The Labour Leadership Campaign

[Monkeys Fist 42458]

 

You monster-he's already below the poverty line man!

[Park Life 71]

UK threw away 20 billion pounds worth of food cause we're conditioned to buy too much and we've been brainwashed that it should look a certain way.

 

"About 20m tons of food is thrown out each year: equivalent to half of the food import needs for the whole of Africa. Some 16m tons of this is wasted in homes, shops, restaurants, hotels and food manufacturing. Much of the rest is thought to be destroyed between the farm field and the shop shelf.

The total bill to the nation is estimated to be more than £20bn. The issue has come to the fore as supermarkets fight off criticism over billions of plastic carrier bags handed out free each year.

Lord Haskins of Skidby, a former government adviser on rural affairs and chairman of Northern Foods, said yesterday that tackling the mountain of food wasted in this country every year would help to preserve the environment and go some way towards feeding an expanding global population in the face of unprecedented food shortages."

Edited August 12, 2015 by Park Life

[Meenzer 15531]

Lord Haskins of Skidby, a former government adviser on rural affairs and chairman of Northern Foods, said yesterday that tackling the mountain of food wasted in this country every year would help to preserve the environment and go some way towards feeding an expanding global population in the face of unprecedented food shortages."

 

Finally, a political problem CT is ideally equipped to address.

[Christmas Tree 4725]

"Labour's crash" - how fucking stupid are you really?

 

How have thick cunts llike you forgotten how shit the tories were on the economy in the past and now?

 

Sorry I forgot - you're the only person who sailed through ST in the 80s with absolutely no effects and no mates who were affected.

 

I really do hope you face financial ruin sometime soon.

You know, I don't usually fish in here but put that in to tease Chez. I thought it was a bit obvious.

[Dr Gloom 21924]

Labour's crash

[PaddockLad 17278]

My man Bernie is rocking the Demorcrat nomination gig...the games up for capitalism

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/leftwing-outsider-bernie-sanders-beating-hillary-clinton-in-new-hampshire-primary-poll-10451330.html

[ChezGiven 0]

It's just there in the psyche now. Labour - poor on economy, priests - don't let your kid be an alter boy..... Etc etc

 

The Tories if you like "horrible cunts", however Labours crash has now made horrible cunts acceptable to the electorate.

 

Trying to re-win this argument may make Corbyn and a few other leftys feel vindicated, but it will never alter the publics perception.

Try again.

 

CT, how will the Tories be able to continue attacking Labour for their economic record if the debate goes away?

[Christmas Tree 4725]

Try again.

 

CT, how will the Tories be able to continue attacking Labour for their economic record if the debate goes away?

I'm not sure which bit you don't understand. The Tories can attack any time they like because.

 

1. Most senior labour MP's have apologised for overspending.

 

2. The voters believe Labour ran the economy poorly. They don't trust them.

 

So any time they want to get out that stick and poke them they can do with ease.

 

Corbyn or you finding a few graphs will not re-write the publics perception of history.

[NJS 4386]

1. Lying cowards who will quit soon or who've gone already (balls).

 

2. It's a politicians jobs to convince the public. The Tories have convinced them they've reduced the debt and turned the economy around with no truthful basis so anything possible. Of course it will be hard as they are mostly stupid but that's the deal.

[Christmas Tree 4725]

1. Lying cowards who will quit soon or who've gone already (balls).

 

2. It's a politicians jobs to convince the public. The Tories have convinced them they've reduced the debt and turned the economy around with no truthful basis so anything possible. Of course it will be hard as they are mostly stupid but that's the deal.

1. Some of them may yet be leader.

 

2. There's always a set of statistics that prove any side of the argument.

 

Most of the general public ignore 90% of politics outside of elections anyway. The Tories would love nothing better than Labour re visiting 2008 for the next 5 years.

 

Labour would be much better getting their act together, concentrating on being a sensible politician and putting together a good fresh team that had a realistic manifesto for 2020.

 

Unfortunately the party is extremely split at the moment and that is only going to intensify if Corbyn wins.

 

Blair understood that it is better to be electable, take a hit on some of your wish list but get some of it through. The hard left or hard right prefer principle over power.

[NJS 4386]

Power without principle a la Cameron or Clegg (and Blair to a large extent) is just as bad.

[Christmas Tree 4725]

But somebody's getting the gig. Better to have some of your stuff than none.

[NJS 4386]

Thing for me is its hard to pick anything in 13 years that was really "my stuff". They did some good stuff in the scheme of things but left too much undone and did a lot of shit as well.

[ChezGiven 0]

I'm not sure which bit you don't understand. The Tories can attack any time they like because.

 

1. Most senior labour MP's have apologised for overspending.

 

2. The voters believe Labour ran the economy poorly. They don't trust them.

 

So any time they want to get out that stick and poke them they can do with ease.

 

Corbyn or you finding a few graphs will not re-write the publics perception of history.

Not saying you're stupid, just that you've been caught out by your own logic. You say that the debate around the role of Labour in the crisis is over but that would mean the Tories could no longer attack Labour for it. What you argue is not possible, as soon as the subject comes up again, the discussion will happen. Which means your argument that there is no point in Labour preparing their arguments around this topic as incorrect.

 

As I said, it's not stupidity just you've been undone by your own argument. Unless you argue that the Tories won't use the economy to attack Labour.

[Park Life 71]

Thing for me is its hard to pick anything in 13 years that was really "my stuff". They did some good stuff in the scheme of things but left too much undone and did a lot of shit as well.

Problem is also the MP selection process that weeds out the radicals and those that can't be bought.

[Alex 35086]

I guess that's why Corbyn is seen as such a radical, i.e. compared to the rest, when in fact he's nothing of the sort. I also think he might appeal to the under 25s, the demographic which votes the least. If you can appeal to a large proportion of those who didn't vote, you're onto something. The crack about not being able to win from the left is a myth perpetuated by the same people who want you to believe austerity is a necessity and for similar reasons I think.

[Tom 14011]

Vote Cooper - She's not a man.

[ewerk 30616]

The crack about not being able to win from the left is a myth

Is it though? Traditionally you'll always have needed the middle to win. If you start to lose that vote then you're going to have the gain a huge amount of ground on the left and with the youth vote and I'm not sure that there's enough ground there to win.

 

Plus the man doesn't look like a leader of one of the world's major powers. I know it's entirely superficial but image means a huge amount to the general electorate, it dogged Miliband and he didn't have half the image problems that Corbyn does.

[Gemmill 44894]

Shave his beard and put him in a suit and he'll look fine. Do Osborne or Boris Johnson look like they could lead a country?

[ewerk 30616]

Boris, doubtful but then again he did enough to get elected to be head of one of the world's major cities. Gideon could easily appeal to enough cunts to win an election.

[Gemmill 44894]

Osborne's face looks like it's made of Philadelphia. He's fucking horrible.

[ewerk 30616]

It makes also makes a big difference when the message you're selling is one the public want to buy. The average voter is concerned about what's in it for them. They want to hear that the government will deal with dirty immigrants and benefit claimants with 16 kids. For Labour to win from the left they'll have to light a fire under those who didn't vote last time, the youth vote in particular, and I'm not sure that Corbyn can motivate enough of them to make a real difference.

[JJ 0]

I think Labours stuffed for the foreseeable future anyway, but going into the next election talking about 2008, nationalising railways, raising income tax thresholds, getting out of NATO, abandoning Trident, scrapping tuition fees, nationalising energy companies etc etc, is a sure fire way to oblivion.

 

Sure some of you will say yes please to the above, but "Middle England" will run a mile.

Let's take this bit by bit.

 

Labour's biggest problem is that they haven't talked enough about 2008. They're too busy running away from it and allowing the Tories to set the narrative. Every Labour budget from 1997 till the crash was backed by the Tories, and you know as well as I do that the exact same financial catastrophe would have happened regardless of who was in charge. Labour need to be bold and honest about what happened.

 

Nationalising railways is supported by at least 70% of the country when polled. Even Tory voters show and (albeit small) majority in favour of renationalisation. Very similar numbers when it comes to energy companies. Can you not see how stupid it is that for instance the Dutch public sector can run the railways in Scotland, but our public sector can't? We're the only country in the EU that doesn't own our own national grid. We're that obsessed with privatisation.

 

You say raising income tax thresholds like it's across the board. The idea is to only raise the top rate back to 50p. You can't pretend that's not popular.

 

Scrapping tuition fees is quite popular. It's extremely hard to do, but there is absolutely no reason for the £9,000 fees with the possibility of raising to £11,500.

 

While I agree with Corbyn on Trident and NATO, I can grant that he's not on the popular side of the debate on that one.

 

As I've said a million times, Labour can either chase the over 10 million disenfranchised people who don't bother to turn out for an election and elect Corbyn, or they can continue their failed plan of trying to appeal to a couple of hundred thousand voters in marginal seats in middle England and continue to be Tory-lite, begging the question "why vote for the fake Tories when I can vote for the real thing?"

 

You argue that they risk falling into complete irrelevance if they elect Corbyn. I argue that by electing one of the other three talking heads they ensure they never recover from their current malaise.

[Tooj 17]

Would re-nationalising actually be feasible? Genuinely haven't a clue, which is why I'm asking and I didn't want my question to appear like I was being an arse.

[ChezGiven 0]

Very straightforward. Compulsory purchase of the shares of any company by the government and it's Nationalised.