I think most of us headbangers could see his faults
Like what?
Online Corbynites seem to identify Corbyn's faults as simply being just too kind and dignified so he didn't want to challenge the criticisms made against him. It's never "he shouldn't have presented a phone-in show on Iranian state TV for thousands of pounds" or "he shouldn't have gone laying flowers in a PLO cemetary" or "maybe it was a mistake to call Hamas friends" or "perhaps writing a gushing foreword for an anti-Semite's book wasn't a good idea"...even in retrospect.
Worse than that, he's spoken up in parliament about bombing the shit out of refugee camps.
Corbyn's faults to me were his lack of ability in actually being a leader or having any media awareness. Yes you should be able to just be honest and not have to play the game but when the game is stacked against you that is not going to work.
Support for the Palestinian people in face the Israeli state's apartheid policies and endless aggression was one of the things that Corbyn got right, why should he be criticised for it?
Very few people on the left support Israel's illegal occupation of Palestinian land and their contempt for United Nations Resolutions.
And btw the EU was previously in favour of contact with Hamas, that only changed after Hamas won the 2006 elections - they weren't supposed to win.
https://www.politico.eu/article/israel-warns-eu-to-stay-away-from-hamas-ahead-of-election/
After six months of the Labour lead over the Tories very slowly narrowing the last couple of weeks they have been slowly widening again:
https://www.politico.eu/europe-poll-of-polls/united-kingdom/
And the very latest opinion poll out today puts Labour support on the level it was when Liz Truss was PM - more than half of voters say they would vote Labour if there was an election now.
https://twitter.com/Omnisis/status/1677302168938848259
Any vague hope the Tories had of averting a historic electoral disaster in a few months time is fast fading.
Only the media can save them now but not sure the media will really care as Starmer is not going to be any different for them really.
Any vague hope the Tories had of averting a historic electoral disaster in a few months time is fast fading.
Well at least that's something we can all enjoy on a sunny late afternoon in July.
👍
What really astounds me, apart from the apparent collapse of the Tory vote, is how totally irrelevant the LibDems have become.
I often chuckle when I see polls showing how little support the LibDems enjoy these days. Which then makes me feel a bit uneasy as there is nothing actually funny about how Nick Clegg comprehensively destroyed their credibility. In fact it is quite a tragic story in British politics.
And now it's Clive Lewis's turn
<p style="text-align: left;">And now it’s Clive Lewis’s turn</p>
What have I not seen?
I don't think any of us have seen the nadir of thr Tories. They're savage.
The red tops will come out in favour of SKS as they wont want to be on the losing side.
I think the fact that he shares political views which aren't a million miles from theirs probably also plays a part.
Yes that makes it easier for them.
<p style="text-align: center;">Now Lewis is being expelled</p>
you can’t post a comment like that without an amusing picture alongside it.
Sorry, im not up to Binners level of visual wit and incisive cartoonery but i now get why he does it, I must have had nearly every lefty head banger on here bite. So much easy than trying to respond imtelligently to rinse and repeat leftist ramblings.
Funny every one is ok calling the Tory loons head bangers although to be fair if there are any hard right head bangers on here they keep really quiet.
Meanwhile back in the real world Starmers all you've have got, Jezza got purged, so its either Starmer or more Tory destruction. I know where my vote is going.
Much better to elucidate an argument and ps don't mock the afflicted.
What's the Clive Lewis news then? You obviously know something the Internet doesn't.
After six months of the Labour lead over the Tories very slowly narrowing the last couple of weeks they have been slowly widening again
Still, according to some SKS's policies are terrible and they could win far more voters if they changed...
Who is saying that ^^ ?
It is hard to imagine that Labour could manage to get 'far more' than 51% of the vote.
And wasn't aware that Starmer had much in the way of policies.
Still, according to some SKS’s policies are terrible and they could win far more voters if they changed…
There’s very little doubt that Starmer will be the next PM. For some that is enough, but those of us who are critical are more concerned with what he will do (or more what he won’t do) than whether he wins or not. Winning the election should not be the measure of success.
Still, according to some SKS’s policies are terrible and they could win far more voters if they changed…
So you are happy for Labour to win even if they don't really do anything different, great. Would you not be even happier if they won and actually did something progressive, I don't know, along the lines of Labour/socialist ideals?
Likewise, are you not disappointed they are not going to be doing that?
When Labour get in, do pretty much nothing for 5 years and then the Tories get back in was that really anything to celebrate?
It's not just that Starmer is not doing things of value for the country - it's that he and Reeves are actively following Tory lines whilst somehow pretending they're progressive.
Reeves has apparently, complete faith in the Bank of England whilst criticising the Tories for high interest rates. The two positions make no sense.
The BoE with its ridiculous mandate which liberals have loved up - and its fawned 'independence' has failed.
Andrew Bailey was installed by Johnson and has a history degree FFS.
If Rachel Reeves can't see a technical way out of this or a solution then she and Labour are as bad as the Tories.
<p style="text-align: left;">And would not change a thing, and thus carry on the same trajectory. I do not care a ounce about removing Tories for this to be the position. Too much is made of Tory antics whilst ignoring their overlap with Centrist/right-wing politics.</p>
Andrew Bailey was installed by Johnson and has a history degree FFS.
A good reminder that it isn’t politically independent. All the problems at the BofE stem from who we elected, who they appoint, what remit they set, and government fiscal policy. Just another example of how Boris Johnson broke Britain. If you don’t think Starmer and Reeves will do a better job in government, fair enough. But if elected they will have to do that job. They’re not going to pretend there are no restraints on spending, because at the end of the day they might (hopefully) have to do all this stuff for real, not for fun on the internet.
Yep it's not independent at all.
MPC is selected by Chancellor, it's following the government's mandate. And the government can overrule decisions in the countries interest. (BoE 1998)
It's an arm of Government with the pretence of someone to blame, and currently they are not acting in the country's interest either by adding income to asset owners and driving more inflation or when rates gets to 6% with the looming mortgage concerns.
It's ridiculous and not economically sound to follow either of these paths.
Rachel Reeves is not doing her job by not suggesting the government could intervene.
They’re not going to pretend there are no restraints on spending, because at the end of the day they might (hopefully) have to do all this stuff for real, not for fun on the internet.
That's not an accurate reflection of their attitudes.
As you very well know currently the country is in dire need of government spending - so to pretend there's magical fiscal restriction whistle ignoring the affects of a society on its knees is not just a lie, it's totally the opposite to economic demands.
Look it's simple: government needs to spend or forever ensure a declining society. Using made up fiscal rules is like saying you can't go to the cinema ever again because they've run out of tickets to give you.
Government uses money to provision itself and taxes to make space for that provision. Anything else fiscally is made up for the sake of restricting what we can and can't do. (Save real resources)
For Liberal fact fans - the ones that got excited because they heard James o'Brien getting excited about Truss's economy 'tanking' ideas - well 2 year gilts are now above what happened just after that chaos.
How much crying has there been about this?
There is no 'good' version of being a Tory.
Seems there is no good version of a Labour government that has a chance of being in power either based on comments above.
Rone when 3 out of the last posts on a thread are yours its time to take a breath and step away from the keyboard for a while. We know you're passionate about your views on alternative monetary theory, unfortunately for you most people don't believe they will work or aren't ready for such a radical step. This is the real world Starmer is fighting elections in, he has to appeal to voters who are ignorant of real world problems and don't understand any monetary theory. Remember the blatantly untrue claims on the side of a bus, people lapped it up even though it was very easy to find out the true figure was a lot less and even that didnt take into account all the other benefits we had. Breaking with orthodoxy at the moment leads him wide open to accusations of unfunded pie in the sky policies however untrue that might be, the accusation will stick because it panders to the ignorance and cherished views many voters hold.
This is the real world Starmer is fighting elections in
LOL Starmer isn't fighting an election, it is being handed to him on a plate!
Currently more than half of voters are saying that they would vote Labour in a general election despite not even knowing what will be in Labour's election manifesto.
Voters are clearly utterly fed up with the Tories. If the Tories lose some of their safest seats in the upcoming by-elections, as some feel they might, it will not be because Starmer has put up a good fight but because the Tories are fatally wounded after shooting themselves in the foot so many times.
To use a football analogy, it’s 0-0 with ten minutes to go in the cup final, the opposition have had 2 men sent off and their best player is off injured, and labour are still playing with 5 men at the back.
And starmer has just run on the pitch shimmied past the labour defence ,nutmegged his goalie and then booted the ball into the labour goal.
And Starmer is currently fighting a brilliant fight in Scotland 😉
The opposition Labour Party will win more seats than the Scottish National Party in Scotland in the next general election
Labour's two greatest rivals, the Tories and the SNP, are in dire unprecedented self-inflicted crisis in the months leading up to a general election, has there ever been a luckier Labour leader in history?
Clive Lewis? Read him (twice) yesterday speculating that being expelled from the RMT parliamentary group was a prelude to being expelled from the party . Today it's gone. We'll just have to wait and see.
I think Clive Lewis was expelled from the RMT parliamentary group 4 years ago.
They don't move fast. Clive Lewis clearly doesn't fit within Starmers Labour Party so he should be concerned.
Rone when 3 out of the last posts on a thread are yours its time to take a breath and step away from the keyboard for a while. We know you’re passionate about your views on alternative monetary theory, unfortunately for you most people don’t believe they will work or aren’t ready for such a radical step.
Very unreasonable comment.
MMT explains how the system works currently. Testable, provable and descriptive.
The fact that Starmer tells lies/misunderstands fiscal operations is vital to understand where we are going.
MMT happens now - you just get to choose whether it's an aircraft carrier, new school, pandemic spending or tax cuts.
Why do people applaud maintaining the misunderstanding of our spending capacity, and ability to do good things? It's truly ignorant and we will never get anywhere if we don't hold politicians to account for what they should be doing.
You got to laugh - 6 years of Brexit ranting - never gets old. A couple of years pointing out the misunderstanding/mis-selling of government finances and I need to step away.
A truly dirisory position to take.
If you want solutions and outcomes you'd best understand how it all works.
I sometimes think STW is a safehaven for folk that want the world to be shit just so they can complain and never be part of fixing the problem because basically they haven't taken time out to understand the way things work.
(Also last 3 posts were mine because I was rushing to work all day and have to squeeze them in before I go.)
MMT happens now – you just get to choose whether it’s an aircraft carrier, new school, pandemic spending or tax cuts.
Yup, IMO politics/economics is just about priorities and nothing else. The "rules" are created to justify particular priorities.
And yes, a fair few on stw just want to nod in agreement with other punters over how much they hate the Tories/voters/anyone with a different opinion. In their world everything is very simple indeed .....Tories/voters/anyone with a different opinion are all thick and stupid, including bizarrely all those in power who they claim are taking us all for idiots.
Very unreasonable comment
Hardly, I carefully worded it so as to not take a position on your views, i simply pointed out that most people either dont understand anything about any of the monetary theories and few can get beyond the household budget analogy so for any politician trying to get their party into power explaining the inner workings of an alternative to the status quo economically isnt a vote winner even if it is the best thing since sliced bread.
As for the other part of your quote, i stand by that, carpet bombing threads like this isnt convincing anyone who isnt already a believer that your view of economic theory is right or would work. You cant argue people into submission, especially on the internet.
trying to get their party into power explaining the inner workings of an alternative to the status quo economically isnt a vote winner even if it is the best thing since sliced bread.
So you think voters should be sold a lie then, such as the need for balanced budgets/austerity? How does that move us forward?
It is not just about winning elections it is also about changing things. Otherwise if all that interests you is a strategy to win elections then the obvious party to back would be the Tories - they have won most of the general elections for the last 200 years.
So you think voters should be sold a lie then, such as the need for balanced budgets/austerity?
I believe it is a matter of opinion wether or not that is needed. Referring to a genuinely held but different opinion as a 'lie' is a terrible thing to do.
In their world everything is very simple indeed …..Tories/voters/anyone with a different opinion are all thick and stupid
You're one of the worst culprits for this Ernie, tbh.
I sometimes think STW is a safehaven for folk that want the world to be shit just so they can complain and never be part of fixing the problem
Also for people who complain about other people on STW not fixing the system, and when asked how they tell them to vote or go on a protest march or something. Because that always works if only we weren't too feeble minded to do it.
Referring to a genuinely held but different opinion as a ‘lie’ is a terrible thing to do.
Perhaps you should read the thread more carefully, I even copied and pasted the revelant bit:
trying to get their party into power explaining the inner workings of an alternative to the status quo economically isnt a vote winner even if it is the best thing since sliced bread.
It is not simply a "different opinion" it is suggesting ignoring the truth, even if it "the best thing since sliced bread".
And as for me calling Tories/voters/anyone with a different opinion thick and stupid that is clearly nonsense. I don't think I have ever called anyone thick and stupid on stw, let alone "one of the worst culprits".
Far from it, I fully recognise that senior Tory politicians are anything but stupid - I repeatedly pointed out that they win elections and succeed in their aims to transfer greater wealth and power into the hands of the super rich. And whilst I might not agree with all voters I do not automatically dismiss them as stupid racists.
By all means criticise what I post but try to restrict it to things that I actually say💡
i simply pointed out that most people either dont understand anything about any of the monetary theories and few can get beyond the household budget analogy so for any politician trying to get their party into power explaining the inner workings of an alternative to the status quo economically isnt a vote winner even if it is the best thing since sliced bread.
It is actually very simple to explain and if it was explained, simply, every time anybody asked an MP "how are you going to fund it" (which is a hell off a lot of times) it would start to get through to people after a few years. But absolutely nobody is doing that and people like Rachel Reeves are making it worse. John McDonnell was the last person who probably had a grip on it.
Yup, IMO politics/economics is just about priorities and nothing else. The “rules” are created to justify particular priorities.
Exactly, and you can vote for parties that have similar priorities to yours - Oh
Nice one Kerley.
Also - my point in this thread for context - lack of money is being used as a reason Labour can't do things we desperately need. Every progressive, even mild Liberal ought to be on to this, it's in their interests.
Anyone this side of the Tories must be at least arguing for a better NHS and all that comes with it. And Nationalisation for instance; good things desperately needed for 95% of people.
Starmer is simply using pretend lack of money to not offer these things up - its lazy and a total lie.
Anyone who doesn't get just needs to be pointed towards the Pandemic where the state stepped in and did its thing (it could've done it better of course but that's the politics ) the economics were always there. No taxes were involved.
I do think some people of the left feel there is well meaning Robin Hood effect of taking money from the rich - you've got to resist this urge as a logical debate. Sure tax them loads but not to fund anything just to remove their capacity to drain resources away from the rest of us and make fiscal space.
Lack of money is Tory framing. Liberals (and lots of the left)have inherited that framing. Like all Tory arguments its designed to remove access to a better way of life for the rest of us.
Progressives should argue for what we need and can do- not the cost.
if it was explained, simply, every time anybody asked an MP “how are you going to fund it” (which is a hell off a lot of times) it would start to get through to people after a few years.
That is exactly what the Tories do - repeat the same mantra over and over again in their speeches and interviews until people eventually believe that it must be true.
Thatcher did it with TINA and the claim that the economy is like a household budget, and Cameron did it with austerity and the need for balanced budgets.
If the right-wing of the Labour Party go along with it it's because they support the status quo and simply have no intention of changing anything.
It is not because voters are not ready to listen to an alternative economic strategy. In fact with the current cost of living economic crisis, along with the crisis in the NHS, the utilities, and housing, and I would say that there is a captive audience out there for any party which challenges the false neoliberal arguments.
Which is presumably why the Tories have become the shyest they have ever been in the last 45 years to talk about TINA and the need for balanced budgets. In fact the word "austerity", which the Tories once used at every opportunity, has now become an unmentionable dirty word for them.
What a time for Labour to let the Tories set the economic agenda.