lot different [ after the first month in power] between what Tony?gordon did and what Tories do/did.
I understand that politics has an element of a popularity contents but its mainly about presenting a vision to the populace of a better place and seeing whether they will accept or reject it
Ironically the levae vote showed that a reasonable % are rather pissed of with the status quo they have however just voted for even more of the status quo/austerity/right wing tory policies as some folk went all populist to win and sold them a big pile of horseshit that was never going to happen
In which case, why don't we sack the whole thing off and just get Tesco to sort the logistics?
Not a bad idea. You could certainly get rid of a few thousand elected parasites and just elect a couple of dozen politicians to do the shouty bit.
I dont see a shit lot different [ after the first month in power] between what Tony?gordon did and what Tories do/did
So what would you say to the point that if Ed had beaten Dave last year, we wouldn't be headed out of the EU?
All parties are still the same though, right? Nothing much changes. They're all the same...
Oh.....
I've got so exasperated by the whole thing I've stopped paying attention, and as I'm not a labour party member to a large extent there's no point spending time thinking about it till they've voted.... but the impression I get is that Owen Smith seems the most conventionally electable of the three and would probably be the best bet for a functioning opposition.
"So what would you say to the point that if Ed had beaten Dave last year, we wouldn't be headed out of the EU?"
We're not headed out of the EU, though. We've set up a talking shop to kick it into the long grass with people in place to take the blame for it not being possible.
The EU debacle confirms 5thElem's point AFAIC. There's no freedom o movement, even when its specifically requested in a referendum.
So what would you say to the point that if Ed had beaten Dave last year, we wouldn't be headed out of the EU?
You're assuming leaving the EU will make much difference. It won't.
Problem with principles is that you are talking about parties with 200-300 people in them, even with core values some will be more or less willing to compromise on certain principles. That's why leadership becomes important.
You're assuming leaving the EU will make much difference. It won't.
I'll make a difference to our influence in Europe.
yet imagine what this country would presently look like if instead of Brown and Blair
Imagine what Iraq would look like...
Indulging in whataboutery like this is pretty pointless. The whole point is that politics isn't or shouldn't be like a sport, where you pin your allegiance to a particular colour and then get bragging rights when you win. Democracy relies on their being sufficient distance between the different parties to offer a choice to people. If people don't agree, then the job of politicians is to persuade them of their case, not simply change their principles to fit what they think will win them the prize. Personally, I can't quite see the point in a labour government that looks, sounds, and acts like the tories. If that's what people want, they should vote tory.
I'll make a difference to our influence in Europe.
Will it?
There's a case that it's more likely to be like being a loyal customer of an insurance company. The loyal customers get the worst deals, the rate tarts get the best. If it's all down to horse trading, membership itself has little value in terms of influence.
Did the SNP tax and spend when they got the chance?
Did they f.....!!
Of course this left of centre party (cough) did advocate a corporate tax rate war to compete with rUK. Bloody LWers 😉
C'pain as i posted yesterday, Owen Jones (blimey I am quoting him now) put it simply
Socialism without power is slogans: [b]a mild irritation at worst, a source of bemusement at best[/b] to a Conservative government that can do as it wishes. Principle and power are not mutually exclusive. Corbyn’s team and his opponents both have to demonstrate how.
I'll make a difference to our influence in Europe.
I doubt anybody will notice in their day-to-day lives.
So what would you say to the point that if Ed had beaten Dave last year, we wouldn't be headed out of the EU?All parties are still the same though, right? Nothing much changes. They're all the same...
Oh
Daz answered for me on this point.
I dont think leaving the EU, if it happens, will fundamentally change the distribution of wealth or power or inequity or social aspiration within this country. It wont be that big a change though the general GDP wealth may alter.
On a meta basis we will know but in our day to day interaction **** all will have changed.
spending on health doubled when labour were in power, having flatlined under tories for years before and after.
They're really not all the same.
Socialism without power is slogans: a mild irritation at worst, a source of bemusement at best to a Conservative government that can do as it wishes
Slogans without socialism is equally as pointless
spending on health doubled when labour were in power, having flatlined under tories for years before and after.They're really not all the same.
The economy had picked up and Labour continued with the policies they'd inherited. That left more money for health. You can't look at things in isolation.
...and another thing. Calling anyone who wants corbyn gone a 'blairite' or 'red tory' (ffs) is annoying.
fwiw I'm actually reasonable utiopian in terms of the sort of society I'd like to see. In a PR system I'd probably vote left of corbyn. But being pragmatic, I prefer better to worse, and that means a party and policies which is electable and are enactable in the system we're in right now. Red ****ing tory...
spending on health doubled when labour were in power, having flatlined under tories for years before and after.They're really not all the same.
Well yes, but they didn't create money, as TB says in "Journey" they simply overspent. We're paying it back now with cuts.
So on average we're about the same.
The economy had picked up and Labour continued with the policies they'd inherited. That left more money for health. You can't look at things in isolation.
When tories have been in power in times of economic growth they've not doubled spending on the NHS, when labour were in power they did.
Labour behaved differently to tories - are you seriously going to argue against this?
Of course there are differences[ as there are between anything not identical] but in the main there is not
there is a difference between two road bikes but they are basically the same
What I want is the difference one gets between a road bike and MTB , they are designed to different things.
I'm not talking bikes, I'm talking doubling spending on the NHS.
What I want is the difference one gets between a road bike and MTB , they are designed to different things.
The Greeks tried that. They found out that there wasn't really a choice of bike after all.
Labour behaved differently to tories - are you seriously going to argue against this?
I am.
If one party spent more on something they must have either spent less on something else, borrowed or found a way to increase tax revenue.
Increasing tax revenue is very hard, my recollection is they took a bit out of Pensions by ending 'dividend tax credit'. I don't recall big cuts anywhere else, so broadly they must have borrowed. Which they did, and now we're paying it back, so on average there's been no change.
If a government could increase productivity per person they could make a difference, but that's very hard to do.
So yeah, broadly speaking democratic govts behave about the same because they're facing similar challenges. We see this abroad as well as in the UK.
it's how you share out the money. Tories tend not to do so on universal health provision for everyone's benefit. Labour have done this.
...anyway. How democratic is NEC's suspension of constituency meetings? Or has this been done up thread?
it's how you share out the money. Tories tend not to do so on universal health provision for everyone's benefit.
Cite.
[quote=johnx2 ]I'm not talking bikes, I'm talking doubling spending on the NHS.
and not understanding analogies
This whole Corbyn thing seems pretty simple to me, he is never going to pursuade swing voters that he has a compelling proposition by continuing to address rallies of momentum supporters. He needs to get a decent PR team and get on TV to tell the undecided what he has to offer. If he is obstinate enough to believe that he can bring labour to power without doing this, and by ignoring his team, that were elected under Millibands mandate, not his, then he is on a hiding to absolutley nothing.
Regardless of his politics labour desperatley needs someone to do leadership better, and thats to address the media and the direct team to engage the electorate, not the bloody members he is always banging on about.
Cite
since you ask so nicely...
http://www.health.org.uk/chart-how-did-uk-nhs-spending-change-over-different-parliaments
my recollection is they took a bit out of Pensions
From Private pensions Labour took £5bn a year and the raid on pensions reduced the value of retirement funds by over £100bn.
TBH with you along with the Iraq war this was up there as one of the worst Blair / Brown year policies with the result that the countries pension system in a huge mess.
djglover - Member
This whole Corbyn thing seems pretty simple to me, he is never going to pursuade swing voters that he has a compelling proposition by continuing to address rallies of momentum supporters...
I'm not so sure about that.
If you look at Scotland that's exactly how the SNP did an almost clean sweep of the other parties (56 out of 59 seats). That and a public that believe that the politicians they are electing will pursue the policies they are espousing.
Like it did with the SNP it will need a few years to achieve this level of support. If I was a Tory PM I'd be looking for an excuse to have a GE sooner than 2020 to prevent this happening.
epicylco, you're drinking too much SNP cool aid. The SNP are not a grass root movement. They are top down.
They got to power from a combination of slick advertising, some grassroots, a change in perception of westminster politics and taking advantage of an incredibly weak Labour party.
Corbyn won't sweep into power in the back of hustings, that only a few percent of the people actually attend.
seosamh77 - Member
epicylco, you're drinking too much SNP cool aid...
No, I only vote SNP for one reason. Independence. I don't care how they manage their party internally.
However I do watch them closely and they seemed to have mastered the trust perception issue - maybe because of party discipline or maybe because it's a very simple one issue cause. As long as they are credibly pursuing independence, they could have Attila the Hun in charge as far as I care (actually he wasn't a bad bloke - I think a Blairite was in charge of the Roman media at the time. 🙂 )
Absolue genius from Stephen Collins in this mornings Guardian....
[url= https://c8.staticflickr.com/8/7325/28341754895_8382b5cbe8_b.jp g" target="_blank">https://c8.staticflickr.com/8/7325/28341754895_8382b5cbe8_b.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/KbsUjt ]Screen Shot 2016-07-16 at 12.58.57[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/14162682@N00/ ]bin lid[/url], on Flickr
😆
He's still better than Chris Evans.
I liked Mark Steel in the Independent, he helped me to understand why binners is so supportive of the coup against Corybn :
[url= http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/jeremy-corbyns-supporters-are-so-dangerous-they-took-over-labour-before-they-were-even-born-a7136711.html ]Jeremy Corbyn's supporters are so dangerous they took over the Labour Party before they were even born[/url]
[i]Eagle claims that she could win a general election – and to be fair she might have a slight chance, as long as she’s allowed to keep all the other parties off the ballot paper. She does have a gift for explaining her ideas, after all. Asked on the Today programme why she voted for the Iraq war, she said “I’m a Northern working class girl who understands the nuances of modern life.” [/i]
Ah yes, [b]"a Northern working class girl who understands the nuances of modern life"[/b]........binners's kind of woman.
It carries on :
[i]That put the Chilcot report in its place. It was all very well Sir John writing millions of words about weapons inspectors and UN resolutions, but instead of that waffle he should have asked everyone if they were from the North. Tomorrow she’ll be asked, “Why are you in favour of Trident?” and her answer will be “I’ve been to Manchester and understand the rules of table tennis.”[/i]
[b]"he should have asked everyone if they were from the North"
"I’ve been to Manchester and understand the rules of table tennis"[/b]
lol
