Author Topic: The Labour Party (*)  (Read 892501 times)

Offline JohnnoWhite

  • Deliverer of the -Q- de grace.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,968
  • Thought I was wrong once - but I was mistaken.
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5560 on: April 8, 2017, 10:14:19 pm »
I find that so sad.
There is nothing wrong with striving to win, so long as you don't set the prize above the game. There can be no dishonour in defeat nor any conceit in victory. What matters above all is that the team plays in the right spirit, with skill, courage, fair play,no favour and the result accepted without bitterness. Sir Matt Busby CBE KCSG 1909-1994

Offline oldfordie

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,536
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5561 on: April 8, 2017, 10:25:57 pm »
I find that so sad.
Maybe ive phrased it wrong, they never use the word socialism in conversation.
It might take our producers five minutes to find 60 economists who feared Brexit and five hours to find a sole voice who espoused it.
“But by the time we went on air we simply had one of each; we presented this unequal effort to our audience as balance. It wasn’t.”
               Emily Maitlis

Offline Lush is the best medicine...

  • FUCK THE POLICE - NWA
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 40,806
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5562 on: April 8, 2017, 11:01:15 pm »
I find that so sad.
why? hardly anyone I know uses the word socialism, largely because they dont want it, at least not in the form the current Labour Party leaders want.

Online TepidT2O

  • Deffo NOT 9"! MUFC bedwetter. Grass. Folically-challenged, God-piece-wearing, monkey-rubber. Jizz aroma expert. Operating at the lower end of the distribution curve...has the hots for Alan. Bastard. Fearless in transfer windows with lack of convicti
  • Lead Matchday Commentator
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 94,785
  • Dejan Lovren fan club member #1
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5563 on: April 9, 2017, 03:38:20 pm »
On who would make the best Prime Minister

T. May: 55%
J. Corbyn: 18%
[Don't know]: 27%

(via Lord Ashcroft Polls / 21 - 28 Mar)
“Happiness can be found in the darkest of times, if one only remembers to turn on the light.”
“Generosity always pays off. Generosity in your effort, in your work, in your kindness, in the way you look after people and take care of people. In the long run, if you are generous with a heart, and with humanity, it always pays off.”
W

Offline Lush is the best medicine...

  • FUCK THE POLICE - NWA
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 40,806
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5564 on: April 9, 2017, 04:20:25 pm »
On who would make the best Prime Minister

T. May: 55%
J. Corbyn: 18%
[Don't know]: 27%

(via Lord Ashcroft Polls / 21 - 28 Mar)
this basically shows the value of sounding like you know what you are doing, of course being aided by an incompetent opposite number swings a good few percentage points your way

Online TepidT2O

  • Deffo NOT 9"! MUFC bedwetter. Grass. Folically-challenged, God-piece-wearing, monkey-rubber. Jizz aroma expert. Operating at the lower end of the distribution curve...has the hots for Alan. Bastard. Fearless in transfer windows with lack of convicti
  • Lead Matchday Commentator
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 94,785
  • Dejan Lovren fan club member #1
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5565 on: April 9, 2017, 04:25:42 pm »
this basically shows the value of sounding like you know what you are doing, of course being aided by an incompetent opposite number swings a good few percentage points your way
Don't know hasn't even had to do that much to thrash him
“Happiness can be found in the darkest of times, if one only remembers to turn on the light.”
“Generosity always pays off. Generosity in your effort, in your work, in your kindness, in the way you look after people and take care of people. In the long run, if you are generous with a heart, and with humanity, it always pays off.”
W

Offline Wabaloolah

  • Rocks to the East, Rocks to the West. Definitely Unscotch.
  • Matchday Commentator
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 24,948
  • Allez Allez Allez
    • My Twitter Account
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5566 on: April 9, 2017, 05:59:46 pm »
On who would make the best Prime Minister

T. May: 55%
J. Corbyn: 18%
[Don't know]: 27%

(via Lord Ashcroft Polls / 21 - 28 Mar)
I'm amazed Corbyn is as high as 18%
However if something serious happens to them I will eat my own cock.


If anyone is going to put a few fingers deep into my arse it's going to be me.

Offline Alan_X

  • WUM. 'twatito' - The Cat Herding Firm But Fair Voice Of Reason (Except when he's got a plank up his arse). Gimme some skin, priest! Has a general dislike for Elijah Wood. Clearly cannot fill even a thong! RAWK Resident Muppet. Has a crush o
  • RAWK Staff
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 53,506
  • Come on you fucking red men!!!
  • Super Title: This is super!
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5567 on: April 10, 2017, 06:32:18 am »
The Syria discussion has been split and merged into the other thread
Sid Lowe (@sidlowe)
09/03/2011 08:04
Give a man a mask and he will tell the truth, Give a man a user name and he will act like a total twat.
Its all about winning shiny things.

Offline Cliff Bastin

  • Big Exeter fan, pretending to be a gooner, pretending...yawn
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,444
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5568 on: April 10, 2017, 07:13:31 am »
Also, and with all due respect Johnno - who are 'the people' or 'real people' and who aren't? Are you saying the voting public don't count? As much as it's distasteful, the British people elected Tories to form a government in 2010 and 2015.
Communists probably. It amazes me that people think this Socialism can win an election in 2017. The world has moved on from this, the mines aren't open anymore. A lot of people don't consider themselves part of the proletariat. Blair was right on this issue, you can not win in the UK with this philosophy. 

Offline JohnnoWhite

  • Deliverer of the -Q- de grace.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,968
  • Thought I was wrong once - but I was mistaken.
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5569 on: April 10, 2017, 09:04:29 am »
Communists probably. It amazes me that people think this Socialism can win an election in 2017. The world has moved on from this, the mines aren't open anymore. A lot of people don't consider themselves part of the proletariat. Blair was right on this issue, you can not win in the UK with this philosophy. 



 
Cliff, the post which you have commented on was replying to my post and I'm repeating it here.

"Oh Alan - I'm really saying we - all of us - the voters, the people who are sickened to our stomach by the total shite that's churned out of Westminster year after balls-aching year, should signal to ALL faker "politicians" we've had one fucking big bellyful of "your game" because WE the ordinary Joes seem ALWAYS to get the butt of the outcome.

We need to tell the professional politicians who want to fuck with people's lives and destroy communities etc et fucking cetera "why don't you all go and play sixth form politicking and debating games where the outcomes DO NO HARM to REAL PEOPLE?
The more some "students of the game" - too many of us in all truth - re-state - that politics is a pragmatic long-view game and in so doing, prop up the far too long accepted bollocks which has become our accepted version of democracy - then such people ARE SUPPORTING the prolongation of the abusive and offensive political concept!!

Tell them to shove it until the people are given straight-talking people who will say it as it is - and NOT how these slimy con-merchants believe it has to be said. 

I really gut-believe that amateur "afficionados" and serious, well-meaning interpreters of the dirty business of politicking do more bleeding harm than good. Smoke and mirrors is what we are served and I've fucking had a bellyful of it over the best part of 54 dirty stinking years."

Why Cliff does it amaze you when you only need to scan the stats for our country to see that the Tory interpretation of the success of Capitalism equates to a succession of policies that punish the people?

Stripping away OUR NHS - and it is ours as we have paid in all our lives!;
Cutting mental health funding to those who have no-one to help them.
Cutting vital support to our long-term chronic sick and disabled;
No housing provision or support unless you count cutting housing benefit payments to struggling families as "tough and necessary supporting medicine":
No social house-building provision to address the needs of a growing population;
Cutting social care funding to councils already over-burdened with an ageing population up and down the land;
Employing private agencies who are paid - and on an extremely aggressive reducing payments target-achievement basis! - for "managing" unemployment benefit claimants;
Under-funding provision for our national education - our citizens of the future!

Austerity rules the Tory minds - yet it was NEVER the fault of our people that the great banking scam imposed their swindling losses on the public purse.

Why do you leap to  "communists" as being "the people" who are sick of it all? I am not a communist. My dad was a steel-worker 12 hour shifts 5 days a week with OT if he was "lucky" on a Sat morning.
However, we were all 6 of us raised to care for the well-being of others even when those others might be considered by some to be of little significanc e or "importance"to our society. We were taught to share what we possibly could to alleviate suffering. We were NEVER actively encouraged to increase anyone's suffering! We were raised to show love of community and when the hard times came, we all pitched in and did what we could for those worse off than us.

I equate my upbringing to a political education that makes me a socialist. Like my original posting above reflects, this atrocious apology for a democratic-elected government - this particular one the worst in my memory - has smarmied through a whole host of measures which have denied the great majority of our people access to a decent standard of living in artificially created "hard times". They're fond of saying we must live within our means as they unburden the extremely rich to the tune of billions of pounds of due taxation that now no longer needs to be paid. How noble!

I don't advocate an armed insurrection to change things. I advocate the premise that our people should be told the bloody truth and should demand it from their political leaders. If how we are governed doesn't deliver basic life-enhancing chances for all of our people, then crumbs from the rich man's table in the world's sixth richest nation will not plaster over the cracks that it demonstrably has failed - and is continuing to fail - our nation. It's not working. If it continues along this track, we as a people have a choice to make. We either continue meekly to suffer in silence until we are so cowed and subdued we simply throw in the towel until we shuffle off our mortal coil or we wake up and use our hard-earned electoral franchise to change it for the benefit of all not for the few.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2017, 09:06:33 am by JohnnoWhite »
There is nothing wrong with striving to win, so long as you don't set the prize above the game. There can be no dishonour in defeat nor any conceit in victory. What matters above all is that the team plays in the right spirit, with skill, courage, fair play,no favour and the result accepted without bitterness. Sir Matt Busby CBE KCSG 1909-1994

Online TepidT2O

  • Deffo NOT 9"! MUFC bedwetter. Grass. Folically-challenged, God-piece-wearing, monkey-rubber. Jizz aroma expert. Operating at the lower end of the distribution curve...has the hots for Alan. Bastard. Fearless in transfer windows with lack of convicti
  • Lead Matchday Commentator
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 94,785
  • Dejan Lovren fan club member #1
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5570 on: April 10, 2017, 10:18:58 am »
Yeah, so why not have an effective opposition party..?

That might help
“Happiness can be found in the darkest of times, if one only remembers to turn on the light.”
“Generosity always pays off. Generosity in your effort, in your work, in your kindness, in the way you look after people and take care of people. In the long run, if you are generous with a heart, and with humanity, it always pays off.”
W

Offline classycarra

  • The Left Disonourable Chuntering Member For Scousepool.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 30,558
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5571 on: April 10, 2017, 10:53:50 am »
Yeah, so why not have an effective opposition party..?

That might help

McDonnell spent the weekend doing his wounded puppy/victim card routine, crying that everything but the Labour leadership is to blame. Can't wait for this piece of work to be cast back into the shadows after Corbyn is ousted, he is a terrible person and terrible news for the Labour party.

In other news, there is a chance Labour will have to re-contest a seat. If the legal challenge is successful, I find it hard to believe Labour would retain the seat given their lack of popularity plus the nasty local tactics:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/sep/15/phil-woolas-white-folk-election

Offline SP

  • Thor ain't got shit on this dude! Alpheus. SPoogle. The Equusfluminis Of RAWK. Straight in at the deep end with a tube of Vagisil. Needs to get a half-life. Needs a damned good de-frag.
  • RAWK Staff.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 36,044
  • .
  • Super Title: Southern Pansy
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5572 on: April 10, 2017, 10:58:56 am »
McDonnell spent the weekend doing his wounded puppy/victim card routine, crying that everything but the Labour leadership is to blame. Can't wait for this piece of work to be cast back into the shadows after Corbyn is ousted, he is a terrible person and terrible news for the Labour party.

In other news, there is a chance Labour will have to re-contest a seat. If the legal challenge is successful, I find it hard to believe Labour would retain the seat given their lack of popularity plus the nasty local tactics:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/sep/15/phil-woolas-white-folk-election

Did you actually even read that? It is from 2010 and talks about a swing away from Labour as the Governing Party. The date is even in the URL.

P.S. Labour won the by-election.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/2011/jan/14/what-oldham-result-means-miliband-clegg-cameron


Offline JohnnoWhite

  • Deliverer of the -Q- de grace.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,968
  • Thought I was wrong once - but I was mistaken.
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5573 on: April 10, 2017, 11:21:42 am »
McDonnell spent the weekend doing his wounded puppy/victim card routine, crying that everything but the Labour leadership is to blame. Can't wait for this piece of work to be cast back into the shadows after Corbyn is ousted, he is a terrible person and terrible news for the Labour party.

In other news, there is a chance Labour will have to re-contest a seat. If the legal challenge is successful, I find it hard to believe Labour would retain the seat given their lack of popularity plus the nasty local tactics:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/sep/15/phil-woolas-white-folk-election

As SP has already commented - this is from nearly 7 years ago! What at all is the current relevance of this one-off rogue shit-scared and crooked ex-Labour MP?

Here's the full (non-current)-story
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/8114108/Labour-MP-Phil-Woolas-loses-seat-over-election-lies.html
There is nothing wrong with striving to win, so long as you don't set the prize above the game. There can be no dishonour in defeat nor any conceit in victory. What matters above all is that the team plays in the right spirit, with skill, courage, fair play,no favour and the result accepted without bitterness. Sir Matt Busby CBE KCSG 1909-1994

Offline SP

  • Thor ain't got shit on this dude! Alpheus. SPoogle. The Equusfluminis Of RAWK. Straight in at the deep end with a tube of Vagisil. Needs to get a half-life. Needs a damned good de-frag.
  • RAWK Staff.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 36,044
  • .
  • Super Title: Southern Pansy
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5574 on: April 10, 2017, 11:56:33 am »
Johnno,

For all of the heat in here, there is far less disagreement that there on the surface appears to be. No one is happy with the current situation of likely perpetual Tory rule. The heat of the disagreement is driven by the steep price to be paid for the wrong course of action.  You are in the idealist camp that is pinning its hopes on enough people realising that the Tories are screwing them, and overcome their reservations about the competency of Corbyn and his team. The cynical camp think that a socialist revolution never got close to fruition, even with the heavy industrial workforce base. With a charismatic driven leader, maybe that would have been a possible route, but Corbyn does not appeal outside his base, and he has enough toxic baggage that will wreck his changes with the floating voters.

You may wish for mass enlightenment, but that is not going to happen. The only way to effect changes is within the current system. You have to win power under the current crooked system, before you can rebalance the deck.

Both sides see the same victims, who will suffer in the same ways if Labour does not become a viable electoral proposition. But both sides view the others' path as a surefire route to that horrific outcome. So when someone triggers you to post about the very real suffering to the most vulnerable that continued Tory rule would entail, those concerns are exactly what is driving the opposite side too.

Of course this talking about the reasonable posters on either side. There are a fair number of people who are really trolling, and are desperate to win the internet rather than resurrect the Labour party. And they are neither worth paying heed to, nor getting upset by.

I think we need to play the Westminster game to win, and then be in a position to change the rules. You think the price of playing the game is too high. I think the price of not playing the game is too high. Most of the heat in here amongst rational posters derives from that difference of opinion.
   


Offline oldfordie

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,536
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5575 on: April 10, 2017, 11:59:24 am »


 
Cliff, the post which you have commented on was replying to my post and I'm repeating it here.

"Oh Alan - I'm really saying we - all of us - the voters, the people who are sickened to our stomach by the total shite that's churned out of Westminster year after balls-aching year, should signal to ALL faker "politicians" we've had one fucking big bellyful of "your game" because WE the ordinary Joes seem ALWAYS to get the butt of the outcome.

We need to tell the professional politicians who want to fuck with people's lives and destroy communities etc et fucking cetera "why don't you all go and play sixth form politicking and debating games where the outcomes DO NO HARM to REAL PEOPLE?
The more some "students of the game" - too many of us in all truth - re-state - that politics is a pragmatic long-view game and in so doing, prop up the far too long accepted bollocks which has become our accepted version of democracy - then such people ARE SUPPORTING the prolongation of the abusive and offensive political concept!!

Tell them to shove it until the people are given straight-talking people who will say it as it is - and NOT how these slimy con-merchants believe it has to be said. 

I really gut-believe that amateur "afficionados" and serious, well-meaning interpreters of the dirty business of politicking do more bleeding harm than good. Smoke and mirrors is what we are served and I've fucking had a bellyful of it over the best part of 54 dirty stinking years."

Why Cliff does it amaze you when you only need to scan the stats for our country to see that the Tory interpretation of the success of Capitalism equates to a succession of policies that punish the people?

Stripping away OUR NHS - and it is ours as we have paid in all our lives!;
Cutting mental health funding to those who have no-one to help them.
Cutting vital support to our long-term chronic sick and disabled;
No housing provision or support unless you count cutting housing benefit payments to struggling families as "tough and necessary supporting medicine":
No social house-building provision to address the needs of a growing population;
Cutting social care funding to councils already over-burdened with an ageing population up and down the land;
Employing private agencies who are paid - and on an extremely aggressive reducing payments target-achievement basis! - for "managing" unemployment benefit claimants;
Under-funding provision for our national education - our citizens of the future!

Austerity rules the Tory minds - yet it was NEVER the fault of our people that the great banking scam imposed their swindling losses on the public purse.

Why do you leap to  "communists" as being "the people" who are sick of it all? I am not a communist. My dad was a steel-worker 12 hour shifts 5 days a week with OT if he was "lucky" on a Sat morning.
However, we were all 6 of us raised to care for the well-being of others even when those others might be considered by some to be of little significanc e or "importance"to our society. We were taught to share what we possibly could to alleviate suffering. We were NEVER actively encouraged to increase anyone's suffering! We were raised to show love of community and when the hard times came, we all pitched in and did what we could for those worse off than us.

I equate my upbringing to a political education that makes me a socialist. Like my original posting above reflects, this atrocious apology for a democratic-elected government - this particular one the worst in my memory - has smarmied through a whole host of measures which have denied the great majority of our people access to a decent standard of living in artificially created "hard times". They're fond of saying we must live within our means as they unburden the extremely rich to the tune of billions of pounds of due taxation that now no longer needs to be paid. How noble!

I don't advocate an armed insurrection to change things. I advocate the premise that our people should be told the bloody truth and should demand it from their political leaders. If how we are governed doesn't deliver basic life-enhancing chances for all of our people, then crumbs from the rich man's table in the world's sixth richest nation will not plaster over the cracks that it demonstrably has failed - and is continuing to fail - our nation. It's not working. If it continues along this track, we as a people have a choice to make. We either continue meekly to suffer in silence until we are so cowed and subdued we simply throw in the towel until we shuffle off our mortal coil or we wake up and use our hard-earned electoral franchise to change it for the benefit of all not for the few.
With respect we all know whats wrong with the system. how we change it is another matter.
Ragged Trouser philanthropist, "I blame the fiscal policys" 1911
"I blame the fiscal policys" reason for Labour loosing the GE in 2010.
The people who decide elections dont form opinions they are convinced by the most persuasive argument a politician makes. they impress and get their vote.
Ive also argued for a bit of honesty by Labour, not for decency etc. to educate the electorate.
Labour are fighting the Torys with one hand tied behind their back.
Labour should have defended their record in 2010 but I would like them to take it further. defend their intentions. they may get it wrong every now and then but dont jump down their throat when things do go wrong, sometimes things go wrong and it has sod all to do with government policys.(crash 2008)
Give them the confidence to make great change, dont vote them out just because the deficits gone up.
The man in the street should vote for Labour for one reason only. Labour good, Torys bad.
If Labour had the confidence to make great change without the fear of Labour voters deserting them when things go slightly wrong then great change would happen.
I fully understand why people disagree, Labour are just being honest. voters will run scared, they will fear Labour overspending and they have to pick up the bill.
It might take our producers five minutes to find 60 economists who feared Brexit and five hours to find a sole voice who espoused it.
“But by the time we went on air we simply had one of each; we presented this unequal effort to our audience as balance. It wasn’t.”
               Emily Maitlis

Offline SP

  • Thor ain't got shit on this dude! Alpheus. SPoogle. The Equusfluminis Of RAWK. Straight in at the deep end with a tube of Vagisil. Needs to get a half-life. Needs a damned good de-frag.
  • RAWK Staff.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 36,044
  • .
  • Super Title: Southern Pansy
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5576 on: April 10, 2017, 12:16:08 pm »
With respect we all know whats wrong with the system. how we change it is another matter.
Ragged Trouser philanthropist, "I blame the fiscal policys" 1911
"I blame the fiscal policys" reason for Labour loosing the GE in 2010.
The people who decide elections dont form opinions they are convinced by the most persuasive argument a politician makes. they impress and get their vote.
Ive also argued for a bit of honesty by Labour, not for decency etc. to educate the electorate.
Labour are fighting the Torys with one hand tied behind their back.
Labour should have defended their record in 2010 but I would like them to take it further. defend their intentions. they may get it wrong every now and then but dont jump down their throat when things do go wrong, sometimes things go wrong and it has sod all to do with government policys.(crash 2008)
Give them the confidence to make great change, dont vote them out just because the deficits gone up.
The man in the street should vote for Labour for one reason only. Labour good, Torys bad.
If Labour had the confidence to make great change without the fear of Labour voters deserting them when things go slightly wrong then great change would happen.
I fully understand why people disagree, Labour are just being honest. voters will run scared, they will fear Labour overspending and they have to pick up the bill.

The general impression that "people" have is that Labour can be trusted with Services, but may over-spend and over-borrow.  They trust the Tories with the economy, but generally think they are bastards with services.

It is of course bollocks, but it means that the Tories get a free pass on the economy, but have to make manifesto pledges to protect spending on the NHS. Labour have to have coherent costed spending plans, far more rigid that the Tories do, because they are perceived to be untrustworthy. Blair's route to power was secured on the back of Gordon Brown's credibility with the economy.

Labour need to win the argument on the economy to win an election. They may have to make commitments that run counter to where they actually want to be, such as ruling out increases in certain tax rates for the life of the parliament. The Tories will campaign on Labour tax increases. That needs to be answered. It may mean that major tax reform would be booted to a second term. Campaigning whilst in Government that you can be trusted on the economy is far easier than building credibility in opposition. 

Labour will pledge to increase spending. They need to answer who pays for it. And the people that they need to win over to win a majority, are the most susceptible to tax cut bribes. It is a horribly delicate balancing act between saving services, and economic electability. 

Offline oldfordie

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,536
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5577 on: April 10, 2017, 12:33:05 pm »
The general impression that "people" have is that Labour can be trusted with Services, but may over-spend and over-borrow.  They trust the Tories with the economy, but generally think they are bastards with services.

It is of course bollocks, but it means that the Tories get a free pass on the economy, but have to make manifesto pledges to protect spending on the NHS. Labour have to have coherent costed spending plans, far more rigid that the Tories do, because they are perceived to be untrustworthy. Blair's route to power was secured on the back of Gordon Brown's credibility with the economy.

Labour need to win the argument on the economy to win an election. They may have to make commitments that run counter to where they actually want to be, such as ruling out increases in certain tax rates for the life of the parliament. The Tories will campaign on Labour tax increases. That needs to be answered. It may mean that major tax reform would be booted to a second term. Campaigning whilst in Government that you can be trusted on the economy is far easier than building credibility in opposition. 

Labour will pledge to increase spending. They need to answer who pays for it. And the people that they need to win over to win a majority, are the most susceptible to tax cut bribes. It is a horribly delicate balancing act between saving services, and economic electability.
Yes very true but we always go through this vicious circle and people need to understand this.
The Torys get elected, chop everything yet still run deficits and we still end up paying a big price.
Labour may well cock up every now and then but at least they make improvements to our services and our standard of living. it's a simple message that everyone should hammer home.
I really couldn't give a s.. what the Tory manifesto promises and ive no idea why the man in the street goes from one election to the next even considering it.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2017, 12:34:56 pm by oldfordie »
It might take our producers five minutes to find 60 economists who feared Brexit and five hours to find a sole voice who espoused it.
“But by the time we went on air we simply had one of each; we presented this unequal effort to our audience as balance. It wasn’t.”
               Emily Maitlis

Offline classycarra

  • The Left Disonourable Chuntering Member For Scousepool.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 30,558
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5578 on: April 10, 2017, 12:42:50 pm »
Did you actually even read that? It is from 2010 and talks about a swing away from Labour as the Governing Party. The date is even in the URL.

P.S. Labour won the by-election.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/2011/jan/14/what-oldham-result-means-miliband-clegg-cameron



Sorry everyone. I did indeed read the full article. Didn't read the URL or date, as was just sent it by a colleague at work - sorry I let that slip through. Great to see my prediction, with seven years of hindsight, was completely incorrect too!

Offline Alan_X

  • WUM. 'twatito' - The Cat Herding Firm But Fair Voice Of Reason (Except when he's got a plank up his arse). Gimme some skin, priest! Has a general dislike for Elijah Wood. Clearly cannot fill even a thong! RAWK Resident Muppet. Has a crush o
  • RAWK Staff
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 53,506
  • Come on you fucking red men!!!
  • Super Title: This is super!
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5579 on: April 10, 2017, 01:07:28 pm »
Yes very true but we always go through this vicious circle and people need to understand this.
The Torys get elected, chop everything yet still run deficits and we still end up paying a big price.
Labour may well cock up every now and then but at least they make improvements to our services and our standard of living. it's a simple message that everyone should hammer home.
I really couldn't give a s.. what the Tory manifesto promises and ive no idea why the man in the street goes from one election to the next even considering it.

You need to think about what the man in the street thinks because of the way people self-identify. There's a quote about Americans that's been posted a couple of times in the Trump thread. Americans vote outside their interests because deep down there's a belief that everyone can be a millionaire.

That view is not held in Britain in the same extreme form but 'the man in the street' is more aspirational than Corbyn and McDonnel supporters would like to believe. Their definition of 'the people' they represent is hopelessly narrow. They seem to exclude anyone who is in anyway aspirational or dares to consider using their earnings for the benefit of themselves of their family.

Policies (like taxing private education to pay for school meals) always contain an element of 'punishing the rich' but actually impact middle class voters who aren't part of the 1%. 

It's fairly basic maths. The Labour Party needs to be elected to protect the people who most need its help, but those people aren't necessarily 50+% of the population and not only that, a lot of people don't like being told, or don't self identify themselves as the second class citizens* that Corbyn's Labour seems to represent.

*for clarity - I don't think anyone is a second class citizen.
Sid Lowe (@sidlowe)
09/03/2011 08:04
Give a man a mask and he will tell the truth, Give a man a user name and he will act like a total twat.
Its all about winning shiny things.

Online filopastry

  • seldom posts but often delivers
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,850
  • Let me tell you a story.........
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5580 on: April 10, 2017, 01:16:35 pm »
You need to think about what the man in the street thinks because of the way people self-identify. There's a quote about Americans that's been posted a couple of times in the Trump thread. Americans vote outside their interests because deep down there's a belief that everyone can be a millionaire.

That view is not held in Britain in the same extreme form but 'the man in the street' is more aspirational than Corbyn and McDonnel supporters would like to believe. Their definition of 'the people' they represent is hopelessly narrow. They seem to exclude anyone who is in anyway aspirational or dares to consider using their earnings for the benefit of themselves of their family.

Policies (like taxing private education to pay for school meals) always contain an element of 'punishing the rich' but actually impact middle class voters who aren't part of the 1%. 

It's fairly basic maths. The Labour Party needs to be elected to protect the people who most need its help, but those people aren't necessarily 50+% of the population and not only that, a lot of people don't like being told, or don't self identify themselves as the second class citizens* that Corbyn's Labour seems to represent.

*for clarity - I don't think anyone is a second class citizen.

In fact a lot of the traditional working class hate high levels of benefits for people who aren't working, its why the government managed to hack away at them for a while now with few electoral consequences.

They are on the other hand facing more electoral resistance when it comes to attacking the benefits of the working poor.

It's a fundamental issue for Labour though that they are seen as having little to offer for "aspirational" voters, that was the case for many voters under Milliband and I imagine is even more the case now.

Offline Cliff Bastin

  • Big Exeter fan, pretending to be a gooner, pretending...yawn
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,444
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5581 on: April 10, 2017, 01:39:17 pm »
Quote
You may wish for mass enlightenment, but that is not going to happen. The only way to effect changes is within the current system. You have to win power under the current crooked system, before you can rebalance the deck.
Labour won 3 general elections and kept the core principles of Thatcherism on the economy. It certainly wasn't a rip up of what Thatcher did. I thought Tories would have a better chance in 2015 to win than Labour but I did think maybe Labour could perhaps stop a majority for the Tories.

This time I know for absolute certain that Labour has not a hope in hell of forming a majority or stopping a massive Tory majority in 2020 as things stand 3 years out from the election which is the biggest damning analysis I can make on Labour at the moment.

These momentum hanger ons from the past are living in lalaland. Tony Blair might be an awful lot of things but he called it 2 years ago that Corbyn as leader makes Labour unelectable. Why are the Socialists trying to do what failed in 1983?


Offline JohnnoWhite

  • Deliverer of the -Q- de grace.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,968
  • Thought I was wrong once - but I was mistaken.
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5582 on: April 10, 2017, 01:46:10 pm »
Johnno,

For all of the heat in here, there is far less disagreement that there on the surface appears to be. No one is happy with the current situation of likely perpetual Tory rule. The heat of the disagreement is driven by the steep price to be paid for the wrong course of action.  You are in the idealist camp that is pinning its hopes on enough people realising that the Tories are screwing them, and overcome their reservations about the competency of Corbyn and his team. The cynical camp think that a socialist revolution never got close to fruition, even with the heavy industrial workforce base. With a charismatic driven leader, maybe that would have been a possible route, but Corbyn does not appeal outside his base, and he has enough toxic baggage that will wreck his changes with the floating voters.

You may wish for mass enlightenment, but that is not going to happen. The only way to effect changes is within the current system. You have to win power under the current crooked system, before you can rebalance the deck.

Both sides see the same victims, who will suffer in the same ways if Labour does not become a viable electoral proposition. But both sides view the others' path as a surefire route to that horrific outcome. So when someone triggers you to post about the very real suffering to the most vulnerable that continued Tory rule would entail, those concerns are exactly what is driving the opposite side too.

Of course this talking about the reasonable posters on either side. There are a fair number of people who are really trolling, and are desperate to win the internet rather than resurrect the Labour party. And they are neither worth paying heed to, nor getting upset by.

I think we need to play the Westminster game to win, and then be in a position to change the rules. You think the price of playing the game is too high. I think the price of not playing the game is too high. Most of the heat in here amongst rational posters derives from that difference of opinion.
   



SP - sorry don't know your name - so SP it will have to be!

I take a fair amount on board from your post above. I do see the rock and a hard place conundrum that confronts us as we face the prospect of further years of Tory misrule.

Much of my anger and frustration stems from the manner in which our political system - the Commons if you will - has long-tolerated (far TOO long!) parliamentary "dismissive-ism" masquerading as the exercising of a free democracy to be accepted with never a serious impediment and with such apparent ease.
For example, I'll give you the disgraceful art of filibustering - seen as fair game and par for the course in Westminster. To waste our taxes in such a shoddy and offensive way and be permitted to talk down (and out!) ANY Bill as though it were of no significance is playing parlour games often with peoples' lives severely negatively impacted. That tactic is a gross offence to the fundamentals of democracy in and of itself!
If you will, they are still bang at it in the old traditional manner as if Victoria reigned still ! 100% unacceptable in the 21st century.

I want a parliamentary democracy that celebrates democracy not one that seeks to exploit and abuse it because "that's how we've always done it" in this place. So why do we not as a mature and informed electorate   (both descriptors are indeed up for debate by the way. . . .) demand that they fucking stop doing it and get with where the world has turned 115 years on?

This was at the core of my rant over what we are consistently handed down from there and continually assured is  a shining example of democracy at work and preferable to all other forms of government. It consistently pisses me off that we the prisoners of its doings and held almost in custody as a nation, are terminally assigned mere bystander status for the following 5 years after an election. THAT doesn't equate to my vision of democracy in action. I have yet to read a word of even mild criticism from our established media about the traditional manner in which we are governed by the way.
   
In this age, this current mob is in my opinion THE single most abusive - abusive and indifferent in extremis to the vast majority of its citizens - so-called government in my adult living memory! Yet we - and when I say we I mean the royal "we" those vast numbers of the real victims of such arrogance from the top - sit back as though stupefied and continue to take their doled-out chastisement for our collective "misdeeds" with barely a whimper. Yet we didn't light the fire!! 

I'll stop now because the anger is coming back . . . .

 
« Last Edit: April 10, 2017, 01:52:55 pm by JohnnoWhite »
There is nothing wrong with striving to win, so long as you don't set the prize above the game. There can be no dishonour in defeat nor any conceit in victory. What matters above all is that the team plays in the right spirit, with skill, courage, fair play,no favour and the result accepted without bitterness. Sir Matt Busby CBE KCSG 1909-1994

Offline JohnnoWhite

  • Deliverer of the -Q- de grace.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,968
  • Thought I was wrong once - but I was mistaken.
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5583 on: April 10, 2017, 02:23:10 pm »
Labour won 3 general elections and kept the core principles of Thatcherism on the economy. It certainly wasn't a rip up of what Thatcher did. I thought Tories would have a better chance in 2015 to win than Labour but I did think maybe Labour could perhaps stop a majority for the Tories.

This time I know for absolute certain that Labour has not a hope in hell of forming a majority or stopping a massive Tory majority in 2020 as things stand 3 years out from the election which is the biggest damning analysis I can make on Labour at the moment.

These momentum hanger ons from the past are living in lalaland. Tony Blair might be an awful lot of things but he called it 2 years ago that Corbyn as leader makes Labour unelectable. Why are the Socialists trying to do what failed in 1983?



I just wonder why you've not addressed any single Tory policy - all of which outraged me - from the listing I gave in my response to you earlier.
There is nothing wrong with striving to win, so long as you don't set the prize above the game. There can be no dishonour in defeat nor any conceit in victory. What matters above all is that the team plays in the right spirit, with skill, courage, fair play,no favour and the result accepted without bitterness. Sir Matt Busby CBE KCSG 1909-1994

Offline Cliff Bastin

  • Big Exeter fan, pretending to be a gooner, pretending...yawn
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,444
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5584 on: April 10, 2017, 02:28:54 pm »
Quote
In this age, this current mob is in my opinion THE single most abusive - abusive and indifferent in extremis to the vast majority of its citizens - so-called government in my adult living memory!

But the people voted for them to form a majority government. They are going to get an even larger majority in the next election. If people are suffering so much and its absolutely awful (it is with the NHS and disability benefit etc) why are they voting for them?

It is for Labour to put across the alternative and give the people another option. Be reliable on the economy. The perception from many is Corbyn doesn't even like his own country.

Online TepidT2O

  • Deffo NOT 9"! MUFC bedwetter. Grass. Folically-challenged, God-piece-wearing, monkey-rubber. Jizz aroma expert. Operating at the lower end of the distribution curve...has the hots for Alan. Bastard. Fearless in transfer windows with lack of convicti
  • Lead Matchday Commentator
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 94,785
  • Dejan Lovren fan club member #1
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5585 on: April 10, 2017, 03:01:41 pm »
I just wonder why you've not addressed any single Tory policy - all of which outraged me - from the listing I gave in my response to you earlier.
Because policies aren't really the problem..   Some of Corbyn's policies are half baked or ill thought out, but in general most of us on here agree with them.  The need to build a lot of new houses for instance, no one else is saying that, it's an utterly necessary policy.

If only we were just debating nuances of policies it would be so much easier..

The policies aren't really the issue, we are avoiding the herd of elephants in the room.
“Happiness can be found in the darkest of times, if one only remembers to turn on the light.”
“Generosity always pays off. Generosity in your effort, in your work, in your kindness, in the way you look after people and take care of people. In the long run, if you are generous with a heart, and with humanity, it always pays off.”
W

Offline classycarra

  • The Left Disonourable Chuntering Member For Scousepool.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 30,558
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5586 on: April 10, 2017, 03:23:08 pm »
Because policies aren't really the problem..   Some of Corbyn's policies are half baked or ill thought out, but in general most of us on here agree with them.  The need to build a lot of new houses for instance, no one else is saying that, it's an utterly necessary policy.

If only we were just debating nuances of policies it would be so much easier..

The policies aren't really the issue, we are avoiding the herd of elephants in the room.

John McDonnell was talking about this on Sunday. Or rather, ignoring (or perhaps just entirely ignorant of) the elephant in the room. [source]

Quote
“What Jeremy was saying was the media should now report us accurately and report us fairly,” McDonnell told Sky News’s Sophy Ridge on Sunday programme.

He also said last year’s Labour leadership challenge had caused the numbers to slump. “What’s interesting is when you poll the issues and our policies, they are extremely popular, so what’s preventing people translating that into strength in the polls?” he said.

“It is partly because they see us as divided so if we unite, which I think we are doing now on a number of issues, particularly around Brexit, you’ll see us rise in the polls.”

There's a remarkably simple answer to that hypothetical question he posed.

Online TepidT2O

  • Deffo NOT 9"! MUFC bedwetter. Grass. Folically-challenged, God-piece-wearing, monkey-rubber. Jizz aroma expert. Operating at the lower end of the distribution curve...has the hots for Alan. Bastard. Fearless in transfer windows with lack of convicti
  • Lead Matchday Commentator
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 94,785
  • Dejan Lovren fan club member #1
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5587 on: April 10, 2017, 03:24:54 pm »
John McDonnell was talking about this on Sunday. Or rather, ignoring (or perhaps just entirely ignorant of) the elephant in the room. [source]

He's right... and wrong..

The policies are quite well liked, the polls do show that.

A shame he ignores the polls that say that he and Corbyn are the reasons people won't vote labour.
“Happiness can be found in the darkest of times, if one only remembers to turn on the light.”
“Generosity always pays off. Generosity in your effort, in your work, in your kindness, in the way you look after people and take care of people. In the long run, if you are generous with a heart, and with humanity, it always pays off.”
W

Offline SP

  • Thor ain't got shit on this dude! Alpheus. SPoogle. The Equusfluminis Of RAWK. Straight in at the deep end with a tube of Vagisil. Needs to get a half-life. Needs a damned good de-frag.
  • RAWK Staff.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 36,044
  • .
  • Super Title: Southern Pansy
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5588 on: April 10, 2017, 03:50:06 pm »
SP - sorry don't know your name - so SP it will have to be!

It's Jon, that's pretty comprehensively leaked.

I take a fair amount on board from your post above. I do see the rock and a hard place conundrum that confronts us as we face the prospect of further years of Tory misrule.

Much of my anger and frustration stems from the manner in which our political system - the Commons if you will - has long-tolerated (far TOO long!) parliamentary "dismissive-ism" masquerading as the exercising of a free democracy to be accepted with never a serious impediment and with such apparent ease.
For example, I'll give you the disgraceful art of filibustering - seen as fair game and par for the course in Westminster. To waste our taxes in such a shoddy and offensive way and be permitted to talk down (and out!) ANY Bill as though it were of no significance is playing parlour games often with peoples' lives severely negatively impacted. That tactic is a gross offence to the fundamentals of democracy in and of itself!
If you will, they are still bang at it in the old traditional manner as if Victoria reigned still ! 100% unacceptable in the 21st century.

And much of that is avoidable. Filibusters are preventable, but they require sufficient numbers to force a vote. Labour have been very naive in their use of parliamentary procedures, too often running foul of procedural matters. Yes many of Westminster's systems are arcane and ridiculous, but they are well balanced and can be made to work, but it requires basic competency in those procedures. Each of these peculiarities arose from a need for a check or balance on the ruling party. The danger is that throwing out the current system, risks something tilted far more heavily to the ruling party. You would not design it that way from scratch, but it is not an impediment to the holding the government to account. It would not be a priority for me to reform much of the business of the Commons. The priority would be increasing the expertise available to the Labour Leadership so they can make full use of their options and use the mechanisms for their benefit rather than chaffing against them as they often appear to.


I want a parliamentary democracy that celebrates democracy not one that seeks to exploit and abuse it because "that's how we've always done it" in this place. So why do we not as a mature and informed electorate   (both descriptors are indeed up for debate by the way. . . .) demand that they fucking stop doing it and get with where the world has turned 115 years on?

This was at the core of my rant over what we are consistently handed down from there and continually assured is  a shining example of democracy at work and preferable to all other forms of government. It consistently pisses me off that we the prisoners of its doings and held almost in custody as a nation, are terminally assigned mere bystander status for the following 5 years after an election. THAT doesn't equate to my vision of democracy in action. I have yet to read a word of even mild criticism from our established media about the traditional manner in which we are governed by the way.
   
In this age, this current mob is in my opinion THE single most abusive - abusive and indifferent in extremis to the vast majority of its citizens - so-called government in my adult living memory! Yet we - and when I say we I mean the royal "we" those vast numbers of the real victims of such arrogance from the top - sit back as though stupefied and continue to take their doled-out chastisement for our collective "misdeeds" with barely a whimper. Yet we didn't light the fire!! 

I'll stop now because the anger is coming back . . . . 

The answer to challenging the Government's trail of destruction does not lie in Westminster. PMQs is good for a 15 second soundbite on News at Ten. It needs proactive media management. Every time a government spokesman opens their mouth, Labour should be offering a talking head to each of the new organisations to rebuff their claims. Every speech is met with a detailed rebuttal of the points made. The Labour media team should be doing the journalists job for them. And it needs to be nearly instant.

The Government is an easy target that has got away with far too much for far too long. The next General Election will be won or lost in the media, not the Commons. Westminster reform is a luxury item that most don't care about. It feels like the same indulgence as talking about the SNP in a hung parliament - it burns the available exposure to the electorate, and does Labour little benefit. Labour should be focused virtually exclusively on the Economy and Services. They need to build a base level of trust on the economy, and the Tories are vulnerable on Services.

Once Labour have won, they can start talking about reforming Westminster. In the meantime, every pronouncement should be weighed against whether it helps Labour win in 2020. They need to be that ruthless and disciplined.   


Offline Sangria

  • In trying to be right ends up wrong without fail
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 19,172
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5589 on: April 10, 2017, 03:58:01 pm »
The general impression that "people" have is that Labour can be trusted with Services, but may over-spend and over-borrow.  They trust the Tories with the economy, but generally think they are bastards with services.

It is of course bollocks, but it means that the Tories get a free pass on the economy, but have to make manifesto pledges to protect spending on the NHS. Labour have to have coherent costed spending plans, far more rigid that the Tories do, because they are perceived to be untrustworthy. Blair's route to power was secured on the back of Gordon Brown's credibility with the economy.

Labour need to win the argument on the economy to win an election. They may have to make commitments that run counter to where they actually want to be, such as ruling out increases in certain tax rates for the life of the parliament. The Tories will campaign on Labour tax increases. That needs to be answered. It may mean that major tax reform would be booted to a second term. Campaigning whilst in Government that you can be trusted on the economy is far easier than building credibility in opposition. 

Labour will pledge to increase spending. They need to answer who pays for it. And the people that they need to win over to win a majority, are the most susceptible to tax cut bribes. It is a horribly delicate balancing act between saving services, and economic electability. 

It's doubly damning that, in a number of polls, the Labour party is trusted more than the Tories on the core issue of the NHS, but when you drag the leaders into it, May and the Tories are trusted more than Corbyn and Labour. Even if they're just opinion polls and not proper elections, how do you manage to get Labour less trusted than the Tories on the most Labour-ish issue of all that you want to talk about over all other issues?
"i just dont think (Lucas is) that type of player that Kenny wants"
Vidocq, 20 January 2011

http://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=267148.msg8032258#msg8032258

Offline Lush is the best medicine...

  • FUCK THE POLICE - NWA
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 40,806
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5590 on: April 10, 2017, 05:28:14 pm »
He's right... and wrong..

The policies are quite well liked, the polls do show that.

A shame he ignores the polls that say that he and Corbyn are the reasons people won't vote labour.
it gives him a nice bogeyman to blame their ills on ie the press

Offline Alan_X

  • WUM. 'twatito' - The Cat Herding Firm But Fair Voice Of Reason (Except when he's got a plank up his arse). Gimme some skin, priest! Has a general dislike for Elijah Wood. Clearly cannot fill even a thong! RAWK Resident Muppet. Has a crush o
  • RAWK Staff
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 53,506
  • Come on you fucking red men!!!
  • Super Title: This is super!
Sid Lowe (@sidlowe)
09/03/2011 08:04
Give a man a mask and he will tell the truth, Give a man a user name and he will act like a total twat.
Its all about winning shiny things.

Offline classycarra

  • The Left Disonourable Chuntering Member For Scousepool.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 30,558
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5592 on: April 10, 2017, 08:51:23 pm »
Steve Bell is terribly unfunny. Or insightful. Or interesting. Not much impressed by his political analysis either. Top combination!

Offline oldfordie

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,536
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5593 on: April 10, 2017, 09:03:23 pm »
You need to think about what the man in the street thinks because of the way people self-identify. There's a quote about Americans that's been posted a couple of times in the Trump thread. Americans vote outside their interests because deep down there's a belief that everyone can be a millionaire[/b].

That view is not held in Britain in the same extreme form but 'the man in the street' is more aspirational than Corbyn and McDonnel supporters would like to believe. Their definition of 'the people' they represent is hopelessly narrow. They seem to exclude anyone who is in anyway aspirational or dares to consider using their earnings for the benefit of themselves of their family.

Policies (like taxing private education to pay for school meals) always contain an element of 'punishing the rich' but actually impact middle class voters who aren't part of the 1%. 

It's fairly basic maths. The Labour Party needs to be elected to protect the people who most need its help, but those people aren't necessarily 50+% of the population and not only that, a lot of people don't like being told, or don't self identify themselves as the second class citizens* that Corbyn's Labour seems to represent.

*for clarity - I don't think anyone is a second class citizen.
Labour do have to win over all types of voters with different policys.
Am talking more about changing this image of there all as bad as each other.
We all knew what would happen when the Torys won power in 2010. funding slashed to everything,  Hospitals ,schools. etc. isn't this basically the reason most of us vote Labour in the first place. I imagine millions of people who have no real interest in politics also vote Labour for this reason. They understand the consequences of what a Tory government will do in power.

« Last Edit: April 10, 2017, 09:06:51 pm by oldfordie »
It might take our producers five minutes to find 60 economists who feared Brexit and five hours to find a sole voice who espoused it.
“But by the time we went on air we simply had one of each; we presented this unequal effort to our audience as balance. It wasn’t.”
               Emily Maitlis

Offline JohnnoWhite

  • Deliverer of the -Q- de grace.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,968
  • Thought I was wrong once - but I was mistaken.
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5594 on: April 10, 2017, 09:28:03 pm »
Labour do have to win over all types of voters with different policys.
Am talking more about changing this image of there all as bad as each other.
We all knew what would happen when the Torys won power in 2010. funding slashed to everything,  Hospitals ,schools. etc. isn't this basically the reason most of us vote Labour in the first place. I imagine millions of people who have no real interest in politics also vote Labour for this reason. They understand the consequences of what a Tory government will do in power.



So it's turkeys voting for Christmas  again? Depressing reflection on the IQ of the populous don't you think?
« Last Edit: April 10, 2017, 09:31:21 pm by JohnnoWhite »
There is nothing wrong with striving to win, so long as you don't set the prize above the game. There can be no dishonour in defeat nor any conceit in victory. What matters above all is that the team plays in the right spirit, with skill, courage, fair play,no favour and the result accepted without bitterness. Sir Matt Busby CBE KCSG 1909-1994

Offline oldfordie

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,536
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5595 on: April 10, 2017, 10:07:59 pm »
So it's turkeys voting for Christmas  again? Depressing reflection on the IQ of the populous don't you think?
I can understand someone refusing to vote for Labour if they feel strongly on a particular issue, I may not agree with them but if that's their priority then fair enough.it's the millions of others who I would class as Turkeys voting for Christmas.
I dont know if it's IQ. gullibility or just ignorance but they seem to ignore the only fact that matters. are these people going to act in my best interests.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2017, 10:17:20 pm by oldfordie »
It might take our producers five minutes to find 60 economists who feared Brexit and five hours to find a sole voice who espoused it.
“But by the time we went on air we simply had one of each; we presented this unequal effort to our audience as balance. It wasn’t.”
               Emily Maitlis

Offline Alan_X

  • WUM. 'twatito' - The Cat Herding Firm But Fair Voice Of Reason (Except when he's got a plank up his arse). Gimme some skin, priest! Has a general dislike for Elijah Wood. Clearly cannot fill even a thong! RAWK Resident Muppet. Has a crush o
  • RAWK Staff
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 53,506
  • Come on you fucking red men!!!
  • Super Title: This is super!
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5596 on: April 10, 2017, 10:12:07 pm »
We all knew what would happen when the Torys won power in 2010. funding slashed to everything,  Hospitals ,schools. etc. isn't this basically the reason most of us vote Labour in the first place. I imagine millions of people who have no real interest in politics also vote Labour for this reason. They understand the consequences of what a Tory government will do in power.

I keep saying this but it's like no one is listening. There is a disconnect between the catastrophic view of the country in your post and in Labour's messages and the actual lives of most people in the country.

There are people suffering in this country and they need a Labour government but that isn't the majority of the population.

So it's turkeys voting for Christmas  again? Depressing reflection on the IQ of the populous don't you think?


The people continually disappoint the left don't they?
Sid Lowe (@sidlowe)
09/03/2011 08:04
Give a man a mask and he will tell the truth, Give a man a user name and he will act like a total twat.
Its all about winning shiny things.

Offline liversaint

  • Beach boy giver of yuletide joy to ha-run-run-reindeer
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 5,253
  • Settle down Beavis
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5597 on: April 10, 2017, 10:20:42 pm »
I keep saying this but it's like no one is listening. There is a disconnect between the catastrophic view of the country in your post and in Labour's messages and the actual lives of most people in the country.

There are people suffering in this country and they need a Labour government but that isn't the majority of the population.

The people continually disappoint the left don't they?

Have to agree, the ideology of the current Labour party has no relation to the lives of millions who would traditionally vote or consider voting for Labour.
You say Honey? I say Fuck off.

You dont win friends with Salad

There is another option. Mr Ferguson organises the fixtures in his office and sends it to us and everyone will know and cannot complain. That is simple.

Offline oldfordie

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,536
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5598 on: April 10, 2017, 11:02:12 pm »
I keep saying this but it's like no one is listening. There is a disconnect between the catastrophic view of the country in your post and in Labour's messages and the actual lives of most people in the country.

There are people suffering in this country and they need a Labour government but that isn't the majority of the population.

Yes I understand the point your making, there are many who dont feel the brunt of the Torys policys. their lives tick over nicely and those people will vote on policys, they wont vote for Corbyns Labour and we should concentrate on competency and policys and stop making this a fight against capitalism and socialism. all this has to be recognized as we are only going to drive away millions of voters resulting in more suffering and hardship for millions. that is the priority and ive never argued anything different.
I also keep saying we have to fight the image of there all as bad as each other, this has nothing to do with Corbyns Labour,  there are millions of people and their lives are not ticking over nicely and they also need to be won over, not with socialism or the fight against neo-liberalism. they have to convinced there not all as bad as each other and that means defending labours record and all the good policys they introduced,policys the Torys have now ripped apart and thrown in the bin.

 
It might take our producers five minutes to find 60 economists who feared Brexit and five hours to find a sole voice who espoused it.
“But by the time we went on air we simply had one of each; we presented this unequal effort to our audience as balance. It wasn’t.”
               Emily Maitlis

Offline Alan_X

  • WUM. 'twatito' - The Cat Herding Firm But Fair Voice Of Reason (Except when he's got a plank up his arse). Gimme some skin, priest! Has a general dislike for Elijah Wood. Clearly cannot fill even a thong! RAWK Resident Muppet. Has a crush o
  • RAWK Staff
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 53,506
  • Come on you fucking red men!!!
  • Super Title: This is super!
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5599 on: April 10, 2017, 11:17:27 pm »
Yes I understand the point your making, there are many who dont feel the brunt of the Torys policys. their lives tick over nicely and those people will vote on policys, they wont vote for Corbyns Labour and we should concentrate on competency and policys and stop making this a fight against capitalism and socialism. all this has to be recognized as we are only going to drive away millions of voters resulting in more suffering and hardship for millions. that is the priority and ive never argued anything different.

I also keep saying we have to fight the image of there all as bad as each other, this has nothing to do with Corbyns Labour,  there are millions of people and their lives are not ticking over nicely and they also need to be won over, not with socialism or the fight against neo-liberalism. they have to convinced there not all as bad as each other and that means defending labours record and all the good policys they introduced,policys the Torys have now ripped apart and thrown in the bin.

I generally agree with you mate, especially the start of the second paragraph. It doesn't do Labour any favours when people say 'politicians - they're all the same' and it certainly doesn't help when people in the Labour Party call some Labour MPs 'Red Tories'.

Labour has to do more than defend its past policies, which by default means defending the last Labour Government (and that's something Corbyn and his team struggle to do). Labour has to show how helping the poorest and the least able to look after themselves isn't about always about punishing someone better off, but as something that is beneficial to society as a whole. What's the positive reason for voting Labour if you aren't one of the disadvantaged?
Sid Lowe (@sidlowe)
09/03/2011 08:04
Give a man a mask and he will tell the truth, Give a man a user name and he will act like a total twat.
Its all about winning shiny things.