|
Poll: Who Should Be Leader of HM Most Loyal Opposition? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Jeremy Corbyn |
|
95 | 18.63% |
| Dennis Skinner |
|
53 | 10.39% |
| Angus Robertson |
|
20 | 3.92% |
| Tim Farron |
|
9 | 1.76% |
| Paul Ukips |
|
7 | 1.37% |
| Robot Lenin |
|
105 | 20.59% |
| Tony Blair |
|
28 | 5.49% |
| Pissflaps |
|
193 | 37.84% |
| Total: | 510 votes | ||
|
Paxman posted:Playing devil's advocate a little but as long as we do have free movement, what are the companies expected to do? I believe this is filed under 'the capitalism mode of production and wage labour is inherently bad for society'. Two parties with no interest in anyone but themselves seek the simplest relationship possible at the greatest benefit to themselves; hence employers seek to create the perfect workforce of cheap, reliable and with no other option workers, the state endeavors to assist them in this and employees suffer when they fit the bill and suffer worse if they don't, even if they care about their job they don't care about the business. Co-operative business structures which give workers control could absolutely accept transitory migrant labour but wouldn't prioritise it based on purely business cost because they'd be working and living alongside them, as well as ending the semi-illegal flow by people traffickers because they couldn't guarantee the kind of work that they do now to the migrant worker.
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2017 22:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 20:15 |
|
|
Private Speech posted:Or maybe the employment and immigration statistics don't show that at all, because of the growth of economy associated with there simply being more people. That is besides anecdotes. But hey, it's the brutal truth who can argue. Nobody apart from economists and politicians actually gives a poo poo about the economy. People care about their part of the economy, how secure it is and how much money they're earning by being a part of it. While the growth figures are absolutely dependent on immigration (I believe it was analysis of Osbournes last budget which clearly illustrated the reduced growth from reduced immigration), this growth is so specific in economic sector and geographical region that it is equally the brutal truth that a larger economy doesn't improve many (most?) peoples lives even a little. Even factoring the increased income of the immigrant worker from whatever they could earn at home there is still the brain drain from their nation of birth and the economic impediment that those who remain suffer as a consequence. namesake fucked around with this message at 23:02 on Mar 8, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2017 23:00
|
|
|
Private Speech posted:That's all a bit relative, but there's a whole lot of research into effects of immigration on wages and unemployment across all sections of the society, and the negative effects on low-paid workers are marginal at best. I made a big effort post about this in one of the Europol threads back when I was at uni, supported with about a dozen or more research articles. The most startling conclusion was that, providing the current effects on economy continue linearly, which is of course a huge and symplifying assumption, if the whole population of Africa got absorbed into the EU then wages of low-paid workers would only drop by 10%. I'm not arguing that migrant labour reduces wages (I agree the evidence suggests it doesn't particularly do so) but arguing that the positive relationship between growth and immigration is therefore good for everyone is also not true because this growth is regional and sector specific, so people see increased national immigration and personal/local economic stagnation while being told the economy is growing. Enter the far right which suggests the two are related and you have UKIP saying these immigrants must be 'stealing' all the growth.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2017 23:13
|
|
|
'Putin says hi, now what have you got to drink around here?' Cool, cool. Contextless first post of the page. Cool.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2017 15:36
|
|
|
Looke posted:the grauniad have made a Corbyn CYOA Go SOMEHOW
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
GO LEFT
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:Y'all are getting rather sensual for 9 in the evening on the dead gay forums. I love my dead gay forums. Also much like how the birthrate increases after major wars we survived the night of the anime recommendations and are expressing ourselves exuberantly. vvvvv The later Ober edit is even better.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2017 22:21
|
|
|
Lightning Lord posted:Who in loving hell is Paul Cattermole and why do half of the posters in this thread have redtext about him? I SPY STRANGERS! *dons top hat, clears the viewing gallery in the house of commons*
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
Pochoclo posted:Article 50 triggered tonight. Welp. There we go folks. Really? The bill only gives the Prime Minister the authority to do so, speculation puts it not being done until the end of the month. vvv Haha, I wrote this and literally thought to myself 'Now I'M the Pissflaps.' namesake fucked around with this message at 20:15 on Mar 13, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2017 20:12
|
|
|
Tigey posted:With the recent negative headlines over the budget its perfectly plausible that May will opt to trigger Article 50 asap in order to buy a few positive headlines from the Mail, Express, etc Having to organise/attend Treaty of Rome anniversary celebrations and the start of Brexit negotiations at the same time would annoy quite a lot of EU government officials. Which is probably why May would do it, yeah.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2017 20:20
|
|
|
While it's not a solution now, the House of Lords can't be relied upon as a real check for all the reasons they aren't going to do anything now. Agitate, organise, mobilise. It's the only real defense.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2017 23:27
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Remember when people thought that the new millennium would be the dawning of the Age of Aquarius? The world is run like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyirktQHw28 However if you were literally there it'd be more like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vxi7JRJrod4
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2017 21:40
|
|
|
jBrereton posted:Yes. But it is also somewhat unlikely that the UK will leave on WTO terms, it would suggest huge amounts of childishness by HMG and also the EU. Is that possible? Yes. Is it likely? Depends if both sides come to their senses over the next two years. Er we do trade with countries outside of the EU, a large and devastating change in terms of trade with them is unavoidable unless a transition arrangement with the EU is agreed and chances are the Tories will blow any chance of that over something trivial. Edit: Ahaha, wait. I wonder what the potential for the UK ending up with WTO rules for the world except the EU and we end up with an insane scheme of having to sell EVERYTHING to an EU nation first which then re-exports them to the actual buyer? namesake fucked around with this message at 17:15 on Mar 16, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2017 17:13
|
|
|
I'm actually a little interested to how utterly detached and maddeningly paternalistic Rees-Mogg will be over Brexit. He's never directly rude, he's always speaking like an after dinner speaker and he's just infuriatingly Tory.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2017 22:44
|
|
|
jBrereton posted:But will Mogg call Labour the Söcialists like he's being a throwback in the 1970s I was going to say yes but I think it's far more likely he'll use either radical with as much distaste as he can muster or something totally bizarre and anachronistic.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2017 22:53
|
|
|
Both possible!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2017 23:03
|
|
|
You could hear his wails of frustration about not simply being able to start a new political party with him at the head, were it not for the wails of agony from those still suffering from the last time he was the head of a political party.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2017 14:47
|
|
|
Paxman posted:Nobody's saying that though But people are saying something would be better when that's really in doubt, particularly as the something isn't really defined. The only thing that for sure would make Labour and their leader look better is friendlier national press coverage and the last Labour leader they liked was Blair, so you can find a new model Blair and hope the exact same thing happens again (at the same costs in the worsening situation we are now) or accept that being left of Blair invites hostility from national media and accept that better policy will have worse press reaction. There could potentially be a balance struck further to the right of Corbyn but the Labour figures who could be in that role have run away, been revealed as incompetent or confirmed that they definitely wouldn't meet the requirements of the role either.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2017 15:32
|
|
|
Prince John posted:Black Rock must be rubbing their hands at the thought of all that backdoor influence they can exercise through him straight into the brains of Londoners. I think it's more a case of how does anyone expect impartiality of any political reporting to take place when the editor is directly involved in the (nearly) top level of political organisation of the country. Any Tory editor can print 'Corbyn sucks' (and they do!) but this wouldn't even involve an actual leak, just a mindful editorial line.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2017 15:48
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:But without that what would the whips use to force your hand? Actual whips?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2017 23:22
|
|
|
Wanna see that security footage.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
A really really clear case for the split in the big tent approach (keep reading the follow on tweets). Sucks to be the rudderless, leaderless centrist rather than the principled motivated left wing, at least until Tony finds a suitable puppet to set up a new group with the Lib Dems.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2017 13:15
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:if you're going to post results from that yougov poll you shouldn't miss out this one Quite a bit of 'Do you know who this person is/was?' I'm sure.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2017 13:34
|
|
|
Taear posted:How can the Tories keep loving up but getting more votes? Aside from Corbyn or anything there who is seeing what's going on and saying "Yep, more of that?" Remember that a lot of it is going to be because UKIP isn't needed any more post-Brexit. Edit: I've just looked through some more electoral data and the comparisons between 2015 vote and who they'd vote for today is pretty interesting for the % sticking with the same for both: SNP 97%, Conservative 82%, Labour and UKIP 79%, Lib Dems 54% (with a major 24% change to Labour). So Labours actions since 2015 don't seem to have actually driven off an unusual amount of people while the Lib Dems are bleeding out. http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2017 14:54
|
|
|
^^^^The appearance of competency by lack of exposure helps but only if it would damage the identification with the voters. As Corbyn and Diane Abbott shows, incompetent allies still attract lots of support.Taear posted:I guess when it comes down to it I just can't understand how you could ever go from the Tories right to Labour or the other way around. I know the general public doesn't really think in terms of right and left but it's anathema to me. It's a question of identity, not policy. The Tories are the party of Britain(England), the SNP the party of Scotland, UKIP the party of the white racist and the people who prioritise that identity (even if they themselves don't quite meet the right definition to belong to it) vote according to how well they feel an association with them, even if the policies won't do a drat thing to help them specifically. Labour is struggling because in a time of identity politics (boom boom) they're not quite fixed on theirs. namesake fucked around with this message at 15:13 on Mar 19, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2017 15:09
|
|
|
radmonger posted:Be a plausible next government, so that your position on things matter more than a wet fart, OK but you are aware that nothing that Corbyn has proposed is impossible or even particularly unusual in terms of social democratic governance right? Local investment funds, wealth taxes, publishing income differentials, etc. How is plausible government to be defined? Ability to get elected is a worthless definition if only one party or one general bracket of policy will ever be allowed to get elected.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2017 19:47
|
|
|
The newspapers took the heroic stand of getting a policy reversed and keeping their journalists tax bills at their current level while the general budget, set to be worse than the 2008 crash for the poorest in society, is otherwise waved through. Cheers for that.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2017 19:50
|
|
|
^^^^Nah it's Jurassic Park meets Big Data. 'Your pollsters were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should.' There's endless news cycles to try and track, new papers and policies announced all the time and enough storage and manpower to track it all now, so we do.ThomasPaine posted:tbh I'm just thoroughly disillusioned with parliamentary democracy and think we're getting to the point where direct action might be the only option if we want things to improve. Pretty much, and even if you're still not radical enough to want to overthrow bourgeois democracy it's painfully obvious that the electoral cycle as it stands is far too long to actually reflect the changing needs of the public (cue argument about why unresponsive government is good because it doesn't respond to kneejerk opinions, etc). radmonger posted:By having numbers coming in from polls and bye-elections such that it is plausible they will win a general election election. No but consider my argument about identity voters rather than policy. We can know a policy will or won't work based on best evidence and yet that has very bad corresponding polling due to general publics lack of awareness or total distrust of that knowledge. Politics is currently being driven by trust and not truth and so adopting the position of 'it's not a vote winner, dump it' results in a loss of identity, a loss in trust and a loss in votes, but conversely having a crackerjack manifesto but the general opinion (heavily influenced by media) of you is 'bunch of untrustworthy, infighting wankers' you're going to poll badly as well. You want firm, trustworthy people agreeing on a position and then conveying that sense of trust and position in a relatible fashion to the public; Labour doesn't have this and so it's suffering for it. namesake fucked around with this message at 20:33 on Mar 19, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2017 20:27
|
|
|
RT interviews and gives guest spots to literally anyone who badmouths the USA, NATO and the EU no matter how inconsistent they are with other people or even themselves. They'd interview Occupy Wall Street activists and then give spots to RON PAUL horde gold, kill your parents libertarians in the same segment.TomViolence posted:Spectacle is king in modern politics. Back when UKIP were polling lower than the greens they still got poo poo-tons of coverage by comparison to the greens or the libdems. Farage's loving face was everywhere because the media flocks to spectacle like flies to poo poo. If Corbyn or McDonnell stopped being openly hostile to the press for misrepresenting them and just instead opened the doors to them and invited them along to every march or press conference and said something hugely controversial to get on the news they'd at least be getting their message out, whatever it is. This does occasionally happen but press coverage of actual activism is super loving spotty at best unless they want some riot porn shots.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:I really do think it's a key lesson for the left in general. Rallies and marches and demonstrations are just preaching to the converted. They're essentially just masturbatory nonsense. I guess maybe they might raise awareness a little at best. The key is sticking to the material reality and doing what you can to show that left-wing politics is not all po-faced whining but can have a genuine benefit to the lives of everyone, while physically undermining those things that stand in the way of this. I would not be opposed to a group that did community work were also...more militant in their approach to businesses and commercial interests. I'd recommend people look into http://www.acorncommunities.org.uk/ The Bristol group does some really good support work and direct actiony things like demonstrate outside letting agents and assemble at peoples homes when they're being revenge evicted and things. Not a hell of a lot of other groups around the country sadly but maybe that'll change! Whoa there, no need to get angry. There are valid criticism to make about Corbyn, just so long as Pissflaps isn't making them.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2017 20:57
|
|
|
Lord of the Llamas posted:Lots of complete crap from Nick Cohen, but: George Osborne lies in bed staring up at the ceiling, his brain racing as he wonders what part of the budget Ed was going to say was cutting too deep and too fast but otherwise raising no criticisms of. Oh no wait that the coke keeping him up at night.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2017 21:07
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:Neither the Cabinet Office nor the Department for Exiting the EU knows how many negotiators are available to the government for the talks on leaving the EU, or what qualifications those unknown negotiators do or do not have: poo poo I'll do it. Paxman posted:They'd say things like bankers were responsible for the economic crash rather than nurses, and therefore Osborne should stop freezing public sector pay and instead tax the bankers more. “Let me be clear, including to those who would wish it were not so: Labour will need to cut public spending in the next parliament to balance the books." - Ed Balls, 1 Jan 2015 Inspiring. His MO (and Ed Milibands by extension) was literally 'too far, too fast' which I can't imagine was very concerning for the Tories. Having agreed that vital and healthy limbs must be removed, Labour and Tories argued if it should be above or below the elbow.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2017 21:31
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:What are they waiting for? Corbyn to dial a particular telephone number and say the words 'Execute Order 1917' which will activate all the cadre. Unfortunately it's a touchscreen phone and he can't figure out how to unlock it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2017 21:37
|
|
|
A GE now is a vote on how to handle Brexit: hard, soft or an attempt to never call/to reverse article 50. Labour would probably do okay by promising to keep workers rights, EU workers rights to remain and a promise to keep the finance sector in London which are all things they've argued for. Edit: And it would blunt the Scottish independence argument.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 11:31
|
|
|
We were offered a voluntary AS level course in Critical Thinking at my sixth form. It was poorly attended and the only person I can remember doing it is now an rear end in a top hat libertarian lawyer so results may vary. Also it's worth remembering that any immigrant who passes the citizenship test will know more about the structure of the British parliamentary and legal system that 99.9% of any native born Brit.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 12:04
|
|
|
Fangz posted:What will it actually take to prove that the PLP can accept moderately left wing policies but just dislike Corbyn personally, and for what he represents? Recent statements by them in support of those things. That is, specifically those things rather than meaningless stuff about fairness or efficiency or whatever. Also what does he represent if not left wing policies?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 18:47
|
|
|
Jakabite posted:I'd put forward Richard Burgon as being a good candidate to replace Corbyn. Similarly lefty and seems to interview well. It's pointless talking to Pissflaps about this if you want the Labour Party to be left wing because Pissflaps is not left wing. He likes Tony loving Blair for fucks sake. Only been an MP since 2015 though, part of the necessary stuff for being leader is being pretty familiar with how the MPs and parliament all work so anyone in the first term is probably never going to be leader unless there's some real 'charismatic figurehead in a time of crisis' moment.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 19:29
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:If you can't persuade me you can't win an election. Shadowy figure reveals British democracy is a lie... you'll never guess who or how! Fangz posted:Because if we don't get to the stage where we can tell each other that even if there is disagreements, at least Labour candidates mean well and should be trusted, then we will never be able to make the case to ordinary voters that they should vote Labour. Sure that's totally reasonable but you do quickly have to actually start naming names about who the MPs are rather than making it a general assumption because there definitely are MPs who don't mean well and so there need to be some lines set about who falls where.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 19:40
|
|
|
Paxman posted:Emily Thornberry was on Newsnight talking about an elderly woman who's been told her home help is going to come at noon instead of in the morning due to cuts, and is now terrified that she won't be able to get up and have breakfast in the morning. Ed Balls + Miliband had the position of austerity being 'too far, too fast' rather than actively harmful, counterproductive and bad and fought the 2015 election on further austerity, Harriet Harmon refused to consider opposing the welfare bill when she was acting leader and then Jeremy won. Post-Brown, pre-Corbyn the Labour Party has been absolutely fine with cutting services so yes given the evidence that's a completely understandable belief.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2017 01:06
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 20:15 |
|
|
jabby posted:Wouldn't it have to be a pretty major hole? As I recall the last laptop bomber just killed himself and the hole posed no issues with landing the plane. Apparently they did it at a low altitude and speed so the pilot could handle it, that's what saved the plane. Anyway I think this is just increasing the risk of hijacking by people who were stuck on the tarmac for three hours with only the inflight magazine to read.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2017 19:30
|
|