Home › Forums › Chat Forum › 2019 General Election
- This topic has 6,282 replies, 176 voices, and was last updated 4 years ago by kelvin.
-
2019 General Election
-
outofbreathFree MemberPosted 5 years agoAnd hopefully lose his seat as a result
Boris’s seat is a sitting duck AFAIC with Labour in a close second place. The only way Labour could lose is to field an out an out extremist there… Oh wait….
Some quotes from Ali Milani:
“Nah u won’t mate. It’ll cost you a pound #jew.”
“I want to be the President of Israel. They have a self desruct button right ?”
“your Israel is a land built on ethnic cleansing and colonialism. Oppression is something your people should know about”
“Israel has no right to exist”
“@piersmorgan u are a zionist and corperate [sic] jackass”
Plus ‘working with Friends of Al Aqsa’.
https://www.middleeasteye.net/users/ali-milani
The fact Momentum picked Milani to contest an embattled PM in his vulnerable seat makes me suspect they are utterly incapable of selecting a leader like this:
Get someone who isn’t controversial or a non-committal idiot and who seems professional who would appeal to more people outside of their party bubbles.
Starmer would be a vote harvesting machine right now everywhere in the UK outside of Momentum.
andyrmFree MemberPosted 5 years agoIt utterly baffles me why Starmer isn’t Labour leader.
^^This. Starmer at least has some credibility and statesmanship about him. If he was deputy leader, things would be very different I think.
Remember the role of opposition leader is to be a credible threat to the PM and so keep the incumbent government in check – magic grandad is neither credible or statesman like so it’s no wonder the Conservative party are able to field someone like BoJo without much risk.
outofbreathFree MemberPosted 5 years ago^^This. Starmer at least has some credibility and statesmanship about him. If he was deputy leader, things would be very different I think.
Remember the role of opposition leader is to be a credible threat to the PM and so keep the incumbent government in check – magic grandad is neither credible or statesman like so it’s no wonder the Conservative party are able to field someone like BoJo without much risk.
Agree. The difference is Tory party can and will jettison BoJo the second he becomes a liability[1]. Labour can’t jettison Momentum, they’ve taken over at every level outside the PLP.
[1] Personally I think that will be about 34 seconds after Brexit is done and the next election is fought or 12 months before the election after that.
roneFull MemberPosted 5 years agoThis. Starmer at least has some credibility and statesmanship about him. If he was deputy leader, things would be very different I think.
You’re confusing what you want with what the membership wants.
Also – why the love for barristers?
roneFull MemberPosted 5 years agoRemember the role of opposition leader is to be a credible threat to the PM and so keep the incumbent government in check – magic grandad is neither credible or statesman like so it’s no wonder the Conservative party are able to field someone like BoJo without much risk.
Are you a Binners clone?
It’s not about being a ‘threat’. The amount of things the leader of the opposition has to juggle in these divisive times doesn’t come down to being a threat to the PM. It’s more about trying to keep the strands together (Leave voting Labour constituencies, PLP, CLP, Labour remain etc.)
JC is on his third PM …
Why do people keep going on about statesmen too? Repeating some Guardian claptrap without considering what the electorate/country might actually need in terms of reversing austerity etc – has nothing to do with statesmanship.
roneFull MemberPosted 5 years agoThe opposition needs a sharp mind right now.
Who defines a sharp mind? It’s completely nebulous.
And if you are referring to Keir Starmer – he is effectively in the correct role! he supports Corbyn and does his job with regard to his title.
But that doesn’t mean he is leadership material or he will get voted in – just because people on here think he should be leader.
And there are no guarantees he wouldn’t face exactly the same issues/outcomes as Corbyn. But hey – he doesn’t have a beard and he’s a statesman.
kelvinFull MemberPosted 5 years agoWell, it requires a brighter mind to become a barrister than a … whatever it is Corbyn was before he become a career politician.
JC is on his third PM …
I’d rather we had a Labour PM than keep watching Conservative leaders getting their go.
roneFull MemberPosted 5 years agoWell, it requires a brighter mind to become a barrister than a … whatever it is Corbyn was before he become a career politician.
But I don’t want my party to be lead by a barrister. Been there done that haven’t we?
Starmer can still benefit us with his ‘sharp’ mind in his current role.
Corbyn a career politician. Really? I think Corbyn has made his career very difficult then by not taking any easy options.
roneFull MemberPosted 5 years agoI’d rather we had a Labour PM than keep watching Conservative leaders getting their go
So would I – but we’re in complex times aren’t we?
binnersFull MemberPosted 5 years agoYou’re confusing what you want with what the membership wants.
…and the membership wants permenent tory rule so they can wave their placards from the sidelines and rail against the injustice of it all, while parading their righteous indignation as a badge of honour
Idealogical purity comes before everything, comrade.
JC is on his third PM …
Brilliant! Give us a shout when he outlasts his 20th, while still in ineffectual opposition, won’t you?
kelvinFull MemberPosted 5 years agoCorbyn a career politician.
The very definition of one.
What else has he done career wise in his long working life?
dazhFull MemberPosted 5 years agoIdealogical purity comes before everything, comrade.
They just want a real labour party in power, not a sad imitation tory apologist one. This is the legacy of Blair (along with 1 million dead people in Iraq but that’s old news apparently). The reason Corbyn is leader now, and why the membership will elect another leftwinger after him is because Blair abandoned everything that was held dear to labour members and supporters. So next time you go on about how great he was (apart from the 1 million dead people of course), just remember he caused all this. A political party doens’t need to be idealogically pure, but it does need ideals, that’s all the membership want (and no more deaths on their consciences).
What else has he done career wise in his long working life?
Well he didn’t kill 1 million people, that’s got to count for something. Seriously though, what is wrong with being a politician and more importantly a political activist working for peace?
kelvinFull MemberPosted 5 years agoA political party doens’t need to be idealogically pure, but it does need ideals, that’s all the membership want
When it comes to BREXIT, what are those ‘ideals’?
When it comes to freedom of movement of workers, what are those ‘ideals’?
When it comes to frictionless trade with the rest of Europe, what are those ‘ideals’?Well he didn’t kill 1 million people, that’s got to count for something.
Remember, I refused to vote Labour under Blair, because of that war, and those deaths… because of ideals.
Seriously though, what is wrong with being a politician and more importantly a political activist working for peace?
Nothing at all. @Rone was claiming that he wasn’t a career politician. I think that he is. I also think he doesn’t have the mind needed to be something like a barrister… to some that doesn’t matter… I, personally, think we may need someone smarter leading Labour, and ultimately being PM, in the months ahead.
zippykonaFull MemberPosted 5 years agoAs long as the Labour party remains pure we will just have to put up with an eternal Tory government.
Evolve you stupid **** ,your job is to beat the Tories by any means necessary.
dazhFull MemberPosted 5 years ago@Rone was claiming that he wasn’t a career politician.
I would describe him as a lifelong peace activist and campaigner for social justice rather than a career politician. A career politician is someone who pursues high office as a primary goal. For obvious reasons I don’t think Corbyn is anywhere close to this, which IMO makes him a much better candidate for high office than those who seek it.
andyrmFree MemberPosted 5 years agoAre you a Binners clone?
It’s not about being a ‘threat’. The amount of things the leader of the opposition has to juggle in these divisive times doesn’t come down to being a threat to the PM. It’s more about trying to keep the strands together (Leave voting Labour constituencies, PLP, CLP, Labour remain etc.)
JC is on his third PM …
Why do people keep going on about statesmen too? Repeating some Guardian claptrap without considering what the electorate/country might actually need in terms of reversing austerity etc – has nothing to do with statesmanship.
Hate to say it, but I’m nobody’s clone. I can just see through corbyn’s wooly nothingness.
Of course the opposition leader needs to be a threat – if he’s unelectable because he’s so useless, indecisive, unclear on intentions and unable to control his troops, there’s nothing forcing the incumbents to behave in fear of losing to a challenger. Which is why we’ve seen the creep in the Conservative party and Boris in power, when previously he’d never have had a chance. Essentially, the least unpalatable to the electorate wins, and right now that’s Boris (for the record I’m no supporter of his!).
Why do we need someone statesman like? The prime minister is CEO of GB Inc – he or she needs to be a credible, strong and respective front man/woman for the country’s interests on the global stage, be a good presenter, a charismatic speaker, well reasoned and actually have the balls to act. Corbyn is none of those things.
To reverse austerity, a PM needs to generate revenues – which means winning the confidence of the business community. Again, this is something Corbyn fails at.
andyrmFree MemberPosted 5 years agoAs long as the Labour party remains pure we will just have to put up with an eternal Tory government.
Evolve you stupid **** ,your job is to beat the Tories by any means necessary.
Couldn’t agree with you more!
Do they want to be a permanent opposition that appeals to a diminished crowd with shrinking influence, or actually make a difference?
binnersFull MemberPosted 5 years agoSo we end up with a permanent Tory government because…
Iraq
Brilliant!
dazhFull MemberPosted 5 years agoHate to say it, but I’m nobody’s clone.
And yet you trot out all the usual tabloid nonsense as if it’s gospel.
or actually make a difference?
Trouble is if you abandon all your principles in the pursuit of power you make very little difference. Having bragging rights over the opposition and ministerial salaries and cars might be nice, but many in the labour party want more than that. As I’ve said many times before, politics is not a sport.
binnersFull MemberPosted 5 years agoAnd the point of a political party is not to be some endless protest group.
At some point they have to step up and actually get elected, then do something.
Corbyn and Momentum are just quite happy in their comfort zone, virtue signalling and waving placards. And Boris and the Tory’s can’t believe their bloody luck…
andyrmFree MemberPosted 5 years agoFully agree their dazh – but the issue from where I see it, is that under corbyn, labour has stopped being the party for workers, and become the party for ideological middle class “dinner party socialists” rather than representing the grafters that have been their traditional power base.
There seems to be a lack of pragmatism in favour of ideology, and that ideology isn’t necessarily in line with what the electorate want. It’s no good saying “the party membership want this” or worse, momentum want this, if it ultimately harms electability.
dazhFull MemberPosted 5 years agoSo we end up with a permanent Tory government because…
No you end up with a labour party true to it’s roots and principles and never beholden to dangerous narcissists like Blair who will do anything to win or to maintain his power. You shouldn’t underestimate the impact of Iraq. If you’re looking for root causes to labour’s current predicament, this is where you’ll find them.
binnersFull MemberPosted 5 years agoPermanent opposition is permanent opposition, no matter how you slice it
If you can’t make an impact against this shower of hard right incompetents then there’s really no point to you.
It’s the dictionary definition of failure
dazhFull MemberPosted 5 years agoThere seems to be a lack of pragmatism in favour of ideology, and that ideology isn’t necessarily in line with what the electorate want.
Labour under Corbyn have been more pragmatic than I ever thought they’d be. The brexit policy is good example of pragmatism trumping ideology. Same with defence. Even the unashamedly radical economic policies have erred on the side of pragmatic caution, especially in fiscal policy.
As for what’s in line with the electorate’s wishes, labour policies have been shown in both polls and elections to be massively popular. There’s understandable inertia following the consensus created by 40 years of neoliberalism (which is much more ideological than anything labour have done), so it won’t change overnight, but it doesn’t mean it can’t be, or that they should give up at the first hurdle. Overturning the current neoliberal socialism for the rich model will take time, an numerous election cycles. Labour can either keep fighting for that or give up. I know what I would prefer.
scotroutesFull MemberPosted 5 years agoThe problem with a more right/centrist Labour party is that it allows the Tories to become even more Right wing by moving the “central” ground.
However, the balance at the moment seems to be fundamentally wrong. There are a lot of natural Labour supporters on this thread and on STW in general but any suggestions they have about improving the lot of the Labour party are shot down in flames by the same 2 or 3 posters. Surely there has to come a time for listening to the actual electorate instead of preaching to them?
binnersFull MemberPosted 5 years agoI’m struggling to see how the Labour Party rediscovering pragmatism could make this Tory government any more right wing?
Have you seen the present cabinet?
It’s an Ayn Rand fan club FFS!
And the present Labour Party ‘leadership’ can’t even offer an alternative to that?
CaptainFlashheartFree MemberPosted 5 years agoSurely there has to come a time for listening to the actual electorate instead of preaching to them?
Can’t be having the pesky electorate involved in things. They might get it wrong.
dazhFull MemberPosted 5 years agoSurely there has to come a time for listening to the actual electorate instead of preaching to them?
If that were true we’d be out of the EU now so be careful what you wish for.
RustySpannerFull MemberPosted 5 years agoBinners, can you tell us what you disliked about the last Labour Manifesto?
jjprestidgeFree MemberPosted 5 years agoThey just want a real labour party in power, not a sad imitation tory apologist one. This is the legacy of Blair (along with 1 million dead people in Iraq but that’s old news apparently). The reason Corbyn is leader now, and why the membership will elect another leftwinger after him is because Blair abandoned everything that was held dear to labour members and supporters. So next time you go on about how great he was (apart from the 1 million dead people of course), just remember he caused all this. A political party doens’t need to be idealogically pure, but it does need ideals, that’s all the membership want (and no more deaths on their consciences).
You are correct in that assessment – Labour had become almost indistinguishable from the Tories during the Blair/Brown years. I hoped, initially, that Corbyn’s rise would mark a shift to a sensible kind of socialism, but, unfortunately, he’s gone totally loony left. I find it strange that his supporters don’t see that that he’s just as much a believer in magical unicorns as all of the Brexiteer Conservative nutters. The only difference is the colour of the unicorn.
JP
kelvinFull MemberPosted 5 years agowhat you disliked about the last Labour Manifesto?
Well, I liked the 2017 Labour Manifesto, apart from the bit that accepted a hard Brexit as the only way of interpreting the 2016 result… at least Labour bothered with a manifesto… the other UK wide parties didn’t really try. It’s 2019 now… probably 2020 when the election hits… how has Corbyn been preparing for the reality of what the election campaign is going to be like? Is he really up to the challenge? Is he winning people over? He’s had a fair while in the post now.
kerleyFree MemberPosted 5 years agoI also liked the Labour manifesto and felt it was going in the right direction. I am sure that a lot of voters would feel the same if they read it. Unfortunately people are not reading manifestos now (did they ever?) and the personality at the top is the most important bit (rightly or wrongly).
Corbyn is simply the wrong person for the job. Yes I agree he has been a good politician who tends to vote for the right things but that does not make him a leader and having him as leader doesn’t help the party get elected and those good policies put into practice.
dazhFull MemberPosted 5 years agoUnfortunately people are not reading manifestos now (did they ever?) and the personality at the top is the most important bit
They didn’t read them in 2017. It was the campaign, and in large part Corbyn’s campaign events, which presented the policies to the electorate. You seem to be conveniently forgetting the fact that at the start of the campaign he wasn’t doing too well, by the end of it he had thousands turning up to public rallies. Of course that doesn’t mean it will happen again, but then no one thought it would in 2017.
deadlydarcyFree MemberPosted 5 years agoThe success against what turned out to be such a slick Tory campaign, with May absolutely on fire, meeting and greeting wherever she went, kissing babies, dancing a bit, etc in 2017 was amazing too.
taxi25Free MemberPosted 5 years agoSurely there has to come a time for listening to the actual electorate instead of preaching to them?
If that were true we’d be out of the EU now so be careful what you wish for.
Disregard Brexit and have a think about what you just posted.
RustySpannerFull MemberPosted 5 years agoRight, so people like the policies but don’t like JC?
But without JC, would those policies exist?
As someone eloquently put it, would you rather live on your knees, or die on your feet?
I’m not going back to the days of Tory appeasement, the moral Chaimberlainesque cowardice that means it would have been cheaper to put the cost of rebuilding Blackburn Hospital on a credit card than selling it off to the private sector via PPI.
No more.
It’s time to stand up for what you believe in.
I’m not willing to stand by and watch any more of the most vulnerable in our society die because it’s inconvenient to do otherwise.This society is riddled with endemic greed and selfishness.
Time for change.If people can’t see beyond a beard, then God help us all.
By all means let’s have Starmer as leader.
As long as he pledges to push through a democratic socialist manifesto containing the key points of the previous one.If supposedly decent, honest people are prepared to witness the destruction of our post war society, perhaps we should just scrap the whole thing and start again?
And Binners, that’s your cue to either post yet another **** picture of Wolfie Smith or answer the question.
The topic ‘2019 General Election’ is closed to new replies.