|
I think right now my ranking is RLB>Nandy>Thornberry>Starmer
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 12:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 12:48 |
|
|
Tijuana Bibliophile posted:Sir James Wilson Vincent Savile OBE KCSG 
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 12:34
|
|
|
sebzilla posted:I think right now my ranking is RLB>Nandy>Thornberry>Starmer Why Nandy? Sure she can give an interview, but I'm not crazy about the people that support her or her and Blue Labour's "fiscally left, socially conservative" shtick.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 12:40
|
|
|
sebzilla posted:I think right now my ranking is RLB>Nandy>Thornberry>Starmer I'm honestly kind of thinking of giving Nandy my first and then RLB second. I could not have predicted this turn off events.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 12:40
|
|
|
I've been thoroughly unimpressed by RLBs performance so far, whereas Nandy has been surprising, and has also distanced herself quite substantially from Blue Labour. I'm inclined to feel the same. Not impressed with Starmer or Thornberry either, and Thornberry's 'all the rest are career politicians' shtick has made her look worse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 12:44
|
|
|
Now that's something to wank to. Karl Marx, not the lovely Leah
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 12:50
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:Now that's something to wank to. Karl Marx, not the lovely Leah Porque no los dos?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 12:51
|
|
|
Miftan posted:Why Nandy? Sure she can give an interview, but I'm not crazy about the people that support her or her and Blue Labour's "fiscally left, socially conservative" shtick. Interviews well and does genuinely seem to have some draw for the voters we've lost over the past couple of decades. Anti-Trident (or at least voted that way), anti-New Labour and I generally trust her to do more Good Left Stuff than Thornberry or Starmer.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 12:51
|
|
|
Bit of a blast from the past here but I firmly recall this very thread floating Nandy as a favourite in 2015 before this under-the-radar backbench MP Jeremy Bernard Corbyn suddenly popped into the ring.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 12:52
|
|
|
Lisa Nandy, make it Lisa Nandos and then we're talking.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 12:57
|
|
|
I'm really not sure I want a blue labour pick anywhere near the leadership.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 12:59
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I'm really not sure I want a blue labour pick anywhere near the leadership. Yeah same, and she hasn't distanced herself from Blue Labour at all. She doesn't mention them because she's not an idiot but I'm pretty sure they were at her launch. She's been asked about them as well and has pivoted away from the question, according to the new statesman. I don't know if that blue labour type nativism that she definitely has a bit of will morph into full on controls on immigration when the media stops showering her with praise and transitions into 'labour bad' and I'm not willing to take that gamble.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 13:09
|
|
|
Miftan posted:Yeah same, and she hasn't distanced herself from Blue Labour at all. She doesn't mention them because she's not an idiot but I'm pretty sure they were at her launch. She's been asked about them as well and has pivoted away from the question, according to the new statesman. I don't know if that blue labour type nativism that she definitely has a bit of will morph into full on controls on immigration when the media stops showering her with praise and transitions into 'labour bad' and I'm not willing to take that gamble. Would you put Thornberry in second, then? Why? And Nandy where, third or fourth?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 13:11
|
|
|
Miftan posted:Yeah same, and she hasn't distanced herself from Blue Labour at all. She doesn't mention them because she's not an idiot but I'm pretty sure they were at her launch. She's been asked about them as well and has pivoted away from the question, according to the new statesman. I don't know if that blue labour type nativism that she definitely has a bit of will morph into full on controls on immigration when the media stops showering her with praise and transitions into 'labour bad' and I'm not willing to take that gamble. Specifically, Jon Cruddas was at her launch and is one of her closest allies. That's really worrying.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 13:11
|
|
|
sebzilla posted:Would you put Thornberry in second, then? Why? Fourth, unless Starmer also hangs out with overt fash like Rod Liddle. That's an absolute red line for a Labour leader.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 13:13
|
|
|
Also the social conservative lot are the kind to immediately start doing poo poo like ramping up attacks on travellers and LGBT people. Which is sort of a personal issue even aside from the obvious wrongness of it? I'm not sure I could look a lot of our posters in the avatar if I voted for that?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 13:13
|
|
|
sebzilla posted:Would you put Thornberry in second, then? Why? I'd do RLB Starmer Nandy Thornberry, I think, but after RLB who is a 7, maybe 7 and a half out of 10, the rest are all pretty bad imo. Having said that, they all have space to grow into their own in the role, I just think RLB is the most likely to grow into something I'd approve of.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 13:14
|
|
|
Miftan posted:I'd do RLB Starmer Nandy Thornberry, I think, but after RLB who is a 7, maybe 7 and a half out of 10, the rest are all pretty bad imo. Having said that, they all have space to grow into their own in the role, I just think RLB is the most likely to grow into something I'd approve of. Bit rude to rate RLB as highly as the EU
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 13:27
|
|
|
The point is to try and force something other than a RLB/Starmer showdown, which tactical voting of Thornberry/Nandy 1st might ensure, and if they fall you just fall back to RLB.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 13:33
|
|
|
Darth Walrus posted:Fourth, unless Starmer also hangs out with overt fash like Kate Hoey. That's an absolute red line for a Labour leader. Fixed that for you. Nandy's not unfriendly with the hateful shits.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 13:33
|
|
|
I may not understand quite how the voting system works but if lots of people want to put keir starmer as a high preference then I don't see what good it does to faff about with other people in the first round..? If lots of people want him to be leader he will be leader, and voting for people you don't want to win and don't stand a very good chance of winning isn't going to help with that, because it's first to 50% of preferences. If you want RLB as leader and vote for nandy ahead of her it's just going to mean the RLB/Starmer face off happens in round 2 which achieves nothing other than making him more likely to win because you told people to put RLB later in the order?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 13:36
|
|
|
Super Secret Guide to Tactical Voting in Instant-Runoff Voting Systems: 1) Put the candidate that you would most like to win first. 2) Put the candidate that you would second most like to win second.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 13:43
|
|
|
I do not understand why a RLB/Starmer face off is to be avoided. Especially since the point of RLB is to send a message to the right wingers that gently caress you we're still in charge actually, so a first round win is the best outcome. The thing with Starmer is that it's not so much about how he'd fair as an individual, but how the party would react to him: he is unequivocally the Melt's Choice(r),* so if he gets in it will be hailed as the death of socialism and he'll go where the wind takes him (right). The only question imo is whether it's worth the outside risk of Nandy to keep him in 4th place. Honestly I don't know enough about her to really judge, but if the choice is New Labour or Blue Labour I'd vote for "gently caress the lot of yez". Do we really have vote for 3rd & 4th preference? *Flips endorsement notwithstanding, since she was probably just being contrarian & went with the candidate furthest removed from Corbyn's leadership e: vvv fair. Might as well be the flavour of rear end in a top hat that Borrovan fucked around with this message at 14:19 on Jan 24, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 13:47
|
|
|
You don't have to vote for anyone you don't want to but you do have the opportunity so you might as well use it, though I concur that picking between two flavours of rear end in a top hat is a difficult choice.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 13:49
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:All very interesting but I'm a little uncertain about this part - I grew up in Tyneside where NUFC is extremely important from a cultural position and many people my family were very close to were season ticket holders. Despite that my parents always (never openly saying it, in their very subtle way) felt like they had this low-key disdain for football fans that I picked up on - stupid, violent, vulgar: read, daily mail working class. I certainly grew up with an elitist attitude towards the game (why waste your time on that pointless rubbish, brb off to spend 8 hours playing videogames), and it was only in my twenties I started to realise that it was an important social and cultural institution for many people in a way I had previously been too arrogant to understand. I still think there are lots of very problematic aspects of the game like tribalism, lots of homophobia, racism, hooliganism etc but where I used to think they were inherent parts of it I now see your point - they're more reflections of left failure and unchallenged right hegemony (with some major exceptions like Celtic). Yeah, i was rushing a bit when i wrote that so it doesn't really make the point i was trying to make - that that sort of behaviour - "airing", as in "putting on airs and graces" as my mum used to call it, especially when describing her sister and my dad's sister, and there's great stories there for another time - was and is present everywhere, but is more prevalent in communities where the link with the football club is much less ingrained in the community. It's just one of the little cultural signifiers that people pick up, consciously or unconsciously. It also doesn't exist as much in areas where there's no local football club at all, for similar reasons - there's no cultural cachet in being seen not to follow the mass. You're right, doing it in a town like Newcastle is very Hyacinth behaviour. Obviously this all gets much more muddled by the eighties, with the parallel (and IMO very much related) disintegration of working-class communities (with matching increase in people wanting to show they were "better" than their neighbours) and the rise in mass violence at football matches. Football is very much a mirror of the society in which it's played, and that unfortunately includes the current gentrified, faux-authentic laddish bullshit that an awful lot of people (modern fans especially included) thinks is what being a fan is all about.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 13:55
|
|
|
crispix posted:So do those men get aroused when Hilary Benn makes a speech about how brilliant it would be to use the air force to bomb Syria or when IDS makes a speech about clamping down on benefit scroungers There's a reason why floppy-dicked old men are super-stoked about giant nuclear submarines firing potent, unstoppable missiles all over the place and yes, it's the obvious one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 14:03
|
|
|
Oof, that's gotta be a job with some serious turnover. https://twitter.com/markdistef/status/1220686436795633664?s=21
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 14:06
|
|
|
Ms Adequate posted:Nah see the fact that Sikh soldiers fought with distinction in WW1, like many peoples from across the Empire, doesn't actually mean it's not woke SJW snowflake bollocks to have a Sikh soldier in the trenches on film. What is even the end game for these people? Let's say you take their criticisms on good faith and accept that including minorities in films is "positive discrimination", what's the alternative - having writers and casting directors being worried that they have put too many minorities in a film and risk upsetting racists? It's always really been the case that how minorities are represented, at the end of the day, just doesn't really interest them much and they find it tiresome. They like to pretend that they are race blind and don't have biases when really it is just that the didn't at all mind certain parts of culture being racist or sexist because, again, even if they aren't racist or sexist themselves they don't really have much of a concern with other people being that way. Even the most generous assessment of it all is that these people just lack any real empathy for people outside their race.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 14:10
|
|
|
Quinch posted:It's always really been the case that how minorities are represented, at the end of the day, just doesn't really interest them much and they find it tiresome. They like to pretend that they are race blind and don't have biases when really it is just that the didn't at all mind certain parts of culture being racist or sexist because, again, even if they aren't racist or sexist themselves they don't really have much of a concern with other people being that way. Even the most generous assessment of it all is that these people just lack any real empathy for people outside their race. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 14:23
|
|
|
Quinch posted:What is even the end game for these people?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 14:23
|
|
|
Pilchenstein posted:A return to blackface. Yeah, a lot of people look at how tolerant and accepting modern culture often is of minorities but can’t accept that any gains are precisely because of the way it has put at the forefront that they are now raging against. They think it should be stopped because it isn’t needed without realising that it’s removal would lead to culture becoming intolerant again, that racism is no where near being a solved issue and it’s an ongoing process.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 14:39
|
|
|
Who's bottom left?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 14:48
|
|
|
sebzilla posted:Who's bottom left? i'm a lefty bottom
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 14:50
|
|
|
This is a really bizarre political compass.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 14:52
|
|
|
sebzilla posted:Who's bottom left?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 14:53
|
|
|
Camrath posted:Also, all of you who ordered fudge this month- your orders are now shipped! Be prepared for a box of deliciousness tomorrow or saturday! Thanks for the fudge, mine arrived this morning and it's very good - having to resist scoffing it all at once! Although the sea salt one should come with a warning not to sample it after you've already desensitised your taste buds trying four other kinds of fudge. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 14:54
|
|
|
Miftan posted:This is a really bizarre political compass. Santa's obviously authoritarian left (pro-redistribution, anti-naughty, big beard, probably a trot of some sort), Moses is auth right (wrote all that Mosaic Law), Jesus is a libcom, which I guess means George is libertarian right.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 15:02
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:It's just the standard one rotated 90 degrees. "If you convert, I will slaughter this now-helpless endangered animal in cold blood. If you don't, I'll sic it on you."
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 15:10
|
|
|
What if the dragon consents?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 15:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 12:48 |
|
|
Maugrim posted:Thanks for the fudge, mine arrived this morning and it's very good - having to resist scoffing it all at once! How do I get on Camrath's fudge list?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 15:24
|
|
