Forum menu
So Gordon Brown is giving advice on being electable, despite never being elected himself. You really couldn't make it up. 🙂
I'm also having a good laugh at all these blairites and the horrific abuse they've suffered. I suppose all the sh*t they've thrown at Corbyn is 'Bantz'.
Perhaps you have forgetten ducky that it's not just about you. Others get sweaty about the union they are members of being broken apart on the basis of deceit and BS. And you think Westminster is myopic!!! 😉
We're fed up of colonial rule by a festering corrupt oligarchy with its supervised "democracy".
but I thought Scotland wanted to stay in the EU?
gordimhor - I would agree that it's not a defining characteristic, but I've seen it argued here and elsewhere that basically it doesn't exist to any meaningful degree.
To me nationalism of any flavour is a dirty word anyway. I just don't agree with the concept. Some portion of chauvinism seems to be intrinsic to it (to wildly varying degrees, but it's always there IMO).
I thought the Telegraph article was mildly amusing by the way!
The electorate will all be sent to the naughty step at this rate 🙁
I guess this is one way to stop the estimated (by polls) 50% + of the party supporters from voting Corbyn.
"[i]Lord Mandelson, one of the architects of “new” Labour, privately [b]appealed last week to the Kendall, Cooper and Burnham camps to quit the contest[/b] before ballot papers were sent out, according to sources.
One said: “Lord Mandelson and other Blairites were saying – this is a disgrace, let’s get this thing pulled. But it was not going to happen.”
The [b]peer is understood to have believed that the party might suspend the contest[/b] if there was only one candidate, but he had to back down when officials said it would mean Mr Corbyn won.[/i]"
Good stuff,THM getting back to type with the sweaty sock references,while lying and pretending that he isn't.It's always good when "the likes of you" show their true prejudices.Shows us we must be doing something right. I see you are suggesting E-L is trolling you,just like you did with Junkyard on the Indy thread,what was the common thing they were suggesting? Seriously,Nige, you need to check your mouth if you want to retire up here!
Nige! I thought his name was Gideon. Or maybe Boris.Seriously Nige
grum - Member
How would an independent Scotland have stopped the Scottish clan chiefs and landowners who carried out the clearances?...And I bet not a single Scottish person as involved in any of that were they, just the evil English right? And people claim Scottish nationalism has nothing to do with blind illogical bigotry against the English....
My concern is about having a democratic government, not blaming the English.
I've just deleted a big chunk of this - if we want to get into the specifics of Scottish history, let's start another thread for it.
My attitude boils down to democracy isn't perfect, but the closer you can bring it to home, the more it can be controlled or corrected.
Now, back to Corbynmania. 🙂
Meanwhile in the Sunday Times by Scottish Labour exMP Tom Harris:
[i]"The only way we can attract voters back is by offering them what they want and that is independence.”[/i]
He makes it clear he is opposed to it, but that's an opinion of someone who has had his feet on the ground in a Scottish electorate.
Maybe Corbyn should listen to him if he wants to grow the vote for Labour in Scotland. After all Labour used to hold itself out as the party of Home Rule, and Home Rule would be an acceptable compromise to enough Scots to put the independence issue to bed for quite a few years.
[quote=epicyclo ]I've lived in a colony. It had a democratically elected parliament, and overseeing that was an office of the crown with a governor appointed by the UK govt (ie not elected to that office or accountable to the people).
Scotland has a democratically elected parliament, and overseeing that is an office of the crown, the Scotland Office which is a UK Government Department headed by the Secretary of State for Scotland who is appointed by the UK govt (ie not elected to that office or accountable to the people).
The similarities are plain to see. If Scotland wasn't a colonial administration, the elected head of state in Scotland should hold that position.
Ah, so the electorate of the colony you lived in voted in elections for the UK government?
This is still going?
Does it matter who the jockey is if the horse is dead?
Thanks ducks, Looking forward to a warm west coast welcome handshake already. But good reminder to bring some jungle juice. August gNats are particularly angry and blood thirsty wee beasties aren't they!
aracer - Member
Ah, so the electorate of the colony you lived in voted in elections for the UK government?
Glad you noticed that.
Now tell me how much chance they have of getting any legislation through the UK parliament.
They will be outvoted by an overwhelming majority of MPs from the other nations when they try to introduce any legislation that supports what the majority of Scots want.
There is a demand for EVEL, and we are happy enough to see that - in your own parliament. Just like we want SVSL in our own parliament.
ohnohesback - Member
...Does it matter who the jockey is if the horse is dead?
Corbyn does seem to be breathing new life and hope into the old nag, but it's a big job, and will need some like minded support from within the party.
However the voting system has postal votes and online votes, so I hope there is a lot of scrutiny.
We're fed up of colonial rule by a festering corrupt oligarchy with its supervised "democracy".
gooooooooood griiiiief 🙄
"Ducks"? "Ducky"?
[quote=Mr Woppit said]"Ducks"? "Ducky"?
"duckman" ^^^^
Don't worry - there are quite a few of us up here who don't think like that.gooooooooood griiiiief
Although this is in danger of becoming another Scottish thread, I'm not so sure Mr Corbyn couldn't win back space from the SNP. Quite a few of my friends are long term Labour voters who had become disillusioned with the party. They voted SNP only because the Independence question had been "settled for a generation", Ed didn't inspire them and the LibDems as the usual protest party in that scenario had become an embarrassment. They won't be too hard for Labour to retrieve them as the SNP response to its majority has led to some regrets already.
I think most of us who aren't the mirror-image English frothing version of that realise that most of you don't think like that...
So, when are we expecting the likely results to be known?
12 Sept for Labour leadership results
[quote=epicyclo ]Glad you noticed that.
Now tell me how much chance they have of getting any legislation through the UK parliament.
They will be outvoted by an overwhelming majority of MPs from the other nations when they try to introduce any legislation that supports what the majority of Scots want.
Well that's democracy for you - in the same way something which would be of benefit to people living in my constituency would get voted down if it didn't benefit the majority of the country the government serves. Remember the majority of people in your "colony" also voted to remain part of that democratic system?
Though I'm not sure what the relevance of that is to your earlier whinge about somebody who is directly elected by some of the people in your "colony".
Its strange that Labour seem to be in such a panic. Why not learn from history. OK at present 2020 doesn't look that rosy nor do the Scottish elections. But it's not really that bad. Take Scotland, people will soon tire of the SNP hegemony and will start looking at what the SNP does rather than what it says. Look at recent polls - uninspiring ratings on the economy, justice and health and poor verdicts on crime. Playing the victim only lasts so long - in the end you have to deliver. Scottish labour should bide their time and focus on what is actually going on.
The Fabain Society was pretty clear on what Labour has to do in the RUK - win back Tory voters. Seems like that simple message is being ignored in the desperation to banish the last traces of Blairism.
So [url= http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/politics-and-ideological-pragmatism-balance ]should the labour party exist to be in power or to hold to its ideals?[/url]
It seems pretty clear to me that the membership's broad ideals are not the same as those of the leadership of the party.
Lord Mandelson, one of the architects of “new” Labour, privately appealed last week to the Kendall, Cooper and Burnham camps to quit the contest before ballot papers were sent out, according to sources.
Far from making the party unelectable, if Mandelson, friend of the Rothschild's and Russian oligarchs, is worried, then that pretty much confirms that what they fear most is that they *will* be electable under Corbyn. I wouldn't blame Corbyn for doing a good old Stalinist purge of this lot after he wins. Everyone highlights how Corbyn and the left have rebelled repeatedly but when it counted they always fell into line and supported the party, will the right do the same? It doesn't look like it.
(and do we really have to do the scots vs english thing again?)
I fear a Corbyn victory because if he wins and "breathes life into the old nag" it will only delay the time when the 'Labour' party is replaced by a genuine socialist party, built from the grass roots up, as it will have to be.
'Labour' party is replaced by a genuine socialist party
What's the point? If, as now seems likely, the party's policies and leadership represents the views of members and supporters, why go down the road of a new party? If Mandelson and Blair get their way then yes there's an argument for it, but to actually wish that to happen seems self-defeating in the extreme.
Building a party from scratch would take years unless there's a specific single-issue that's going to bind them together - I can't see that if their aim would be to be a national socialist party - In fact, I expect that already exists but isn't doing much.
Because 'Labour' aren't socialist and won't become so. they are the archetypal dystopian weak opposition; there only to provide a pretence of democracy. Far from being the new hope, 'Labour' are a roadblock to progress.
@dazh Despite Grum's feelings it really never was a "Scots v English thing "
Because 'Labour' aren't socialist and won't become so.
So what is socialist? I don't even know any more. Are you talking about classic Marxist-Leninist dictatorship of the proletariat stuff, Stalinist authoritarian dictatorship, or something more libertarian like anarcho-sydicalism? And are you suggesting that a new party should achieve power through the existing political system, in which case how would they be different to any other party? Or are you suggesting it could more of a revolutionary transition?
I've just deleted a big chunk of this - if we want to get into the specifics of Scottish history, let's start another thread for it.
ie 'I've made myself look quite foolish and my attempts to justify/backtrack didn't go very well'. 😉
Because 'Labour' aren't socialist and won't become so.
Do you think JC is a socialist?
Is the UK socialist and/or will it become so?
One of the enduring characteristics of the UK appears to be its moderate, centrists politics.
Meanwhile in the Sunday Times by Scottish Labour exMP Tom Harris:"The only way we can attract voters back is by offering them what they want and that is independence.”
He makes it clear he is opposed to it, but that's an opinion of someone who has had his feet on the ground in a Scottish electorate.
He's a panicked, idiot then as we just voted less than 12 months ago and don't want independence.
I'm starting to wonder if Corbyn as a temporary leader (2-3 years) might be just the ticket for a longer term rebuild of the Labour party. He will take back votes from the SNP and to some extent Plaid, the Greens and maybe UKIP. So win back the 'core' support, while planning for a new younger more centerist person to take over for 2020.
As Binners has noted the rest of the 3 possibles are vacuous and can't win 2020 anymore than Corbyn IMO, so why not take the chance to win back 'core' vote as the foundations and rebuild. Reality is though Tories probably will be in power till 2025 unless something weird happens.
The Tories always find something to self destruct on too. Normally Europe and that little issue isn't that far away now....
I'm starting to wonder if Corbyn as a temporary leader (2-3 years) might be just the ticket for a longer term rebuild of the Labour party. He will take back votes from the SNP and to some extent Plaid, the Greens and maybe UKIP. So win back the 'core' support, while planning for a new younger more centerist person to take over for 2020.
A staunch Labour friend of mine, who despairs of the Blairite/Progress group, is hoping for just this. Corbyn as leader to democratise the party policy decision-making process, followed by a new leader before the election.
One of the enduring characteristics of the UK appears to be its moderate, centrists politics.
An artefact of the FPTP system? An article I read recently suggested that the Tories and Labour would be four parties if we had some form of PR.
Corbyn as leader to democratise the party policy decision-making process, followed by a new leader before the election.
I wouldn't be particularly upset with that scenario, although don't dismiss his chances completely. He has a long time to break down the loony-left communist labels and put himself across as he really is, which is a left of centre social democrat. You never know, he may even get rid of the beard and sandals, seeing as that's what seems to disturb people the most 🙂
The main question that seems to preoccupy the electorate is how dignified he is when eating a bacon sandwich. The rest is intellectual masturbation.
I don't think there's any evidence to suggest that the electorate was concerned with Miliband's ability to eat a bacon sandwich.
The problem occurred because there was so little difference between the policies being offered by Miliband and those offered by the Tories that the Tory press had to desperately find something to castigate Milband for.
I can guarantee that should Corbyn become Labour leader the Tory press will have a lot more to worry about than how he eats a sandwich.
I'm sure you're right on that ernie but it did rather help paint him as a bit of an idiot/useless didn't it? I'm sure it wasn't the key factor but I imagine it must have had some effect though as you say it probably says more about the depth of election coverage in much of the mainstream media.
From a member of the "Council for Foreign Relations" and a professional geopolitical consultant, the first of what I predict will be an increasing number of gradually less well disguised and rather silky threats, this one hidden inside an analysis of Corby's foriegn policy attitudes...
http://www.cityam.com/222389/jeremy-corbyn-s-dangerous-foreign-policy-would-be-disaster-britain
I don't think there's any evidence to suggest that the electorate was concerned with Miliband's ability to eat a bacon sandwich.
Really? So why was it so prominent? Why did Cameron go to such lengths to avoid a similar photo by eating a hot dog with a knife and fork? I saw many tv interviews with " ordinary people" saying that they wouldn't vote for Miliband because he "looks funny" and iirc I saw the same sentiment expressed here on stw. Would that it were not the case!
Mr Whoppit you are correct the attacks on Corbyn's awful foreign policy will increase and was predicted by Alistair Campbell of all people (you may not like him but he understands the game of discrediting political opponents).
So far we've had articles on Corbyn's support for the IRA, Hamas and Putin, some of that may be half truths but it doesn't matter if it sticks. IMO anyone who trusts Russia has learnt nothing from history.
Really? So why was it so prominent?
I gave an answer to that in the paragraph after the one you copied and pasted. Read the whole post?
Mr Whoppit you are correct the attacks on Corbyn's awful foreign policy
That's not my point.
I refer you to the last sentence in the article.
Milliband and his sandwich, Hague and his cap, Boris and co in white tie at Uni, Paddy with his pants down....the wonderful world of political theatre!