|
Ratjaculation posted:Where is Tony? asking the important Q's here
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 22:45 |
|
|
So much for the Liberal fight back. Ratjaculation posted:Where is Tony? The Hague
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:23
|
|
|
No more excuses: Jeremy Corbyn is to blame for this meltdownquote:Dave Wilcox, the Derbyshire Labour group leader, explains the defeat he and his colleagues have just endured. He heard it again and again on the doorstep: “Genuine Labour supporters said we are not voting for you while you have Jeremy Corbyn as leader.”
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:27
|
|
|
It should be pointed out that at least two, and possibly four, metro mayoralties went to the Tories almost certainly because the Supplementary Vote is a steaming pile of poo poo. Most notably, Green voters having to guess between Labour and Lib Dem in both West of England and Cambs+P'boro exhausted their preferences early and let the Tories just over the line. Which is the exact thing you don't want in a preferential system.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:27
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:At this point Labour need to get over themselves & accept a progressive alliance/popular front arrangement with the Liberals, Greens & aye, even the Scottish & Welsh nats, with a manifesto commitment for electoral reform. Because STV or the like is the only thing that will counteract the big advantage Tories will get from the boundary redraw next year. Personally I think that's a big positive for Lewis. I think an electoral pact makes sense but its clearly decisive in labour and I don't think the party are in a place to accept standing aside in seats to make room for the Libs or Greens - there is certainly a contingent as shown by the handful of MPs who signed that letter calling on Labour to stand aside in the Isle of Wight to give the greens a straight run, but I think there's enough opposition from the traditional left and right of the party to outnumber the pro-pacters Its a matter of whether or not labour will accept a recalibration from the natural party of government to a party of government
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:27
|
|
|
AP posted:it’s really the fault of the media bad article, bad understanding of reality, bad country
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:32
|
|
|
Is Dave Wilcox the same guy who didn't bother sending leaflets or canvas in this area because it was a Labour safe seat, or the same guy who let the Tories buy the front page of the Derbyshire times and then put in a one page wall of text statement around that entertainment section no one cares about?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
Who the hell looks at May and says she looks strong? She looks like a literal harpy and acts like an insane person.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
They are loving morons then arent they like the majority of the British public.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:35
|
|
|
Also how is someone who isn't willing to vote for good Labour policies a "genuine Labour supporter"? What do they support if not those things?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:38
|
|
|
Ratjaculation posted:Where is Tony? He's only about as likely as all the people who tried last time. Burnham, Eagle, Owens  He's worth a punt
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:39
|
|
|
kustomkarkommando posted:I think an electoral pact makes sense but its clearly decisive in labour and I don't think the party are in a place to accept standing aside in seats to make room for the Libs or Greens - there is certainly a contingent as shown by the handful of MPs who signed that letter calling on Labour to stand aside in the Isle of Wight to give the greens a straight run, but I think there's enough opposition from the traditional left and right of the party to outnumber the pro-pacters I don't think they can really afford to deny reality. The past couple of boundary changes has done that for them, along with the suicide of Scottish Labour. It's just accepting that "this is where we are".
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:38
|
|
|
I'm all for calling Corbin incompetent but that guy really is full of poo poo. "They wanted to vote Labour, they really did. It was how they had always voted. Two men felt they would be betraying their fathers by voting any other way. They weren’t overly impressed by May, though several volunteered that she seemed “strong” (even if all but two of them said they’d never heard the slogan “strong and stable leadership” – a phrase repeated ad nauseam by the Conservative campaign). But they just couldn’t bring themselves to vote Labour." 
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:39
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:So much for the Liberal fight back. So much for the far left, the left, the centre left and the centre.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:41
|
|
|
Seaside Loafer posted:They are loving morons then arent they
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:41
|
|
|
Regarde Aduck posted:So much for the far left, the left, the centre left and the centre. Fair. But let me have my moment of schadenfreude please.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:42
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:At this point Labour need to get over themselves & accept a progressive alliance/popular front arrangement with the Liberals, Greens & aye, even the Scottish & Welsh nats, with a manifesto commitment for electoral reform. Because STV or the like is the only thing that will counteract the big advantage Tories will get from the boundary redraw next year. Personally I think that's a big positive for Lewis. I've been suggesting this for years now. kustomkarkommando posted:I think an electoral pact makes sense but its clearly decisive in labour and I don't think the party are in a place to accept standing aside in seats to make room for the Libs or Greens It would make more sense to have another election using the new electoral system if they do get in after they implemented what they wanted to do since politcal ideals would conflict with each other very often and create an unstable main government in the HoC. Since the only way a progressive alliance is going to work in a FPTP system is to have all the parties agree to be one entity in the ballot. The small problem is what candidate gets what seat. I would imagine a more realistic approach would let Labour/Lib Dem candidates stay in their strongholds with Lib dems staying away from areas that are mainly Labour/Tory to focus on areas that they have a better chance at, especially in Tory/Lib Dem areas and vice versa. You basically want to absorb most parties/indepedents to get a better chance of gaining votes rather then waste away spliting votes in a FPTP too. OwlFancier posted:Still skeptical of him, he's done some good things in the past but power seeking is not a thing inclined to make me trust people. And the only way you are going to get anything done is to seek power. For good or for worse, you can't change anything inside the system without power. Extreme0 fucked around with this message at 21:47 on May 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:42
|
|
|
I really do have some sympathy for Corbyn at this point that Wilcox guy hosed up the campaign for Derbyshire, by not you know, organising any. But the grass roots really do seem as incompetent and poo poo as the top level people and the press seem fixated on taking down one man. Getting rid of Corbyn won't be the magic fix if the foundations are hosed.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:48
|
|
|
Extreme0 posted:And the only way you are going to get anything done is to seek power. For good or for worse, you can't change anything inside the system without power. Again, this does not make the seeking of power any less meriting of suspicion. You should be suspicious of everyone who has or desires power.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:49
|
|
|
Looke posted:asking the important Q's here hey, i was being serious. I worry for him if he doesnt quench his bloodlust
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:50
|
|
|
That Freedland article is confirmed as a piece of shite when you get close to the end:quote:Why are they so stubborn? It can’t be a tenacious commitment to socialism. Corbyn and McDonnell’s programme includes nothing remotely as leftwing as, say, the £5bn windfall tax on the utilities promised, and implemented, 20 years ago by the supposed “evil neoliberal” Tony Blair. Yeah, there's no policies that have been talked about that dwarf £5bn. None at all.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:54
|
|
|
Extreme0 posted:It would make more sense to have another election using the new electoral system if they do get in after they implemented what they wanted to do since politcal ideals would conflict with each other very often and create an unstable main government in the HoC. Since the only way a progressive alliance is going to work in a FPTP system is to have all the parties agree to be one entity in the ballot. The small problem is what candidate gets what seat. I would imagine a more realistic approach would let Labour/Lib Dem candidates stay in their strongholds with Lib dems staying away from areas that are mainly Labour/Tory to focus on areas that they have a better chance at, especially in Tory/Lib Dem areas and vice versa. You basically want to absorb most parties/indepedents to get a better chance of gaining votes rather then waste away spliting votes in a FPTP too. You don't necessarily need to stand as a single entity on the ballot, non-contesting deals in target constituencies with parties agreeing not to nominate candidates would be the obvious solution - a tactic used quite effectively in northern Ireland in 1974 and still deployed occasionally (Fermanagh and South Tyrone has such a pact in place since 2010) A new election after reform makes sense but you need to get the government first and I doubt the greens would accept a super duper honest promise from Labour re:electoral reform without a solid commitment to make way in at least one additional seat outside of Brighton Pavilion Any promise of reform would need to be underscored with a solid material commitment with no-contest ssats
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:55
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Again, this does not make the seeking of power any less meriting of suspicion. You should be suspicious of everyone who has or desires power. I'm always suspicious when people seek power. I'm just not naive to think that everyone who seeks power is in the same branch of bastards that the Tories lay around on. The issue is trust and I trust Clive Lewis more than any Tory prick you can suggest to do better with Power. That dosen't make me think however I'm just going to leave my guard down.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:57
|
|
|
I suppose on that we differ in that I don't trust people really.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:57
|
|
|
You could probably chuck in one or two agreed independents running purely on reform tickets in hotly disputed seats with key rivals (the libs and labour) agreeing on a single issue limited life candidate with no contest from either to smooth over a handful of seats where neither wants to cede ground to the other
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:59
|
|
|
i like to think that if i asked nicely, corbs would cover my nipples on a chilly day. and thats worth my vote
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:58
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:You need someone who can unite the PLP and yet still win over the membership. Firstly this person doesn't exist, and secondly the PLP don't want to unite with the membership. They want all the power back in their hands, and they've used every single trick in the book to try and shut the members out, including inventing new NEC positions to give more seats to their own side. Any kind of proposed unity from the PLP will be a trick, and this is my deepest worry about a 'unity' candidate. They have totally sabotaged the party to try and get rid of Jeremy Corbyn and that shouldn't be forgiven in a hurry. I'm quite sure that if anyone weaker than Corbyn got in within a year there would be another leadership challenge only this time with a candidate list containing only PLP-approved names.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:58
|
|
|
Ex-trade union people are the worst for being small men who know they would have been important in their own sphere if the Unions still had power and so grab at any power they can. You find them on committees campaigning for stuff and complaining bitterly about councils while doing everything they can to annoy them.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
One thing to bear in mind is that a lot of the real PLP shitehawks like Dugher aren't going to be around after the election. So imagine whether or not Labour do badly in the election that there will be less opposition from the right wing of the party. OTOH Watson is rumoured to be stirring something up in the NEC so who the gently caress knows
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 22:07
|
|
|
kustomkarkommando posted:You don't necessarily need to stand as a single entity on the ballot, non-contesting deals in target constituencies with parties agreeing not to nominate candidates would be the obvious solution - a tactic used quite effectively in northern Ireland in 1974 and still deployed occasionally (Fermanagh and South Tyrone has such a pact in place since 2010) Oh I know about non-contesting deals but the other reason I suggested a single entity is to absorb any smaller parties that could potentially split the vote and to reduce the need of a coalition issue if one party decieds to join with the Tories in the issue of a hung parliament. kustomkarkommando posted:A new election after reform makes sense but you need to get the government first and I doubt the greens would accept a super duper honest promise from Labour re:electoral reform without a solid commitment to make way in at least one additional seat outside of Brighton Pavilion. Hence the issue of how many from each party is acceptable. Enough to make sure the that the single entity isn't mostly one party with other smaller parties since that could lead to a backstabbing problem if a few smaller parties decied to go rouge and join up with the bigger party to form an actual government for 4-5 years or if Labour & Lib Dem become a thing. It's a difficult thing to think forward because it requires fair and strategic placements for everyone involved so that no one can form a government without the need of mostly everyone involved which if it works, would mostly be ideal to have another election with the new electoral system with actual contesting seats. Smaller parties I doubt will complain much since STV would be a gain for them in some form. They just need to know if the alliance idea isn't bullshit to exclude them out of the ballot. OwlFancier posted:I suppose on that we differ in that I don't trust people really. I don't trust people either. I just have a easier way of thinking when it comes to reading people if they are less likely to screw me over more then the other.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 22:12
|
|
|
If Labour were the Conservative Party then Lewis would already have been offered the post of Shadow Defence in a Cooper cabinet.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 22:16
|
|
|
I bet people will still make excuses. What's inexcusable is corbyn not resigning today to give his party at least some semblance of a chance in June.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 22:18
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:One thing to bear in mind is that a lot of the real PLP shitehawks like Dugher aren't going to be around after the election. So imagine whether or not Labour do badly in the election that there will be less opposition from the right wing of the party. Someone still leaked all of Labour's briefing notes for MPs to the press immediately after they were issued, just like they did at the last local elections. They aren't even particularly damaging since they're the official party line, what's damaging is the fact that some fucker is leaking absolutely everything that might even remotely be considered confidential.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 22:19
|
|
|
Yes because a party which changed leadership less than a month before a general election is a party I would vote for. Do try to be a bit less dim.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 22:19
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:Why? What the press are doing now is exactly what they've been doing since Corbyn was nominated. They've been stabbing and gouging and spitting since day 1. Today is just the culmination of two years of hostile briefing where they can say "we told you so!". When they told you, maybe you should have listened.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 22:22
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Yes because a party which changed leadership less than a month before a general election is a party I would vote for. Changed leadership to rid itself of the failed toxic dumpster-fire leader who is the reason so many people won't vote for the party, not just a generic disconnected no-context 'changed leadership.' I'm talking about the actual labour leadership in the real world, not some abstraction.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 22:22
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:When they told you, maybe you should have listened. Rich coming from a fascist, the ideology of all pathological losers.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 22:28
|
|
|
Changing horse right now would be bloody pointless. Corbyn needs to see this through to the bitter end.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 22:31
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:When they told you, maybe you should have listened. So you're unashamedly advocating voting for whoever the press tells you to vote for. I can save you actually reading the papers to find out: it's whoever leads the Tory party.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 22:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 22:45 |
|
|
Not So Fast posted:Changing horse right now would be bloody pointless. Corbyn needs to see this through to the bitter end. He needs to resign in disgrace and eventually will. Doing it now might mitigate some small quantity of the damage he's caused, not doing it ensures no damage at all will be mitigated.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 22:32
|
|