Politics

[Renton 21388]

14 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

labour to split if RLB wins. it would simply confirm it has become movement and is no longer a political party with ambitions to govern

 

Latest YouGov data interesting,  just appeared on Guardian live feed. Seems to confirm most Labour members are most interested in fairness rather than anti neoliberal ideology. By a huge amount too. Sorry @Rayvin, that's basically the centre left. Keep RLB out and there is hope, especially with Starmer imo. 

[Rayvin 5186]

13 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

Latest YouGov data interesting,  just appeared on Guardian live feed. Seems to confirm most Labour members are most interested in fairness rather than anti neoliberal ideology. By a huge amount too. Sorry @Rayvin, that's basically the centre left. Keep RLB out and there is hope, especially with Starmer imo. 

 

Define fairness? Or rather, how did Yougov define it?

[Rayvin 5186]

I rather fancy that, since Yougov won't have asked anything remotely concerned with Neoliberalism, that your statement isn't supported by anything. What if I argued that equality of opportunity, and the end to oligarchy and domination of the markets was all "fair".

 

EDIT - I stand corrected, it specifically mentions Neoliberalism. Well, I concede then. Everyone wants centrism. This is great news for you, surely?

 

And me, given that beyond not wanting the right in power, I broadly couldn't give a fuck which way this goes anymore.

Edited January 21, 2020 by Rayvin

[Renton 21388]

20 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

I rather fancy that, since Yougov won't have asked anything remotely concerned with Neoliberalism, that your statement isn't supported by anything. What if I argued that equality of opportunity, and the end to oligarchy and domination of the markets was all "fair".

 

EDIT - I stand corrected, it specifically mentions Neoliberalism. Well, I concede then. Everyone wants centrism. This is great news for you, surely?

 

And me, given that beyond not wanting the right in power, I broadly couldn't give a fuck which way this goes anymore.

 

The same poll has Corbyn way out in the lead as the most popular leader ever and Miliband second so I wouldn't pay much heed to it. Kids eh? 

Edited January 21, 2020 by Renton

[Rayvin 5186]

11 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

The same poll has Corbyn way out in the lead as the most popular leader ever and Miliband second so I wouldn't pay much heed to it. Kids eh? 

 

I thought that was bizarre too, and probably more to do with the fact that most have them hadn't been paying attention pre-Corbyn.

 

But having said this, I do think the notion that Labour will not be a left wing party is significant. Maybe centrism is viable again now because the Tories have lurched to the right, but Johnson appears to be trying to head that off and to become the new Blair.

 

I honestly don't mind who wins and have said I'll vote for Starmer, but there is a difference between what we want and what we need. And I'm yet to see any evidence that Starmer has much of a plan to capitalise on the latter.

 

We need a great deal.

Edited January 21, 2020 by Rayvin

[Gemmill 44487]

 

I'm telling you, Nandy wins back the Red Wall. 

[ewerk 30366]

 

My nand-o-meter has risen very slightly.

[ewerk 30366]

 

There we go, back to zero.

[Gemmill 44487]

16 minutes ago, ewerk said:

 

My nand-o-meter has risen very slightly.

 

"Who is your favourite Labour leader?"

 

Ask her her favourite Spice Girl as well, you bald nonce. 

[Rayvin 5186]

... god dammit, I'm starting to think she's the one to vote for.

 

She just has more about her personality wise than the others. And whisper it but I think Gemmill might be right about her electability...

[Gemmill 44487]

She won't win but she's the best candidate. 

[Renton 21388]

Is she fuck the best candidate. She's just repeated the New Labour equals Thatcherism trope. That may appeal to J69 and Rayvin, but it doesn't appeal to the wider electorate. And proves she's either plain ignorant or just another liar. 

[Gemmill 44487]

you need to fucking chill out. 

[ewerk 30366]

Says the man with Lisa 4 Leader posters on his bedroom walls.

[Renton 21388]

9 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

you need to fucking chill out. 

 

It's partly the reason I have no interest in the party any more. Completely needless.

 

Nandy may or may have the appeal to win back the red wall. But do you really think she will win over the southern middle classes with this bull shit narrative? Because to win an election, she needs to do both. Feels like I'm banging my head against the wall here, but you need someone with broad appeal who the Tories fear. Only one candidate fits that bill (albeit maybe not enough). 

[Gemmill 44487]

I'm fine if it's Starmer. But I also think you've written Nandy off before the contest started and you aren't prepared to allow your mind to be changed. 

[Dr Gloom 21845]

36 minutes ago, Renton said:

Is she fuck the best candidate. She's just repeated the New Labour equals Thatcherism trope. That may appeal to J69 and Rayvin, but it doesn't appeal to the wider electorate. And proves she's either plain ignorant or just another liar. 

Ffs - really? Where/when did she say that? 

[Renton 21388]

2 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

Ffs - really? Where/when did she say that? 

 

Today programme,  according to the Guardian. 

[Rayvin 5186]

Damn, I like her even more now

 

Tbf I'm potentially with Renton on this. As much as the argument on here the other day confirms that I think she's being sort of truthful there, albeit "Thatcherism" is lazy shorthand for other labels, and that anyone prepared to tell it like it is should be applauded, clearly the country in general isn't prepared to accept factually informed opinions that disagree with prevailing narratives.

 

I doubt she needs the southern middle classes really, but alienating them over something that apparently very few people actually care about seems pointless. If she really believes all of that, keep it quiet and deal with it once in power. It's the only way to get this shit past the incredibly informed and intelligent electorate..

[Renton 21388]

6 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

Damn, I like her even more now

 

Tbf I'm potentially with Renton on this. As much as the argument on here the other day confirms that I think she's being sort of truthful there, albeit "Thatcherism" is lazy shorthand for other labels, and that anyone prepared to tell it like it is should be applauded, clearly the country in general isn't prepared to accept factually informed opinions that disagree with prevailing narratives.

 

I doubt she needs the southern middle classes really, but alienating them over something that apparently very few people actually care about seems pointless. If she really believes all of that, keep it quiet and deal with it once in power. It's the only way to get this shit past the incredibly informed and intelligent electorate..

She needs London.

 

Ffs, Nandy wasn't even born when Thatcher took power. Thatcher left office nearly 30 years ago.  She knows fuck all about it from personal experience. County Durham, which was devastated by Thatcher, seems to have forgiven the conservatives whilst she and RBL seem to be happy to shift the blame to Labour. I dont know, I just think the world has gone insane. 

[Rayvin 5186]

5 minutes ago, Renton said:

She needs London.

 

Ffs, Nandy wasn't even born when Thatcher took power. Thatcher left office nearly 30 years ago.  She knows fuck all about it from personal experience. County Durham, which was devastated by Thatcher, seems to have forgiven the conservatives whilst she and RBL seem to be happy to shift the blame to Labour. I dont know, I just think the world has gone insane. 

 

Corbyn won London though..? I don't think this hurts her there.

 

None of us know anything about what it was like living through Nazi Germany, but you can still look and and study the period, and come to a fairly good idea of what happened, why it was bad, and what we can learn from it. NB - please note, I'm not equating Thatcher with the Nazis. Surely that is what we want our politicians to be? Politically informed and well studied. And honestly, how controversial is it to look at a bunch of policies one leader enacted 30 years ago, and to judge them for what they have done to society. I mean if Thatcher had brought in executions, carried out at random by the police on the streets as a means of maintaining public order, would you be saying "no no, Nandy can't criticise that because she wasn't alive in the time the person who instigated it came to power!" Of course you wouldn't.

 

I also had a thought though - Nandy is a long way behind the other two - so realistically, she needs to be seen as an alternative for both sides. That means she has to appeal to the 20% of the membership that are anticapitalist, and who will be supporting RLB as well as those supporting Starmer. The latter are more pragmatic, clearly, so it's probably a calculated risk to try and win votes off RLB without hurting her chances too much with the Starmer crowd.

 

Come any electoral exercise with the wider public, I think we can safely assume the Blair bashing wouldn't play a big part.

[Renton 21388]

3 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

Corbyn won London though..? I don't think this hurts her there.

 

None of us know anything about what it was like living through Nazi Germany, but you can still look and and study the period, and come to a fairly good idea of what happened, why it was bad, and what we can learn from it. NB - please note, I'm not equating Thatcher with the Nazis. Surely that is what we want our politicians to be? Politically informed and well studied. And honestly, how controversial is it to look at a bunch of policies one leader enacted 30 years ago, and to judge them for what they have done to society. I mean if Thatcher had brought in executions, carried out at random by the police on the streets as a means of maintaining public order, would you be saying "no no, Nandy can't criticise that because she wasn't alive in the time the person who instigated it came to power!" Of course you wouldn't.

 

I also had a thought though - Nandy is a long way behind the other two - so realistically, she needs to be seen as an alternative for both sides. That means she has to appeal to the 20% of the membership that are anticapitalist, and who will be supporting RLB as well as those supporting Starmer. The latter are more pragmatic, clearly, so it's probably a calculated risk to try and win votes off RLB without hurting her chances too much with the Starmer crowd.

 

Come any electoral exercise with the wider public, I think we can safely assume the Blair bashing wouldn't play a big part.

 

She's blatantly electioneering for the top job now, of course she is. Which I just personally find depressing, in her attempt to appeal to different ideological factions in the party she's given up her honesty.

 

I suspect people don't want to be a given a biased history lesson from her. I certainly dont. I want an intelligent pragmatist, who believes in evidence based policy, and who will take the tories on successfully, not half their own party. Sadly I just cant see this happening. Too many of labour are in their own bubbles not seeing the big picture. 

 

[Gemmill 44487]

So she's giving up her honesty to win an election and you're annoyed. But when Corbyn refused to give up his honesty to win an election you were apoplectic. I don't know how anyone wins here. 

[Rayvin 5186]

12 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

She's blatantly electioneering for the top job now, of course she is. Which I just personally find depressing, in her attempt to appeal to different ideological factions in the party she's given up her honesty.

 

I suspect people don't want to be a given a biased history lesson from her. I certainly dont. I want an intelligent pragmatist, who believes in evidence based policy, and who will take the tories on successfully, not half their own party. Sadly I just cant see this happening. Too many of labour are in their own bubbles not seeing the big picture. 

 

 

You have to remember, many Labour voters/members are a lot more desperate and disenfranchised by the system than you are. You have a house and a stable job. For people on zero hours, renting, no prospect of really increasing that stability - yeah, intelligent pragmatism of the Blair years isn't going to cut it. It's ultimately the same reason we ended up with Brexit. Nothing has changed though, people's lives aren't better - and hoping that they're going to come back to the centre and be all sensible again, I mean.. yeah it's possible they'll do that, but I'm struggling to see it.

 

So I mean, despair at them if you want - but they're more desperate than you are, and will be despairing at you right back. And yeah, you can say "well just vote for a beige centrist candidate and they'll stop the Tories". Except that the current generational fuck up isn't just on the Tories. It's the entire political system that failed. Every party. Some more guilty than others, but there we go. It's ultimately why I'm comfortable backing Starmer - because even if he is a "centrist" (I think he's sufficiently left wing personally anyway) who has no great plans for achieving actual change, I think circumstance is going to start forcing the hands of our politicians anyway. It already has for the Tories, they're nothing like the party they were a few years ago now. Something in the West needs to change - and it's going to, with or without Labour.

 

As for evidence based policy - the evidence appears to be that we need to knock perpetual growth capitalism on the head asap because it is literally going to kill us all  I don't really see any politicians saying that though, do you? I see a lot of people coming up with absolute bullshit in order to be elected, about how jobs are more important... but that's it. "We need to protect the economy, and yeah ok, also the environment where we can".

Edited January 22, 2020 by Rayvin

[Renton 21388]

1 minute ago, Gemmill said:

So she's giving up her honesty to win an election and you're annoyed. But when Corbyn refused to give up his honesty to win an election you were apoplectic. I don't know how anyone wins here. 

 

This is a good point actually, fair enough. I dont think Thatcher Blair comparisons are necessary, but maybe they are. In which case, I think the party is pretty fucked whoever leads it. The enemy isn't Blair, it's the tories  If Labour cant unite behind that, then they're rightly fucked.