Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Labour would certainly not have lost so many northern MPs "  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Lord Ashcroft is behind a poll giving a reason people didn’t back Corbyn was that he dithered over Brexit. Do you think if he had made a clear case to remain rather than looking indecisive we would have been staying In Europe and Labour would have won more seats at the last election. I’m not looking for a personal bashing session of Corbyn so please don’t he’s had enough of that. I’m curious on the strategy of his and his leadership along with it’s results. " I think he'd have done better with a bit of clarity. On brexit and indeed anything. He was quite hard to nail down on policy. Of course had he come out as a remain his decades of antipathy to EU would have been thrown in his face.... As people aren't allowed to change opinions. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Lord Ashcroft is behind a poll giving a reason people didn’t back Corbyn was that he dithered over Brexit. Do you think if he had made a clear case to remain rather than looking indecisive we would have been staying In Europe and Labour would have won more seats at the last election. I’m not looking for a personal bashing session of Corbyn so please don’t he’s had enough of that. I’m curious on the strategy of his and his leadership along with it’s results. " Not sure what the point of doing a poll now is tbh. The left have traditionally been anti eu but labour were fighting against a no deal brexit and therefore pushed for a 2nd ref. Which made perfect sense. They were in a no win over Brexit.. push for leave and they would have lost labours remain support. Push to hard to remain and They would have lost the red wall..which they did. Enough people saw Brexit as the be all and end all and noe we are left with the consequences. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Corbyn stayed neutral on brexit, he paid the price for it. The last general election was all about Brexit, policies and promises meant very little to people. " Sad but very true. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s time to forget Corbyn. The Labour Party gave only themselves to blame for the current calamitous state of British politics. Theresa May was an inept Prime Minister and incredibly she was replaced by an even more useless person, simply because a lazy majority of British people wanted simple solutions to incredibly difficult problems. Almost any Labour Leader with an ounce of credibility could have ended this situation a long time ago, but Labour was in even more disarray than the country at large. Corbyn was a ridiculous choice - totally ridiculous." He wasnt a ridiculous choice in 2017. Do people in general have the memory of your average goldfish? Labour are to blame cos the country voted for utter cunts. Some logic there | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Corbyn stayed neutral on brexit, he paid the price for it. The last general election was all about Brexit, policies and promises meant very little to people. " What difference did it matter what he wanted? He said time and again the decision rested with the british people and because the 1st ref was based on lies and we were not told about a bo deal..a 2nd ref was the only viable solution. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s time to forget Corbyn. The Labour Party gave only themselves to blame for the current calamitous state of British politics. Theresa May was an inept Prime Minister and incredibly she was replaced by an even more useless person, simply because a lazy majority of British people wanted simple solutions to incredibly difficult problems. Almost any Labour Leader with an ounce of credibility could have ended this situation a long time ago, but Labour was in even more disarray than the country at large. Corbyn was a ridiculous choice - totally ridiculous." Great comment... British politics is a basket case at the moment... Hopefully keir starmer can provide a better quality opposition but how we get British people invested in our democratic processes is a much bigger issue. Whoever wins has to take on the ungovernable masses. Not helped but referenda being ignored and re run until they get the outcome they want. We need better... Its a great opportunity | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s time to forget Corbyn. The Labour Party gave only themselves to blame for the current calamitous state of British politics. Theresa May was an inept Prime Minister and incredibly she was replaced by an even more useless person, simply because a lazy majority of British people wanted simple solutions to incredibly difficult problems. Almost any Labour Leader with an ounce of credibility could have ended this situation a long time ago, but Labour was in even more disarray than the country at large. Corbyn was a ridiculous choice - totally ridiculous. Great comment... British politics is a basket case at the moment... Hopefully keir starmer can provide a better quality opposition but how we get British people invested in our democratic processes is a much bigger issue. Whoever wins has to take on the ungovernable masses. Not helped but referenda being ignored and re run until they get the outcome they want. We need better... Its a great opportunity" The last time labour moved to the centre they lost Scotland and huge chunks of the north. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s time to forget Corbyn. The Labour Party gave only themselves to blame for the current calamitous state of British politics. Theresa May was an inept Prime Minister and incredibly she was replaced by an even more useless person, simply because a lazy majority of British people wanted simple solutions to incredibly difficult problems. Almost any Labour Leader with an ounce of credibility could have ended this situation a long time ago, but Labour was in even more disarray than the country at large. Corbyn was a ridiculous choice - totally ridiculous. He wasnt a ridiculous choice in 2017. Do people in general have the memory of your average goldfish? Labour are to blame cos the country voted for utter cunts. Some logic there " Yes - it is total logic. We (generally) buy, or repel, the story according to how convincingly it was delivered. The Conservative Party “sold” simplicity to an overwhelming majority of people who didn’t (don’t) have any interest in complexities. You remember Tony Blair and how he won?? Simplicity - “Things can only get better.” People buy simple messages - Corbyn appealed to purists who could not articulate their argument in simple enough terms to win voters over. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s time to forget Corbyn. The Labour Party gave only themselves to blame for the current calamitous state of British politics. Theresa May was an inept Prime Minister and incredibly she was replaced by an even more useless person, simply because a lazy majority of British people wanted simple solutions to incredibly difficult problems. Almost any Labour Leader with an ounce of credibility could have ended this situation a long time ago, but Labour was in even more disarray than the country at large. Corbyn was a ridiculous choice - totally ridiculous. He wasnt a ridiculous choice in 2017. Do people in general have the memory of your average goldfish? Labour are to blame cos the country voted for utter cunts. Some logic there " Why such a nasty attitude and choice of word no need for it,tells me a lot about the hard left | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Lord Ashcroft is behind a poll giving a reason people didn’t back Corbyn was that he dithered over Brexit. Do you think if he had made a clear case to remain rather than looking indecisive we would have been staying In Europe and Labour would have won more seats at the last election. I’m not looking for a personal bashing session of Corbyn so please don’t he’s had enough of that. I’m curious on the strategy of his and his leadership along with it’s results. Not sure what the point of doing a poll now is tbh. The left have traditionally been anti eu but labour were fighting against a no deal brexit and therefore pushed for a 2nd ref. Which made perfect sense. They were in a no win over Brexit.. push for leave and they would have lost labours remain support. Push to hard to remain and They would have lost the red wall..which they did. Enough people saw Brexit as the be all and end all and noe we are left with the consequences. " I’m asking because the media says labour lost because of not supporting Brexit. I personally think they lost years earlier by not putting the country first and dithering over what they stood for. The media paint a picture of the country charging for Brexit but the polls stated more wanted to remain at the end so who was charging?? That’s definitely not just about Brexit as the media says. That’s a total loss of faith. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s time to forget Corbyn. The Labour Party gave only themselves to blame for the current calamitous state of British politics. Theresa May was an inept Prime Minister and incredibly she was replaced by an even more useless person, simply because a lazy majority of British people wanted simple solutions to incredibly difficult problems. Almost any Labour Leader with an ounce of credibility could have ended this situation a long time ago, but Labour was in even more disarray than the country at large. Corbyn was a ridiculous choice - totally ridiculous. He wasnt a ridiculous choice in 2017. Do people in general have the memory of your average goldfish? Labour are to blame cos the country voted for utter cunts. Some logic there Why such a nasty attitude and choice of word no need for it,tells me a lot about the hard left" You ok hun? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Lord Ashcroft is behind a poll giving a reason people didn’t back Corbyn was that he dithered over Brexit. Do you think if he had made a clear case to remain rather than looking indecisive we would have been staying In Europe and Labour would have won more seats at the last election. I’m not looking for a personal bashing session of Corbyn so please don’t he’s had enough of that. I’m curious on the strategy of his and his leadership along with it’s results. Not sure what the point of doing a poll now is tbh. The left have traditionally been anti eu but labour were fighting against a no deal brexit and therefore pushed for a 2nd ref. Which made perfect sense. They were in a no win over Brexit.. push for leave and they would have lost labours remain support. Push to hard to remain and They would have lost the red wall..which they did. Enough people saw Brexit as the be all and end all and noe we are left with the consequences. I’m asking because the media says labour lost because of not supporting Brexit. I personally think they lost years earlier by not putting the country first and dithering over what they stood for. The media paint a picture of the country charging for Brexit but the polls stated more wanted to remain at the end so who was charging?? That’s definitely not just about Brexit as the media says. That’s a total loss of faith. " When didnt they put the country 1st? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s time to forget Corbyn. The Labour Party gave only themselves to blame for the current calamitous state of British politics. Theresa May was an inept Prime Minister and incredibly she was replaced by an even more useless person, simply because a lazy majority of British people wanted simple solutions to incredibly difficult problems. Almost any Labour Leader with an ounce of credibility could have ended this situation a long time ago, but Labour was in even more disarray than the country at large. Corbyn was a ridiculous choice - totally ridiculous. He wasnt a ridiculous choice in 2017. Do people in general have the memory of your average goldfish? Labour are to blame cos the country voted for utter cunts. Some logic there Yes - it is total logic. We (generally) buy, or repel, the story according to how convincingly it was delivered. The Conservative Party “sold” simplicity to an overwhelming majority of people who didn’t (don’t) have any interest in complexities. You remember Tony Blair and how he won?? Simplicity - “Things can only get better.” People buy simple messages - Corbyn appealed to purists who could not articulate their argument in simple enough terms to win voters over." So what does that tell us about the electorate? Corbyns big mistake was thinking people would care more about a decent healthcare system,minimum wage being increased than brexit. He was wrong. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I think he was damned either way. If he'd come out strongly for remain, leavers would have hated him. If he'd come out strongly for leave, remainers would have hated him. And I don't think his decision to give us a choice was as mad as it was portrayed. He was the only leader offering to actually try and pay attention to all the voters. But of course his stance was ridiculed because the press tried to bury him from day one." Exactly. The last labour leader to be a vilified in such a way was Michael foot and they still cant let him go. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s time to forget Corbyn. The Labour Party gave only themselves to blame for the current calamitous state of British politics. Theresa May was an inept Prime Minister and incredibly she was replaced by an even more useless person, simply because a lazy majority of British people wanted simple solutions to incredibly difficult problems. Almost any Labour Leader with an ounce of credibility could have ended this situation a long time ago, but Labour was in even more disarray than the country at large. Corbyn was a ridiculous choice - totally ridiculous. He wasnt a ridiculous choice in 2017. Do people in general have the memory of your average goldfish? Labour are to blame cos the country voted for utter cunts. Some logic there Yes - it is total logic. We (generally) buy, or repel, the story according to how convincingly it was delivered. The Conservative Party “sold” simplicity to an overwhelming majority of people who didn’t (don’t) have any interest in complexities. You remember Tony Blair and how he won?? Simplicity - “Things can only get better.” People buy simple messages - Corbyn appealed to purists who could not articulate their argument in simple enough terms to win voters over. So what does that tell us about the electorate? Corbyns big mistake was thinking people would care more about a decent healthcare system,minimum wage being increased than brexit. He was wrong. " The Tories made it all about Brexit. He tried to make it about other things too. But the country was so riven by Brexit and so sick of it, Brexit was always going to be the key to the election for many voters. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s time to forget Corbyn. The Labour Party gave only themselves to blame for the current calamitous state of British politics. Theresa May was an inept Prime Minister and incredibly she was replaced by an even more useless person, simply because a lazy majority of British people wanted simple solutions to incredibly difficult problems. Almost any Labour Leader with an ounce of credibility could have ended this situation a long time ago, but Labour was in even more disarray than the country at large. Corbyn was a ridiculous choice - totally ridiculous. He wasnt a ridiculous choice in 2017. Do people in general have the memory of your average goldfish? Labour are to blame cos the country voted for utter cunts. Some logic there Yes - it is total logic. We (generally) buy, or repel, the story according to how convincingly it was delivered. The Conservative Party “sold” simplicity to an overwhelming majority of people who didn’t (don’t) have any interest in complexities. You remember Tony Blair and how he won?? Simplicity - “Things can only get better.” People buy simple messages - Corbyn appealed to purists who could not articulate their argument in simple enough terms to win voters over. So what does that tell us about the electorate? Corbyns big mistake was thinking people would care more about a decent healthcare system,minimum wage being increased than brexit. He was wrong. The Tories made it all about Brexit. He tried to make it about other things too. But the country was so riven by Brexit and so sick of it, Brexit was always going to be the key to the election for many voters." Agreed That was his big mistake. He thought people wouldnt be fooled by a simple 3 word slogan Wrong again. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s time to forget Corbyn. The Labour Party gave only themselves to blame for the current calamitous state of British politics. Theresa May was an inept Prime Minister and incredibly she was replaced by an even more useless person, simply because a lazy majority of British people wanted simple solutions to incredibly difficult problems. Almost any Labour Leader with an ounce of credibility could have ended this situation a long time ago, but Labour was in even more disarray than the country at large. Corbyn was a ridiculous choice - totally ridiculous. Great comment... British politics is a basket case at the moment... Hopefully keir starmer can provide a better quality opposition but how we get British people invested in our democratic processes is a much bigger issue. Whoever wins has to take on the ungovernable masses. Not helped but referenda being ignored and re run until they get the outcome they want. We need better... Its a great opportunity" Our politics is dumbing down year on year into soundbites and blatant lies which is disturbing. The referendum was based on miss truths lies and bullshit promises so given the quality of the debate why were we surprised when the masses voted to leave. I personally elected MPs to run my country and referendums happen because they’re not doing their job properly. Most people in this country have no grasp of the complexity involved in a country’s ability to function or trade so why the fuck were we allowed to make such an important decision? I hope your right and it does become an opportunity but given the governments own predictions of a reduction in GDP by 2-15% ( subject to deal or no deal) for at least 10 years it’s not looking promising is it! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s time to forget Corbyn. The Labour Party gave only themselves to blame for the current calamitous state of British politics. Theresa May was an inept Prime Minister and incredibly she was replaced by an even more useless person, simply because a lazy majority of British people wanted simple solutions to incredibly difficult problems. Almost any Labour Leader with an ounce of credibility could have ended this situation a long time ago, but Labour was in even more disarray than the country at large. Corbyn was a ridiculous choice - totally ridiculous. Great comment... British politics is a basket case at the moment... Hopefully keir starmer can provide a better quality opposition but how we get British people invested in our democratic processes is a much bigger issue. Whoever wins has to take on the ungovernable masses. Not helped but referenda being ignored and re run until they get the outcome they want. We need better... Its a great opportunity Our politics is dumbing down year on year into soundbites and blatant lies which is disturbing. The referendum was based on miss truths lies and bullshit promises so given the quality of the debate why were we surprised when the masses voted to leave. I personally elected MPs to run my country and referendums happen because they’re not doing their job properly. Most people in this country have no grasp of the complexity involved in a country’s ability to function or trade so why the fuck were we allowed to make such an important decision? I hope your right and it does become an opportunity but given the governments own predictions of a reduction in GDP by 2-15% ( subject to deal or no deal) for at least 10 years it’s not looking promising is it! " Everything about the ref was a shambles. Like you said ministers are there to make decisions or why dont we have a referendum on everything? In 10 years time people will look back and ask..what the fuck did we do? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I think he was damned either way. If he'd come out strongly for remain, leavers would have hated him. If he'd come out strongly for leave, remainers would have hated him. And I don't think his decision to give us a choice was as mad as it was portrayed. He was the only leader offering to actually try and pay attention to all the voters. But of course his stance was ridiculed because the press tried to bury him from day one." He had no chance with the press as time went along I agree, but if he’d chosen remain above any other policies from day 1 I think he would have had a better result. Shallow I know but that’s what people were looking for. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I think he was damned either way. If he'd come out strongly for remain, leavers would have hated him. If he'd come out strongly for leave, remainers would have hated him. And I don't think his decision to give us a choice was as mad as it was portrayed. He was the only leader offering to actually try and pay attention to all the voters. But of course his stance was ridiculed because the press tried to bury him from day one. He had no chance with the press as time went along I agree, but if he’d chosen remain above any other policies from day 1 I think he would have had a better result. Shallow I know but that’s what people were looking for. " I think he'd have lost as many voters as he gained by doing that. And if he'd come down early for remain, I think the Tories and press would have painted him as the enemy of the people, trying to frustrate the will of the people etc. I think he'd have suffered even more vitriol that way. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I think he was damned either way. If he'd come out strongly for remain, leavers would have hated him. If he'd come out strongly for leave, remainers would have hated him. And I don't think his decision to give us a choice was as mad as it was portrayed. He was the only leader offering to actually try and pay attention to all the voters. But of course his stance was ridiculed because the press tried to bury him from day one. He had no chance with the press as time went along I agree, but if he’d chosen remain above any other policies from day 1 I think he would have had a better result. Shallow I know but that’s what people were looking for. " No matter what he would have done..the press would have anhiliated him. He made too many powerful enemies. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I think he was damned either way. If he'd come out strongly for remain, leavers would have hated him. If he'd come out strongly for leave, remainers would have hated him. And I don't think his decision to give us a choice was as mad as it was portrayed. He was the only leader offering to actually try and pay attention to all the voters. But of course his stance was ridiculed because the press tried to bury him from day one. He had no chance with the press as time went along I agree, but if he’d chosen remain above any other policies from day 1 I think he would have had a better result. Shallow I know but that’s what people were looking for. I think he'd have lost as many voters as he gained by doing that. And if he'd come down early for remain, I think the Tories and press would have painted him as the enemy of the people, trying to frustrate the will of the people etc. I think he'd have suffered even more vitriol that way." They couldn’t have attached him if he was on the same side as Cameron. If anything he would have been seen to put country before party politics. He just waited too long. Was he personally dithering or were the executive holding sway? I’m amazed the unions didn’t push labour into remain for workers rights alone. Isn’t that a cornerstone of the labour movement? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Labour's second referendum stance made it easier for the Tories to turn the election into as close to a second referendum likely to be granted. It was very clear the Tories favoured leave, Labour favoured second referendum and lib dems overturn and remain. " If in 5 years time .it turns out to be a disaster..I wonder what the reaction would be. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I think he was damned either way. If he'd come out strongly for remain, leavers would have hated him. If he'd come out strongly for leave, remainers would have hated him. And I don't think his decision to give us a choice was as mad as it was portrayed. He was the only leader offering to actually try and pay attention to all the voters. But of course his stance was ridiculed because the press tried to bury him from day one. He had no chance with the press as time went along I agree, but if he’d chosen remain above any other policies from day 1 I think he would have had a better result. Shallow I know but that’s what people were looking for. I think he'd have lost as many voters as he gained by doing that. And if he'd come down early for remain, I think the Tories and press would have painted him as the enemy of the people, trying to frustrate the will of the people etc. I think he'd have suffered even more vitriol that way. They couldn’t have attached him if he was on the same side as Cameron. If anything he would have been seen to put country before party politics. He just waited too long. Was he personally dithering or were the executive holding sway? I’m amazed the unions didn’t push labour into remain for workers rights alone. Isn’t that a cornerstone of the labour movement? " Most/allunions wanted to remain. As said above.. the tories wanted out..liberals wanted to stay..a 2nd ref with clarification of no deal was the wise move We dont do wise in this country sadly. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I think he was damned either way. If he'd come out strongly for remain, leavers would have hated him. If he'd come out strongly for leave, remainers would have hated him. And I don't think his decision to give us a choice was as mad as it was portrayed. He was the only leader offering to actually try and pay attention to all the voters. But of course his stance was ridiculed because the press tried to bury him from day one. He had no chance with the press as time went along I agree, but if he’d chosen remain above any other policies from day 1 I think he would have had a better result. Shallow I know but that’s what people were looking for. I think he'd have lost as many voters as he gained by doing that. And if he'd come down early for remain, I think the Tories and press would have painted him as the enemy of the people, trying to frustrate the will of the people etc. I think he'd have suffered even more vitriol that way. They couldn’t have attached him if he was on the same side as Cameron. If anything he would have been seen to put country before party politics. He just waited too long. Was he personally dithering or were the executive holding sway? I’m amazed the unions didn’t push labour into remain for workers rights alone. Isn’t that a cornerstone of the labour movement? " I think the papers would have crucified him whatever he did. And look what happened to the Lib Dems when they came out strongly for remain. They, and their new leader, got hammered. How far back are we going? I'm pretty sure he did campaign to remain in the EU during the referendum. Looking it up, it seems he did. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Did any of you see the stuff about people inside the Labour campaign doing their best to see Corbyn would never win too?" Ks tried to keep that quiet. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Labour's second referendum stance made it easier for the Tories to turn the election into as close to a second referendum likely to be granted. It was very clear the Tories favoured leave, Labour favoured second referendum and lib dems overturn and remain. If in 5 years time .it turns out to be a disaster..I wonder what the reaction would be." Not sure how that relates to what I put. We all had a chance to vote for the brexit direction at the last election. Labour's second referendum stance was fortunate as it gave voters 3 clear directions. I don't see how Labour would have faired better by adopting the lib dems overturn position especially given how they suffered in the election | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Labour's second referendum stance made it easier for the Tories to turn the election into as close to a second referendum likely to be granted. It was very clear the Tories favoured leave, Labour favoured second referendum and lib dems overturn and remain. If in 5 years time .it turns out to be a disaster..I wonder what the reaction would be. Not sure how that relates to what I put. We all had a chance to vote for the brexit direction at the last election. Labour's second referendum stance was fortunate as it gave voters 3 clear directions. I don't see how Labour would have faired better by adopting the lib dems overturn position especially given how they suffered in the election" You said correctly which sides each party took. I was just wondering,if it does turn out to be a disaster..people may go..well labour were right. Probably not like.Most people on this country have the attention span of a gnat. And I agree with your point about labours stance. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Labour's second referendum stance made it easier for the Tories to turn the election into as close to a second referendum likely to be granted. It was very clear the Tories favoured leave, Labour favoured second referendum and lib dems overturn and remain. If in 5 years time .it turns out to be a disaster..I wonder what the reaction would be. Not sure how that relates to what I put. We all had a chance to vote for the brexit direction at the last election. Labour's second referendum stance was fortunate as it gave voters 3 clear directions. I don't see how Labour would have faired better by adopting the lib dems overturn position especially given how they suffered in the election You said correctly which sides each party took. I was just wondering,if it does turn out to be a disaster..people may go..well labour were right. Probably not like.Most people on this country have the attention span of a gnat. And I agree with your point about labours stance." In a way Labour got the second referendum or as close as they were likely to get by choosing a stance in between Tory and lib dems. The other non brexit policies of all sides turned into just a side show | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s time to forget Corbyn. The Labour Party gave only themselves to blame for the current calamitous state of British politics. Theresa May was an inept Prime Minister and incredibly she was replaced by an even more useless person, simply because a lazy majority of British people wanted simple solutions to incredibly difficult problems. Almost any Labour Leader with an ounce of credibility could have ended this situation a long time ago, but Labour was in even more disarray than the country at large. Corbyn was a ridiculous choice - totally ridiculous. He wasnt a ridiculous choice in 2017. Do people in general have the memory of your average goldfish? Labour are to blame cos the country voted for utter cunts. Some logic there " It's democracy, just because more people voted for a party you don't like doesn't make them utter cunts to use your expression. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Labours EU plan for the 2019 General Election was very complicated it was ,,... " get a deal then ask the people what the think ,so they are fully aware of what they are voting for " ,,,,.the Tory plan was very simple it was " get brexit done ,and then tell the people that is what they voted for " ,,,,," People fell for a simple slogan They genuinely believed get Brexit done was a simple as that. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s time to forget Corbyn. The Labour Party gave only themselves to blame for the current calamitous state of British politics. Theresa May was an inept Prime Minister and incredibly she was replaced by an even more useless person, simply because a lazy majority of British people wanted simple solutions to incredibly difficult problems. Almost any Labour Leader with an ounce of credibility could have ended this situation a long time ago, but Labour was in even more disarray than the country at large. Corbyn was a ridiculous choice - totally ridiculous. He wasnt a ridiculous choice in 2017. Do people in general have the memory of your average goldfish? Labour are to blame cos the country voted for utter cunts. Some logic there It's democracy, just because more people voted for a party you don't like doesn't make them utter cunts to use your expression. " I didn't say that. I said they voted for cunts. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Labour's second referendum stance made it easier for the Tories to turn the election into as close to a second referendum likely to be granted. It was very clear the Tories favoured leave, Labour favoured second referendum and lib dems overturn and remain. If in 5 years time .it turns out to be a disaster..I wonder what the reaction would be. Not sure how that relates to what I put. We all had a chance to vote for the brexit direction at the last election. Labour's second referendum stance was fortunate as it gave voters 3 clear directions. I don't see how Labour would have faired better by adopting the lib dems overturn position especially given how they suffered in the election You said correctly which sides each party took. I was just wondering,if it does turn out to be a disaster..people may go..well labour were right. Probably not like.Most people on this country have the attention span of a gnat. And I agree with your point about labours stance. In a way Labour got the second referendum or as close as they were likely to get by choosing a stance in between Tory and lib dems. The other non brexit policies of all sides turned into just a side show" I think labour missed the feelings in the country by a mi,e. Saying if we get elected on our multitude of policies we will maybe give you a second referendum but not sure which way I will vote (Corbyn) was way to vague for the simplistic electorate. What they were most concerned about was Brexit and wanted a clear direction. Being fair was seen as weak sadly. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Lord Ashcroft is behind a poll giving a reason people didn’t back Corbyn was that he dithered over Brexit. Do you think if he had made a clear case to remain rather than looking indecisive we would have been staying In Europe and Labour would have won more seats at the last election. I’m not looking for a personal bashing session of Corbyn so please don’t he’s had enough of that. I’m curious on the strategy of his and his leadership along with it’s results. Not sure what the point of doing a poll now is tbh. The left have traditionally been anti eu but labour were fighting against a no deal brexit and therefore pushed for a 2nd ref. Which made perfect sense. They were in a no win over Brexit.. push for leave and they would have lost labours remain support. Push to hard to remain and They would have lost the red wall..which they did. Enough people saw Brexit as the be all and end all and noe we are left with the consequences. I’m asking because the media says labour lost because of not supporting Brexit. I personally think they lost years earlier by not putting the country first and dithering over what they stood for. The media paint a picture of the country charging for Brexit but the polls stated more wanted to remain at the end so who was charging?? That’s definitely not just about Brexit as the media says. That’s a total loss of faith. " I think they lost because they insisted on telling the public that they didn't know what they were talking about when they voted to leave the EU in the referendum. The British being British took exception to being patronised and gave them a bloody nose. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Lord Ashcroft is behind a poll giving a reason people didn’t back Corbyn was that he dithered over Brexit. Do you think if he had made a clear case to remain rather than looking indecisive we would have been staying In Europe and Labour would have won more seats at the last election. I’m not looking for a personal bashing session of Corbyn so please don’t he’s had enough of that. I’m curious on the strategy of his and his leadership along with it’s results. Not sure what the point of doing a poll now is tbh. The left have traditionally been anti eu but labour were fighting against a no deal brexit and therefore pushed for a 2nd ref. Which made perfect sense. They were in a no win over Brexit.. push for leave and they would have lost labours remain support. Push to hard to remain and They would have lost the red wall..which they did. Enough people saw Brexit as the be all and end all and noe we are left with the consequences. I’m asking because the media says labour lost because of not supporting Brexit. I personally think they lost years earlier by not putting the country first and dithering over what they stood for. The media paint a picture of the country charging for Brexit but the polls stated more wanted to remain at the end so who was charging?? That’s definitely not just about Brexit as the media says. That’s a total loss of faith. I think they lost because they insisted on telling the public that they didn't know what they were talking about when they voted to leave the EU in the referendum. The British being British took exception to being patronised and gave them a bloody nose. " I’d agree Brexiteers would have thought and voted that way. I agree he didn’t gauge the mood at all in either camp. The electorate didn’t know what they were actually voting for they just voted for what they thought they knew or felt they knew oh and a few bullshit lies. Time will tell. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Lord Ashcroft is behind a poll giving a reason people didn’t back Corbyn was that he dithered over Brexit. Do you think if he had made a clear case to remain rather than looking indecisive we would have been staying In Europe and Labour would have won more seats at the last election. I’m not looking for a personal bashing session of Corbyn so please don’t he’s had enough of that. I’m curious on the strategy of his and his leadership along with it’s results. Not sure what the point of doing a poll now is tbh. The left have traditionally been anti eu but labour were fighting against a no deal brexit and therefore pushed for a 2nd ref. Which made perfect sense. They were in a no win over Brexit.. push for leave and they would have lost labours remain support. Push to hard to remain and They would have lost the red wall..which they did. Enough people saw Brexit as the be all and end all and noe we are left with the consequences. I’m asking because the media says labour lost because of not supporting Brexit. I personally think they lost years earlier by not putting the country first and dithering over what they stood for. The media paint a picture of the country charging for Brexit but the polls stated more wanted to remain at the end so who was charging?? That’s definitely not just about Brexit as the media says. That’s a total loss of faith. I think they lost because they insisted on telling the public that they didn't know what they were talking about when they voted to leave the EU in the referendum. The British being British took exception to being patronised and gave them a bloody nose. " During the 90s big chunks of the north felt alienated and left behind my new labour. As a protest when offered a choice between a genuine left wing alternative and right wing borderline racists like Farage..they chose the latter. What does that say? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s time to forget Corbyn. The Labour Party gave only themselves to blame for the current calamitous state of British politics. Theresa May was an inept Prime Minister and incredibly she was replaced by an even more useless person, simply because a lazy majority of British people wanted simple solutions to incredibly difficult problems. Almost any Labour Leader with an ounce of credibility could have ended this situation a long time ago, but Labour was in even more disarray than the country at large. Corbyn was a ridiculous choice - totally ridiculous. Great comment... British politics is a basket case at the moment... Hopefully keir starmer can provide a better quality opposition but how we get British people invested in our democratic processes is a much bigger issue. Whoever wins has to take on the ungovernable masses. Not helped but referenda being ignored and re run until they get the outcome they want. We need better... Its a great opportunity Our politics is dumbing down year on year into soundbites and blatant lies which is disturbing. The referendum was based on miss truths lies and bullshit promises so given the quality of the debate why were we surprised when the masses voted to leave. I personally elected MPs to run my country and referendums happen because they’re not doing their job properly. Most people in this country have no grasp of the complexity involved in a country’s ability to function or trade so why the fuck were we allowed to make such an important decision? I hope your right and it does become an opportunity but given the governments own predictions of a reduction in GDP by 2-15% ( subject to deal or no deal) for at least 10 years it’s not looking promising is it! " It's not looking promising, I share your analysis completely dumbed down and we have to find a way to engage the public as right now we are transfixed by celebrity and the cult of personality and clicks.. As opposed to integrity and values and shared vision... I hope there is some kind of emergency unity government to take us forward as although I was pleased we had a govt with a mandate after the last election... They have pissed away any credibility. Whoever leads, we have to get behind them... We achieve more when we work together. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Labour's second referendum stance made it easier for the Tories to turn the election into as close to a second referendum likely to be granted. It was very clear the Tories favoured leave, Labour favoured second referendum and lib dems overturn and remain. If in 5 years time .it turns out to be a disaster..I wonder what the reaction would be. Not sure how that relates to what I put. We all had a chance to vote for the brexit direction at the last election. Labour's second referendum stance was fortunate as it gave voters 3 clear directions. I don't see how Labour would have faired better by adopting the lib dems overturn position especially given how they suffered in the election You said correctly which sides each party took. I was just wondering,if it does turn out to be a disaster..people may go..well labour were right. Probably not like.Most people on this country have the attention span of a gnat. And I agree with your point about labours stance. In a way Labour got the second referendum or as close as they were likely to get by choosing a stance in between Tory and lib dems. The other non brexit policies of all sides turned into just a side show I think labour missed the feelings in the country by a mi,e. Saying if we get elected on our multitude of policies we will maybe give you a second referendum but not sure which way I will vote (Corbyn) was way to vague for the simplistic electorate. What they were most concerned about was Brexit and wanted a clear direction. Being fair was seen as weak sadly. " Said it before.. he thought people were more concerned with the likes of the future of a healthcare. Instead they cared more about brexit. That was his big mistake. Wonder what would have happened if Brexit wasnt an issue,? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s time to forget Corbyn. The Labour Party gave only themselves to blame for the current calamitous state of British politics. Theresa May was an inept Prime Minister and incredibly she was replaced by an even more useless person, simply because a lazy majority of British people wanted simple solutions to incredibly difficult problems. Almost any Labour Leader with an ounce of credibility could have ended this situation a long time ago, but Labour was in even more disarray than the country at large. Corbyn was a ridiculous choice - totally ridiculous. Great comment... British politics is a basket case at the moment... Hopefully keir starmer can provide a better quality opposition but how we get British people invested in our democratic processes is a much bigger issue. Whoever wins has to take on the ungovernable masses. Not helped but referenda being ignored and re run until they get the outcome they want. We need better... Its a great opportunity Our politics is dumbing down year on year into soundbites and blatant lies which is disturbing. The referendum was based on miss truths lies and bullshit promises so given the quality of the debate why were we surprised when the masses voted to leave. I personally elected MPs to run my country and referendums happen because they’re not doing their job properly. Most people in this country have no grasp of the complexity involved in a country’s ability to function or trade so why the fuck were we allowed to make such an important decision? I hope your right and it does become an opportunity but given the governments own predictions of a reduction in GDP by 2-15% ( subject to deal or no deal) for at least 10 years it’s not looking promising is it! It's not looking promising, I share your analysis completely dumbed down and we have to find a way to engage the public as right now we are transfixed by celebrity and the cult of personality and clicks.. As opposed to integrity and values and shared vision... I hope there is some kind of emergency unity government to take us forward as although I was pleased we had a govt with a mandate after the last election... They have pissed away any credibility. Whoever leads, we have to get behind them... We achieve more when we work together. " I think Brexit exposed massive chasms in this country. Those scars won't heal overnight | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I think he was damned either way. If he'd come out strongly for remain, leavers would have hated him. If he'd come out strongly for leave, remainers would have hated him. And I don't think his decision to give us a choice was as mad as it was portrayed. He was the only leader offering to actually try and pay attention to all the voters. But of course his stance was ridiculed because the press tried to bury him from day one. He had no chance with the press as time went along I agree, but if he’d chosen remain above any other policies from day 1 I think he would have had a better result. Shallow I know but that’s what people were looking for. " Which would have been bizarre as he'd spent his career being anti EU... So you had the govt, with a leader who was always remain, trying to deliver leave... And an opposition with a leader who had always been anti EU, trying to remain. Integrity and values.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s time to forget Corbyn. The Labour Party gave only themselves to blame for the current calamitous state of British politics. Theresa May was an inept Prime Minister and incredibly she was replaced by an even more useless person, simply because a lazy majority of British people wanted simple solutions to incredibly difficult problems. Almost any Labour Leader with an ounce of credibility could have ended this situation a long time ago, but Labour was in even more disarray than the country at large. Corbyn was a ridiculous choice - totally ridiculous. Great comment... British politics is a basket case at the moment... Hopefully keir starmer can provide a better quality opposition but how we get British people invested in our democratic processes is a much bigger issue. Whoever wins has to take on the ungovernable masses. Not helped but referenda being ignored and re run until they get the outcome they want. We need better... Its a great opportunity Our politics is dumbing down year on year into soundbites and blatant lies which is disturbing. The referendum was based on miss truths lies and bullshit promises so given the quality of the debate why were we surprised when the masses voted to leave. I personally elected MPs to run my country and referendums happen because they’re not doing their job properly. Most people in this country have no grasp of the complexity involved in a country’s ability to function or trade so why the fuck were we allowed to make such an important decision? I hope your right and it does become an opportunity but given the governments own predictions of a reduction in GDP by 2-15% ( subject to deal or no deal) for at least 10 years it’s not looking promising is it! It's not looking promising, I share your analysis completely dumbed down and we have to find a way to engage the public as right now we are transfixed by celebrity and the cult of personality and clicks.. As opposed to integrity and values and shared vision... I hope there is some kind of emergency unity government to take us forward as although I was pleased we had a govt with a mandate after the last election... They have pissed away any credibility. Whoever leads, we have to get behind them... We achieve more when we work together. " I agree and want to unify behind a government. This crowd make that impossible. Cummins, Covid, planning fraud, and Boris hiding from hard questions. It’s an embarrassment to the hard working people of this country that this shower are in power, I don’t want any of the current parties in power as they are not fit to lead this country. Fundamental change is needed. Some ideas Share the tax revenue across the country fairly. To run to be an MP you have to to have lived in a constituency for at least 5 years before being allowed on the ballot paper. So no party loyalists dropped in. Local town and county council members must all be independent. No town is the same. They all have different needs and should work on a local need not a national party loyalty. Replace the 1200 strong House of Lords with 200 people of merit non political party again. They are there to scrutinise legislation not support either side. No second houses for MPs Build flats in London where they and their families can stay When working in London no family allowances as why should we pay for family? That’s what the wage is for. This applies unless they live within 25 miles of parliament whereby they can commute like the rest of us. The accommodation will be free but not theirs to own. It’s passed to the next MP if they retire or loose an election. This will cut costs and fraud. Any expense claims not valid and no receipt doesn’t get paid. Any fraud is prosecuted and then sacked not allowed to shake hands and pay it back as is happening when they are caught. No more multi trip fact finding trips. 90% are to warm countries and have no relevance to their role. No consulting jobs during term of office. Feel free to add but it’s a start .. sorry rant over I forgot .. close the bars (tea rooms) in Parliament. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I think he was damned either way. If he'd come out strongly for remain, leavers would have hated him. If he'd come out strongly for leave, remainers would have hated him. And I don't think his decision to give us a choice was as mad as it was portrayed. He was the only leader offering to actually try and pay attention to all the voters. But of course his stance was ridiculed because the press tried to bury him from day one. He had no chance with the press as time went along I agree, but if he’d chosen remain above any other policies from day 1 I think he would have had a better result. Shallow I know but that’s what people were looking for. Which would have been bizarre as he'd spent his career being anti EU... So you had the govt, with a leader who was always remain, trying to deliver leave... And an opposition with a leader who had always been anti EU, trying to remain. Integrity and values.. " I think integrity and values no longer exist in our parliamentary or party system. So a mute point. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Lord Ashcroft is behind a poll giving a reason people didn’t back Corbyn was that he dithered over Brexit. Do you think if he had made a clear case to remain rather than looking indecisive we would have been staying In Europe and Labour would have won more seats at the last election. I’m not looking for a personal bashing session of Corbyn so please don’t he’s had enough of that. I’m curious on the strategy of his and his leadership along with it’s results. Not sure what the point of doing a poll now is tbh. The left have traditionally been anti eu but labour were fighting against a no deal brexit and therefore pushed for a 2nd ref. Which made perfect sense. They were in a no win over Brexit.. push for leave and they would have lost labours remain support. Push to hard to remain and They would have lost the red wall..which they did. Enough people saw Brexit as the be all and end all and noe we are left with the consequences. I’m asking because the media says labour lost because of not supporting Brexit. I personally think they lost years earlier by not putting the country first and dithering over what they stood for. The media paint a picture of the country charging for Brexit but the polls stated more wanted to remain at the end so who was charging?? That’s definitely not just about Brexit as the media says. That’s a total loss of faith. I think they lost because they insisted on telling the public that they didn't know what they were talking about when they voted to leave the EU in the referendum. The British being British took exception to being patronised and gave them a bloody nose. During the 90s big chunks of the north felt alienated and left behind my new labour. As a protest when offered a choice between a genuine left wing alternative and right wing borderline racists like Farage..they chose the latter. What does that say?" So genuine question.... I'm no expert but I am concerned that we seem to have lost the understanding of majority government and democracy. The ability to engage the public on serious matters is pretty much non existent. People have a fear of speaking some facts or they will be ripped apart by a voracious and unprincipled media and cancel culture will deal with them. The lack of shared goals and spirit and identity is crippling us. Rather than accepting we have a blue govt for 5 years so let's work together for 5 years and then change the govt at the next chance we get.... We seem intent on cutting off our own nose to spite our face.... "I didnt vote for them so everything they say or do will be opposed"... (now I think they have been dreadful but we are stuck with them for a while)... So...question is.. How do we make British politics more effective in leading us through the next decade which is going to be incredibly challenging.? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Lord Ashcroft is behind a poll giving a reason people didn’t back Corbyn was that he dithered over Brexit. Do you think if he had made a clear case to remain rather than looking indecisive we would have been staying In Europe and Labour would have won more seats at the last election. I’m not looking for a personal bashing session of Corbyn so please don’t he’s had enough of that. I’m curious on the strategy of his and his leadership along with it’s results. Not sure what the point of doing a poll now is tbh. The left have traditionally been anti eu but labour were fighting against a no deal brexit and therefore pushed for a 2nd ref. Which made perfect sense. They were in a no win over Brexit.. push for leave and they would have lost labours remain support. Push to hard to remain and They would have lost the red wall..which they did. Enough people saw Brexit as the be all and end all and noe we are left with the consequences. I’m asking because the media says labour lost because of not supporting Brexit. I personally think they lost years earlier by not putting the country first and dithering over what they stood for. The media paint a picture of the country charging for Brexit but the polls stated more wanted to remain at the end so who was charging?? That’s definitely not just about Brexit as the media says. That’s a total loss of faith. I think they lost because they insisted on telling the public that they didn't know what they were talking about when they voted to leave the EU in the referendum. The British being British took exception to being patronised and gave them a bloody nose. During the 90s big chunks of the north felt alienated and left behind my new labour. As a protest when offered a choice between a genuine left wing alternative and right wing borderline racists like Farage..they chose the latter. What does that say? So genuine question.... I'm no expert but I am concerned that we seem to have lost the understanding of majority government and democracy. The ability to engage the public on serious matters is pretty much non existent. People have a fear of speaking some facts or they will be ripped apart by a voracious and unprincipled media and cancel culture will deal with them. The lack of shared goals and spirit and identity is crippling us. Rather than accepting we have a blue govt for 5 years so let's work together for 5 years and then change the govt at the next chance we get.... We seem intent on cutting off our own nose to spite our face.... "I didnt vote for them so everything they say or do will be opposed"... (now I think they have been dreadful but we are stuck with them for a while)... So...question is.. How do we make British politics more effective in leading us through the next decade which is going to be incredibly challenging.? " I agree we need unity and should support who is in power but there has to be respect. Letting Cummins stay . Letting the planning permission fraud go unpunished. Hiding Russian financial backing. Hiding in a fridge, not facing journalists and countless other shady acts of lowlife behaviour have shocked me and a I’m sure lots of others. I can put up with mistakes and miss judgements but blatant lies and deception are just beyond the pale. Boris has to be axed by his own party for the respect of the politicians to have a chance. I don’t want to kick the tories out as they were elected fair and square. I want the corrupt leadership out and then we all have a chance to unify. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Lord Ashcroft is behind a poll giving a reason people didn’t back Corbyn was that he dithered over Brexit. Do you think if he had made a clear case to remain rather than looking indecisive we would have been staying In Europe and Labour would have won more seats at the last election. I’m not looking for a personal bashing session of Corbyn so please don’t he’s had enough of that. I’m curious on the strategy of his and his leadership along with it’s results. Not sure what the point of doing a poll now is tbh. The left have traditionally been anti eu but labour were fighting against a no deal brexit and therefore pushed for a 2nd ref. Which made perfect sense. They were in a no win over Brexit.. push for leave and they would have lost labours remain support. Push to hard to remain and They would have lost the red wall..which they did. Enough people saw Brexit as the be all and end all and noe we are left with the consequences. I’m asking because the media says labour lost because of not supporting Brexit. I personally think they lost years earlier by not putting the country first and dithering over what they stood for. The media paint a picture of the country charging for Brexit but the polls stated more wanted to remain at the end so who was charging?? That’s definitely not just about Brexit as the media says. That’s a total loss of faith. I think they lost because they insisted on telling the public that they didn't know what they were talking about when they voted to leave the EU in the referendum. The British being British took exception to being patronised and gave them a bloody nose. During the 90s big chunks of the north felt alienated and left behind my new labour. As a protest when offered a choice between a genuine left wing alternative and right wing borderline racists like Farage..they chose the latter. What does that say? So genuine question.... I'm no expert but I am concerned that we seem to have lost the understanding of majority government and democracy. The ability to engage the public on serious matters is pretty much non existent. People have a fear of speaking some facts or they will be ripped apart by a voracious and unprincipled media and cancel culture will deal with them. The lack of shared goals and spirit and identity is crippling us. Rather than accepting we have a blue govt for 5 years so let's work together for 5 years and then change the govt at the next chance we get.... We seem intent on cutting off our own nose to spite our face.... "I didnt vote for them so everything they say or do will be opposed"... (now I think they have been dreadful but we are stuck with them for a while)... So...question is.. How do we make British politics more effective in leading us through the next decade which is going to be incredibly challenging.? I agree we need unity and should support who is in power but there has to be respect. Letting Cummins stay . Letting the planning permission fraud go unpunished. Hiding Russian financial backing. Hiding in a fridge, not facing journalists and countless other shady acts of lowlife behaviour have shocked me and a I’m sure lots of others. I can put up with mistakes and miss judgements but blatant lies and deception are just beyond the pale. Boris has to be axed by his own party for the respect of the politicians to have a chance. I don’t want to kick the tories out as they were elected fair and square. I want the corrupt leadership out and then we all have a chance to unify. " The Tories won't kick out their leader as long as they think he'll win elections. They don't care about right and wrong or laws particularly. They only care about power. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Labour's second referendum stance made it easier for the Tories to turn the election into as close to a second referendum likely to be granted. It was very clear the Tories favoured leave, Labour favoured second referendum and lib dems overturn and remain. If in 5 years time .it turns out to be a disaster..I wonder what the reaction would be. Not sure how that relates to what I put. We all had a chance to vote for the brexit direction at the last election. Labour's second referendum stance was fortunate as it gave voters 3 clear directions. I don't see how Labour would have faired better by adopting the lib dems overturn position especially given how they suffered in the election You said correctly which sides each party took. I was just wondering,if it does turn out to be a disaster..people may go..well labour were right. Probably not like.Most people on this country have the attention span of a gnat. And I agree with your point about labours stance." We have already seen that it will go wrong and it will be Brussels to blame. This Govt has made its name deriding complexities and offering simplicity as a viable option. Unfortunately that argument falls apart when complex situations appear. We have neither a Leader, nor a cabinet that is technically capable of dealing with difficult issues because they were chosen on Brexit based loyalty. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that?" Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Lord Ashcroft is behind a poll giving a reason people didn’t back Corbyn was that he dithered over Brexit. Do you think if he had made a clear case to remain rather than looking indecisive we would have been staying In Europe and Labour would have won more seats at the last election. I’m not looking for a personal bashing session of Corbyn so please don’t he’s had enough of that. I’m curious on the strategy of his and his leadership along with it’s results. Not sure what the point of doing a poll now is tbh. The left have traditionally been anti eu but labour were fighting against a no deal brexit and therefore pushed for a 2nd ref. Which made perfect sense. They were in a no win over Brexit.. push for leave and they would have lost labours remain support. Push to hard to remain and They would have lost the red wall..which they did. Enough people saw Brexit as the be all and end all and noe we are left with the consequences. I’m asking because the media says labour lost because of not supporting Brexit. I personally think they lost years earlier by not putting the country first and dithering over what they stood for. The media paint a picture of the country charging for Brexit but the polls stated more wanted to remain at the end so who was charging?? That’s definitely not just about Brexit as the media says. That’s a total loss of faith. I think they lost because they insisted on telling the public that they didn't know what they were talking about when they voted to leave the EU in the referendum. The British being British took exception to being patronised and gave them a bloody nose. During the 90s big chunks of the north felt alienated and left behind my new labour. As a protest when offered a choice between a genuine left wing alternative and right wing borderline racists like Farage..they chose the latter. What does that say? So genuine question.... I'm no expert but I am concerned that we seem to have lost the understanding of majority government and democracy. The ability to engage the public on serious matters is pretty much non existent. People have a fear of speaking some facts or they will be ripped apart by a voracious and unprincipled media and cancel culture will deal with them. The lack of shared goals and spirit and identity is crippling us. Rather than accepting we have a blue govt for 5 years so let's work together for 5 years and then change the govt at the next chance we get.... We seem intent on cutting off our own nose to spite our face.... "I didnt vote for them so everything they say or do will be opposed"... (now I think they have been dreadful but we are stuck with them for a while)... So...question is.. How do we make British politics more effective in leading us through the next decade which is going to be incredibly challenging.? " You never answered my question 
When you talk about working together for the common good,isnt that socialism?
Capitalism, especially since Thatcherism,is the complete opposite.Its about dog eat dog..looking out for yourself and fuck everyone else.I know it's a cynical view..I genuinely dont think tories want a society where everyone is working towards a common goal.. they want a division and discord because it diverts attention from bigger issues.
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support" Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win?" The didnt win any. And? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? The didnt win any. And?" And What? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? The didnt win any. And? And What?" What was your point? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? The didnt win any. And? And What? What was your point?" I asked a question. You answered it. Then you then tried a bit of deflection! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? The didnt win any. And? And What? What was your point? I asked a question. You answered it. Then you then tried a bit of deflection!" What. By asking what your point was? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? The didnt win any. And? And What? What was your point? I asked a question. You answered it. Then you then tried a bit of deflection! What. By asking what your point was?" Exactly. It was a question. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? The didnt win any. And? And What? What was your point? I asked a question. You answered it. Then you then tried a bit of deflection! What. By asking what your point was? Exactly. It was a question. " What did you have for your dinner last night? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support" That kind of answer walks Momentum supporters straight through the “thick as pigshit” door. No person on their right mind would discard a watered down socialist utopia in favour of ever more extremist Conservative Governments. But this is exactly what you are saying. Would you really prefer to have this bunch of clowns stay in office rather than a Starmer Government just because he doesn’t want to follow election losing concepts? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? The didnt win any. And? And What? What was your point? I asked a question. You answered it. Then you then tried a bit of deflection!" He literally answered your question then asked you a question in return. How on Earth is that deflection? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win?" Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"When I see the comment regarding young people supporting Momentum I’m reminded of the quote by Mark Twain. When I was 16 I thought my parents were stupid. When I was 18 I was amazed by how much they had learned. Let’s hope those younger members begin to learn. " I cant work you out. Sometimes I agree with every word you say and other times,I'm left scratching me head. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same'" But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"When I see the comment regarding young people supporting Momentum I’m reminded of the quote by Mark Twain. When I was 16 I thought my parents were stupid. When I was 18 I was amazed by how much they had learned. Let’s hope those younger members begin to learn. I cant work you out. Sometimes I agree with every word you say and other times,I'm left scratching me head." I’m trying to say To say the young were allied to momentum is probably true to a point but when people start to work for a living their ideals are sadly replaced by the need for familiarity, stability and reality. Revolution could cost them their 95% mortgage for their new home so they don’t rock the boat. Idealistic revolution has definitely got its merits but dare you tax the rich at 85% like labour Did in the 70s and expect them to stay? They now can bugger off and work from another country at will. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. " Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"When I see the comment regarding young people supporting Momentum I’m reminded of the quote by Mark Twain. When I was 16 I thought my parents were stupid. When I was 18 I was amazed by how much they had learned. Let’s hope those younger members begin to learn. I cant work you out. Sometimes I agree with every word you say and other times,I'm left scratching me head. I’m trying to say To say the young were allied to momentum is probably true to a point but when people start to work for a living their ideals are sadly replaced by the need for familiarity, stability and reality. Revolution could cost them their 95% mortgage for their new home so they don’t rock the boat. Idealistic revolution has definitely got its merits but dare you tax the rich at 85% like labour Did in the 70s and expect them to stay? They now can bugger off and work from another country at will. " It was hardly revolutionary. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition" So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support?" They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"When I see the comment regarding young people supporting Momentum I’m reminded of the quote by Mark Twain. When I was 16 I thought my parents were stupid. When I was 18 I was amazed by how much they had learned. Let’s hope those younger members begin to learn. I cant work you out. Sometimes I agree with every word you say and other times,I'm left scratching me head. I’m trying to say To say the young were allied to momentum is probably true to a point but when people start to work for a living their ideals are sadly replaced by the need for familiarity, stability and reality. Revolution could cost them their 95% mortgage for their new home so they don’t rock the boat. Idealistic revolution has definitely got its merits but dare you tax the rich at 85% like labour Did in the 70s and expect them to stay? They now can bugger off and work from another country at will. It was hardly revolutionary. " No revolution in the overthrow sense but a new approach to government approach | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s time to forget Corbyn. The Labour Party gave only themselves to blame for the current calamitous state of British politics. Theresa May was an inept Prime Minister and incredibly she was replaced by an even more useless person, simply because a lazy majority of British people wanted simple solutions to incredibly difficult problems. Almost any Labour Leader with an ounce of credibility could have ended this situation a long time ago, but Labour was in even more disarray than the country at large. Corbyn was a ridiculous choice - totally ridiculous. He wasnt a ridiculous choice in 2017. Do people in general have the memory of your average goldfish? Labour are to blame cos the country voted for utter cunts. Some logic there Yes - it is total logic. We (generally) buy, or repel, the story according to how convincingly it was delivered. The Conservative Party “sold” simplicity to an overwhelming majority of people who didn’t (don’t) have any interest in complexities. You remember Tony Blair and how he won?? Simplicity - “Things can only get better.” People buy simple messages - Corbyn appealed to purists who could not articulate their argument in simple enough terms to win voters over. So what does that tell us about the electorate? Corbyns big mistake was thinking people would care more about a decent healthcare system,minimum wage being increased than brexit. He was wrong. " | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way" Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. " . Mentioned this on another thread but despite Tories getting 80 seat majority Corbyn in 2019 got more votes than Milliband in 2015 , more than Brown in 2010 and more than Blair when Labour last won an election , will be interesting to see how Starmer compares | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Labour's second referendum stance made it easier for the Tories to turn the election into as close to a second referendum likely to be granted. It was very clear the Tories favoured leave, Labour favoured second referendum and lib dems overturn and remain. If in 5 years time .it turns out to be a disaster..I wonder what the reaction would be. Not sure how that relates to what I put. We all had a chance to vote for the brexit direction at the last election. Labour's second referendum stance was fortunate as it gave voters 3 clear directions. I don't see how Labour would have faired better by adopting the lib dems overturn position especially given how they suffered in the election" Labour started the election campaign with policies and promises of what they would do, the brexit came into play late on. By that time the damage was done. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Labour's second referendum stance made it easier for the Tories to turn the election into as close to a second referendum likely to be granted. It was very clear the Tories favoured leave, Labour favoured second referendum and lib dems overturn and remain. If in 5 years time .it turns out to be a disaster..I wonder what the reaction would be. Not sure how that relates to what I put. We all had a chance to vote for the brexit direction at the last election. Labour's second referendum stance was fortunate as it gave voters 3 clear directions. I don't see how Labour would have faired better by adopting the lib dems overturn position especially given how they suffered in the election Labour started the election campaign with policies and promises of what they would do, the brexit came into play late on. By that time the damage was done." I think he should have denied Boris the election as by agreeing he played into his hands and denied further scrutiny of the who,e Brexit debacle. Boris promise to get Brexit dome would have been wiped out too. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. . Mentioned this on another thread but despite Tories getting 80 seat majority Corbyn in 2019 got more votes than Milliband in 2015 , more than Brown in 2010 and more than Blair when Labour last won an election , will be interesting to see how Starmer compares " I think people forget how close he came in 2017 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Labour's second referendum stance made it easier for the Tories to turn the election into as close to a second referendum likely to be granted. It was very clear the Tories favoured leave, Labour favoured second referendum and lib dems overturn and remain. If in 5 years time .it turns out to be a disaster..I wonder what the reaction would be. Not sure how that relates to what I put. We all had a chance to vote for the brexit direction at the last election. Labour's second referendum stance was fortunate as it gave voters 3 clear directions. I don't see how Labour would have faired better by adopting the lib dems overturn position especially given how they suffered in the election Labour started the election campaign with policies and promises of what they would do, the brexit came into play late on. By that time the damage was done. I think he should have denied Boris the election as by agreeing he played into his hands and denied further scrutiny of the who,e Brexit debacle. Boris promise to get Brexit dome would have been wiped out too. " I think from the start boris portrayed it as election about Brexit. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Labour's second referendum stance made it easier for the Tories to turn the election into as close to a second referendum likely to be granted. It was very clear the Tories favoured leave, Labour favoured second referendum and lib dems overturn and remain. If in 5 years time .it turns out to be a disaster..I wonder what the reaction would be. Not sure how that relates to what I put. We all had a chance to vote for the brexit direction at the last election. Labour's second referendum stance was fortunate as it gave voters 3 clear directions. I don't see how Labour would have faired better by adopting the lib dems overturn position especially given how they suffered in the election Labour started the election campaign with policies and promises of what they would do, the brexit came into play late on. By that time the damage was done. I think he should have denied Boris the election as by agreeing he played into his hands and denied further scrutiny of the who,e Brexit debacle. Boris promise to get Brexit dome would have been wiped out too. I think from the start Boris portrayed it as election about Brexit." He saw a Labour’s Achilles heal was they were a bit vague and twisted this into a much worse portrayal. With the help of the media. Corbyn should have played the long game and watch Boris fluster until he couldn’t act. He had influence and should have used it until the Toris had boxed themselves into a corner. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Labour's second referendum stance made it easier for the Tories to turn the election into as close to a second referendum likely to be granted. It was very clear the Tories favoured leave, Labour favoured second referendum and lib dems overturn and remain. If in 5 years time .it turns out to be a disaster..I wonder what the reaction would be. Not sure how that relates to what I put. We all had a chance to vote for the brexit direction at the last election. Labour's second referendum stance was fortunate as it gave voters 3 clear directions. I don't see how Labour would have faired better by adopting the lib dems overturn position especially given how they suffered in the election Labour started the election campaign with policies and promises of what they would do, the brexit came into play late on. By that time the damage was done. I think he should have denied Boris the election as by agreeing he played into his hands and denied further scrutiny of the who,e Brexit debacle. Boris promise to get Brexit dome would have been wiped out too. " . ,,,,to be fair to Corbyn he did try to avoid the GE , it was obvious it would turn into a brexit referendum ,which the opposition parties should have held out for , but when the LibDems and SNP began to say they would fall into Johnson's trap and vote for a GE , it would have given the Tories the majority they needed , at which point if Labour had again voted against a GE they would have entered the race with all their political opponents accusing them of not wanting to be there , | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Labour's second referendum stance made it easier for the Tories to turn the election into as close to a second referendum likely to be granted. It was very clear the Tories favoured leave, Labour favoured second referendum and lib dems overturn and remain. If in 5 years time .it turns out to be a disaster..I wonder what the reaction would be. Not sure how that relates to what I put. We all had a chance to vote for the brexit direction at the last election. Labour's second referendum stance was fortunate as it gave voters 3 clear directions. I don't see how Labour would have faired better by adopting the lib dems overturn position especially given how they suffered in the election Labour started the election campaign with policies and promises of what they would do, the brexit came into play late on. By that time the damage was done. I think he should have denied Boris the election as by agreeing he played into his hands and denied further scrutiny of the who,e Brexit debacle. Boris promise to get Brexit dome would have been wiped out too. . ,,,,to be fair to Corbyn he did try to avoid the GE , it was obvious it would turn into a brexit referendum ,which the opposition parties should have held out for , but when the LibDems and SNP began to say they would fall into Johnson's trap and vote for a GE , it would have given the Tories the majority they needed , at which point if Labour had again voted against a GE they would have entered the race with all their political opponents accusing them of not wanting to be there , " Yes the liberals caved first that’s true. I so wanted him to let Boris fall flat . | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Labour's second referendum stance made it easier for the Tories to turn the election into as close to a second referendum likely to be granted. It was very clear the Tories favoured leave, Labour favoured second referendum and lib dems overturn and remain. If in 5 years time .it turns out to be a disaster..I wonder what the reaction would be. Not sure how that relates to what I put. We all had a chance to vote for the brexit direction at the last election. Labour's second referendum stance was fortunate as it gave voters 3 clear directions. I don't see how Labour would have faired better by adopting the lib dems overturn position especially given how they suffered in the election Labour started the election campaign with policies and promises of what they would do, the brexit came into play late on. By that time the damage was done. I think he should have denied Boris the election as by agreeing he played into his hands and denied further scrutiny of the who,e Brexit debacle. Boris promise to get Brexit dome would have been wiped out too. I think from the start Boris portrayed it as election about Brexit. He saw a Labour’s Achilles heal was they were a bit vague and twisted this into a much worse portrayal. With the help of the media. Corbyn should have played the long game and watch Boris fluster until he couldn’t act. He had influence and should have used it until the Toris had boxed themselves into a corner. " It would have made sense but as.mentined above,he would have got hammered for delaying democracy. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Corbyn should have tried to deny Johnson his election at the time. They were flailing and imploding. But the Tories would have hammered Corbyn over and over for denying the will of the people and being the enemy of the people etc by not allowing them to have their say. I think Corbyn really was doomed no matter what course he picked." Agreed.He was in a no win situation. Remember Johnson calling him a chicken?That's the level of political discourse we have sunk too. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Labour's second referendum stance made it easier for the Tories to turn the election into as close to a second referendum likely to be granted. It was very clear the Tories favoured leave, Labour favoured second referendum and lib dems overturn and remain. If in 5 years time .it turns out to be a disaster..I wonder what the reaction would be. Not sure how that relates to what I put. We all had a chance to vote for the brexit direction at the last election. Labour's second referendum stance was fortunate as it gave voters 3 clear directions. I don't see how Labour would have faired better by adopting the lib dems overturn position especially given how they suffered in the election Labour started the election campaign with policies and promises of what they would do, the brexit came into play late on. By that time the damage was done. I think he should have denied Boris the election as by agreeing he played into his hands and denied further scrutiny of the who,e Brexit debacle. Boris promise to get Brexit dome would have been wiped out too. . ,,,,to be fair to Corbyn he did try to avoid the GE , it was obvious it would turn into a brexit referendum ,which the opposition parties should have held out for , but when the LibDems and SNP began to say they would fall into Johnson's trap and vote for a GE , it would have given the Tories the majority they needed , at which point if Labour had again voted against a GE they would have entered the race with all their political opponents accusing them of not wanting to be there , Yes the liberals caved first that’s true. I so wanted him to let Boris fall flat . " ..... I am still baffled as to why the Lib Dems decided to join in the Tories call for a GE , they could not have been too far away from Johnson having to call another referendum (we were in a 5 year fixed term parliament with the next GE not due until 2022) , unless they believed their own rhetoric and thought they would win enough seats to form the next government , Personally (as a remainer ) I still believe another referendum , similar to the previous one would have been wrong , What is now needed is an agreement with the EU and that agreement put to the people to decide if that would really be in our best interest ,This would mean that the referendum with an actual negotiated deal would mean that I and everyone else would be aware of what they were voting for , which is actually what Jeremy Corbyn was suggesting ,and I still cannot see anything at all wrong with this idea | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Labour's second referendum stance made it easier for the Tories to turn the election into as close to a second referendum likely to be granted. It was very clear the Tories favoured leave, Labour favoured second referendum and lib dems overturn and remain. If in 5 years time .it turns out to be a disaster..I wonder what the reaction would be. Not sure how that relates to what I put. We all had a chance to vote for the brexit direction at the last election. Labour's second referendum stance was fortunate as it gave voters 3 clear directions. I don't see how Labour would have faired better by adopting the lib dems overturn position especially given how they suffered in the election Labour started the election campaign with policies and promises of what they would do, the brexit came into play late on. By that time the damage was done. I think he should have denied Boris the election as by agreeing he played into his hands and denied further scrutiny of the who,e Brexit debacle. Boris promise to get Brexit dome would have been wiped out too. . ,,,,to be fair to Corbyn he did try to avoid the GE , it was obvious it would turn into a brexit referendum ,which the opposition parties should have held out for , but when the LibDems and SNP began to say they would fall into Johnson's trap and vote for a GE , it would have given the Tories the majority they needed , at which point if Labour had again voted against a GE they would have entered the race with all their political opponents accusing them of not wanting to be there , Yes the liberals caved first that’s true. I so wanted him to let Boris fall flat . ..... I am still baffled as to why the Lib Dems decided to join in the Tories call for a GE , they could not have been too far away from Johnson having to call another referendum (we were in a 5 year fixed term parliament with the next GE not due until 2022) , unless they believed their own rhetoric and thought they would win enough seats to form the next government , Personally (as a remainer ) I still believe another referendum , similar to the previous one would have been wrong , What is now needed is an agreement with the EU and that agreement put to the people to decide if that would really be in our best interest ,This would mean that the referendum with an actual negotiated deal would mean that I and everyone else would be aware of what they were voting for , which is actually what Jeremy Corbyn was suggesting ,and I still cannot see anything at all wrong with this idea " He was asking to much of the sun readers in this country. Brexit was the only show in town as a yes or no . Trying to explain a strategy with the media against you was a bad course to take. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Labour's second referendum stance made it easier for the Tories to turn the election into as close to a second referendum likely to be granted. It was very clear the Tories favoured leave, Labour favoured second referendum and lib dems overturn and remain. If in 5 years time .it turns out to be a disaster..I wonder what the reaction would be. Not sure how that relates to what I put. We all had a chance to vote for the brexit direction at the last election. Labour's second referendum stance was fortunate as it gave voters 3 clear directions. I don't see how Labour would have faired better by adopting the lib dems overturn position especially given how they suffered in the election Labour started the election campaign with policies and promises of what they would do, the brexit came into play late on. By that time the damage was done. I think he should have denied Boris the election as by agreeing he played into his hands and denied further scrutiny of the who,e Brexit debacle. Boris promise to get Brexit dome would have been wiped out too. . ,,,,to be fair to Corbyn he did try to avoid the GE , it was obvious it would turn into a brexit referendum ,which the opposition parties should have held out for , but when the LibDems and SNP began to say they would fall into Johnson's trap and vote for a GE , it would have given the Tories the majority they needed , at which point if Labour had again voted against a GE they would have entered the race with all their political opponents accusing them of not wanting to be there , Yes the liberals caved first that’s true. I so wanted him to let Boris fall flat . ..... I am still baffled as to why the Lib Dems decided to join in the Tories call for a GE , they could not have been too far away from Johnson having to call another referendum (we were in a 5 year fixed term parliament with the next GE not due until 2022) , unless they believed their own rhetoric and thought they would win enough seats to form the next government , Personally (as a remainer ) I still believe another referendum , similar to the previous one would have been wrong , What is now needed is an agreement with the EU and that agreement put to the people to decide if that would really be in our best interest ,This would mean that the referendum with an actual negotiated deal would mean that I and everyone else would be aware of what they were voting for , which is actually what Jeremy Corbyn was suggesting ,and I still cannot see anything at all wrong with this idea " I thought may have made a oacy with the liberals | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Labour's second referendum stance made it easier for the Tories to turn the election into as close to a second referendum likely to be granted. It was very clear the Tories favoured leave, Labour favoured second referendum and lib dems overturn and remain. If in 5 years time .it turns out to be a disaster..I wonder what the reaction would be. Not sure how that relates to what I put. We all had a chance to vote for the brexit direction at the last election. Labour's second referendum stance was fortunate as it gave voters 3 clear directions. I don't see how Labour would have faired better by adopting the lib dems overturn position especially given how they suffered in the election Labour started the election campaign with policies and promises of what they would do, the brexit came into play late on. By that time the damage was done. I think he should have denied Boris the election as by agreeing he played into his hands and denied further scrutiny of the who,e Brexit debacle. Boris promise to get Brexit dome would have been wiped out too. . ,,,,to be fair to Corbyn he did try to avoid the GE , it was obvious it would turn into a brexit referendum ,which the opposition parties should have held out for , but when the LibDems and SNP began to say they would fall into Johnson's trap and vote for a GE , it would have given the Tories the majority they needed , at which point if Labour had again voted against a GE they would have entered the race with all their political opponents accusing them of not wanting to be there , Yes the liberals caved first that’s true. I so wanted him to let Boris fall flat . ..... I am still baffled as to why the Lib Dems decided to join in the Tories call for a GE , they could not have been too far away from Johnson having to call another referendum (we were in a 5 year fixed term parliament with the next GE not due until 2022) , unless they believed their own rhetoric and thought they would win enough seats to form the next government , Personally (as a remainer ) I still believe another referendum , similar to the previous one would have been wrong , What is now needed is an agreement with the EU and that agreement put to the people to decide if that would really be in our best interest ,This would mean that the referendum with an actual negotiated deal would mean that I and everyone else would be aware of what they were voting for , which is actually what Jeremy Corbyn was suggesting ,and I still cannot see anything at all wrong with this idea " Many people prefer simple lies over more complex reality. The Tories have really capitalised on this concept in recent years. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Labour's second referendum stance made it easier for the Tories to turn the election into as close to a second referendum likely to be granted. It was very clear the Tories favoured leave, Labour favoured second referendum and lib dems overturn and remain. If in 5 years time .it turns out to be a disaster..I wonder what the reaction would be. Not sure how that relates to what I put. We all had a chance to vote for the brexit direction at the last election. Labour's second referendum stance was fortunate as it gave voters 3 clear directions. I don't see how Labour would have faired better by adopting the lib dems overturn position especially given how they suffered in the election Labour started the election campaign with policies and promises of what they would do, the brexit came into play late on. By that time the damage was done. I think he should have denied Boris the election as by agreeing he played into his hands and denied further scrutiny of the who,e Brexit debacle. Boris promise to get Brexit dome would have been wiped out too. . ,,,,to be fair to Corbyn he did try to avoid the GE , it was obvious it would turn into a brexit referendum ,which the opposition parties should have held out for , but when the LibDems and SNP began to say they would fall into Johnson's trap and vote for a GE , it would have given the Tories the majority they needed , at which point if Labour had again voted against a GE they would have entered the race with all their political opponents accusing them of not wanting to be there , Yes the liberals caved first that’s true. I so wanted him to let Boris fall flat . ..... I am still baffled as to why the Lib Dems decided to join in the Tories call for a GE , they could not have been too far away from Johnson having to call another referendum (we were in a 5 year fixed term parliament with the next GE not due until 2022) , unless they believed their own rhetoric and thought they would win enough seats to form the next government , Personally (as a remainer ) I still believe another referendum , similar to the previous one would have been wrong , What is now needed is an agreement with the EU and that agreement put to the people to decide if that would really be in our best interest ,This would mean that the referendum with an actual negotiated deal would mean that I and everyone else would be aware of what they were voting for , which is actually what Jeremy Corbyn was suggesting ,and I still cannot see anything at all wrong with this idea Many people prefer simple lies over more complex reality. The Tories have really capitalised on this concept in recent years." Proof if it’s needed of the dumbing down of politics to soundbites and rallying calls. We are discovering the king has no clothes on! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. " Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Corbyn stayed neutral on brexit, he paid the price for it. The last general election was all about Brexit, policies and promises meant very little to people. " Corbyn's history...over decades had always been anti-EU. He couldn't quite come out that way against the majority of his party. Hence he looked like a ditherer. Add to that that he was an anti-semitic, terrorist hugging puppet of militant tendancy (momentum) he was always totally unelectable. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Labour's second referendum stance made it easier for the Tories to turn the election into as close to a second referendum likely to be granted. It was very clear the Tories favoured leave, Labour favoured second referendum and lib dems overturn and remain. If in 5 years time .it turns out to be a disaster..I wonder what the reaction would be. Not sure how that relates to what I put. We all had a chance to vote for the brexit direction at the last election. Labour's second referendum stance was fortunate as it gave voters 3 clear directions. I don't see how Labour would have faired better by adopting the lib dems overturn position especially given how they suffered in the election Labour started the election campaign with policies and promises of what they would do, the brexit came into play late on. By that time the damage was done. I think he should have denied Boris the election as by agreeing he played into his hands and denied further scrutiny of the who,e Brexit debacle. Boris promise to get Brexit dome would have been wiped out too. . ,,,,to be fair to Corbyn he did try to avoid the GE , it was obvious it would turn into a brexit referendum ,which the opposition parties should have held out for , but when the LibDems and SNP began to say they would fall into Johnson's trap and vote for a GE , it would have given the Tories the majority they needed , at which point if Labour had again voted against a GE they would have entered the race with all their political opponents accusing them of not wanting to be there , Yes the liberals caved first that’s true. I so wanted him to let Boris fall flat . ..... I am still baffled as to why the Lib Dems decided to join in the Tories call for a GE , they could not have been too far away from Johnson having to call another referendum (we were in a 5 year fixed term parliament with the next GE not due until 2022) , unless they believed their own rhetoric and thought they would win enough seats to form the next government , Personally (as a remainer ) I still believe another referendum , similar to the previous one would have been wrong , What is now needed is an agreement with the EU and that agreement put to the people to decide if that would really be in our best interest ,This would mean that the referendum with an actual negotiated deal would mean that I and everyone else would be aware of what they were voting for , which is actually what Jeremy Corbyn was suggesting ,and I still cannot see anything at all wrong with this idea Many people prefer simple lies over more complex reality. The Tories have really capitalised on this concept in recent years. Proof if it’s needed of the dumbing down of politics to soundbites and rallying calls. We are discovering the king has no clothes on! " . ,,,,, amazingly some still think he is fully clothed | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Corbyn stayed neutral on brexit, he paid the price for it. The last general election was all about Brexit, policies and promises meant very little to people. Corbyn's history...over decades had always been anti-EU. He couldn't quite come out that way against the majority of his party. Hence he looked like a ditherer. Add to that that he was an anti-semitic, terrorist hugging puppet of militant tendancy (momentum) he was always totally unelectable." Yeah I cant stand those pacifist terrorist supporters. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much" Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Simple question. Why doesn't momentum form their own party. Why are they hanging on to the coat tails of a traditionally left of centre party ? I will answer my own question because they know they are unelectable as a national movement and will always be a fringe movement." Maybe because they are left of centre? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. " Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM" Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79" https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/apr/29/gordon-brown-gillian-duffy-bigot | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79" Why is what she said wrong? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79" So the last one was 41 years ago and had all the fun of the so called winter of discontent. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 So the last one was 41 years ago and had all the fun of the so called winter of discontent." Yep and tories are still blaming labour for their numerous fuck ups. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 So the last one was 41 years ago and had all the fun of the so called winter of discontent. Yep and tories are still blaming labour for their numerous fuck ups." And still winning.I've only read about that winter of discontent but did not sound fun . At some point someone has got to find a way to make Labour electable. How many more decades do they want in opposition | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 Why is what she said wrong?" I'd say so. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 So the last one was 41 years ago and had all the fun of the so called winter of discontent. Yep and tories are still blaming labour for their numerous fuck ups. And still winning.I've only read about that winter of discontent but did not sound fun . At some point someone has got to find a way to make Labour electable. How many more decades do they want in opposition" It's not as easy as that. For a start we live in a conservative country (people still think if you can speak Latin and went to Eton you were born to rule) The media is overwhelmingly right wing (people say it doesn't make a difference but it does) The only time in the last 40 years a labour gmnt got in was when they moved into the centre.And I've said this before,when they did this,they lost big chunks of its core support. To me a labour party is supposed to represent socialist values. If I backed a centrist party.. I'd vote liberal. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 Why is what she said wrong? I'd say so." WHY is what she said wrong | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 So the last one was 41 years ago and had all the fun of the so called winter of discontent. Yep and tories are still blaming labour for their numerous fuck ups. And still winning.I've only read about that winter of discontent but did not sound fun . At some point someone has got to find a way to make Labour electable. How many more decades do they want in opposition It's not as easy as that. For a start we live in a conservative country (people still think if you can speak Latin and went to Eton you were born to rule) The media is overwhelmingly right wing (people say it doesn't make a difference but it does) The only time in the last 40 years a labour gmnt got in was when they moved into the centre.And I've said this before,when they did this,they lost big chunks of its core support. To me a labour party is supposed to represent socialist values. If I backed a centrist party.. I'd vote liberal. " Oh it won't be easy at all but carrying on in the same old way blaming everyone but themselves means they are doomed to a life in opposition and as you have said before even a possible split | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 Why is what she said wrong? I'd say so. WHY is what she said wrong" You cant say anything about the immigrants.. well you can so that's bullshit. The eastern Europeans are just flocking in. Even if you accept that (I remember the daily mail haveing stories about us getting swamped by eastern Europeans which didnt happen)..didn't most of them come here to work? She is a bigot imo. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 So the last one was 41 years ago and had all the fun of the so called winter of discontent. Yep and tories are still blaming labour for their numerous fuck ups. And still winning.I've only read about that winter of discontent but did not sound fun . At some point someone has got to find a way to make Labour electable. How many more decades do they want in opposition It's not as easy as that. For a start we live in a conservative country (people still think if you can speak Latin and went to Eton you were born to rule) The media is overwhelmingly right wing (people say it doesn't make a difference but it does) The only time in the last 40 years a labour gmnt got in was when they moved into the centre.And I've said this before,when they did this,they lost big chunks of its core support. To me a labour party is supposed to represent socialist values. If I backed a centrist party.. I'd vote liberal. Oh it won't be easy at all but carrying on in the same old way blaming everyone but themselves means they are doomed to a life in opposition and as you have said before even a possible split" I'm fairly sure one of the problems is they do blame them selves..well each other. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 Why is what she said wrong? I'd say so. WHY is what she said wrong You cant say anything about the immigrants.. well you can so that's bullshit. The eastern Europeans are just flocking in. Even if you accept that (I remember the daily mail haveing stories about us getting swamped by eastern Europeans which didnt happen)..didn't most of them come here to work? She is a bigot imo." You still not have explained why what she said makes her a bigot | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 So the last one was 41 years ago and had all the fun of the so called winter of discontent. Yep and tories are still blaming labour for their numerous fuck ups. And still winning.I've only read about that winter of discontent but did not sound fun . At some point someone has got to find a way to make Labour electable. How many more decades do they want in opposition It's not as easy as that. For a start we live in a conservative country (people still think if you can speak Latin and went to Eton you were born to rule) The media is overwhelmingly right wing (people say it doesn't make a difference but it does) The only time in the last 40 years a labour gmnt got in was when they moved into the centre.And I've said this before,when they did this,they lost big chunks of its core support. To me a labour party is supposed to represent socialist values. If I backed a centrist party.. I'd vote liberal. Oh it won't be easy at all but carrying on in the same old way blaming everyone but themselves means they are doomed to a life in opposition and as you have said before even a possible split I'm fairly sure one of the problems is they do blame them selves..well each other." Not so much for me though know they have in fighting. It always seems to be blame something external, blame others anything but stop and think what did they do wrong themselves | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 Why is what she said wrong? I'd say so. WHY is what she said wrong You cant say anything about the immigrants.. well you can so that's bullshit. The eastern Europeans are just flocking in. Even if you accept that (I remember the daily mail haveing stories about us getting swamped by eastern Europeans which didnt happen)..didn't most of them come here to work? She is a bigot imo. You still not have explained why what she said makes her a bigot" You cant say anything about the immigrants..is hardly an enlightened comment. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 So the last one was 41 years ago and had all the fun of the so called winter of discontent. Yep and tories are still blaming labour for their numerous fuck ups. And still winning.I've only read about that winter of discontent but did not sound fun . At some point someone has got to find a way to make Labour electable. How many more decades do they want in opposition It's not as easy as that. For a start we live in a conservative country (people still think if you can speak Latin and went to Eton you were born to rule) The media is overwhelmingly right wing (people say it doesn't make a difference but it does) The only time in the last 40 years a labour gmnt got in was when they moved into the centre.And I've said this before,when they did this,they lost big chunks of its core support. To me a labour party is supposed to represent socialist values. If I backed a centrist party.. I'd vote liberal. Oh it won't be easy at all but carrying on in the same old way blaming everyone but themselves means they are doomed to a life in opposition and as you have said before even a possible split I'm fairly sure one of the problems is they do blame them selves..well each other. Not so much for me though know they have in fighting. It always seems to be blame something external, blame others anything but stop and think what did they do wrong themselves" What have blamed externally? After the last election is was about about.. where did we go wrong? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 Why is what she said wrong? I'd say so. WHY is what she said wrong You cant say anything about the immigrants.. well you can so that's bullshit. The eastern Europeans are just flocking in. Even if you accept that (I remember the daily mail haveing stories about us getting swamped by eastern Europeans which didnt happen)..didn't most of them come here to work? She is a bigot imo. You still not have explained why what she said makes her a bigot You cant say anything about the immigrants..is hardly an enlightened comment." Is it not her right to say that? Why is that bigoted.she has every right to voice her concerns or do you prefer people gagged and scared? It's odd as Brown admitted latter he got it wrong and apologized on radio when it was played back and then went to apologise in person again saying she did not say anything bigoted. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 So the last one was 41 years ago and had all the fun of the so called winter of discontent. Yep and tories are still blaming labour for their numerous fuck ups. And still winning.I've only read about that winter of discontent but did not sound fun . At some point someone has got to find a way to make Labour electable. How many more decades do they want in opposition It's not as easy as that. For a start we live in a conservative country (people still think if you can speak Latin and went to Eton you were born to rule) The media is overwhelmingly right wing (people say it doesn't make a difference but it does) The only time in the last 40 years a labour gmnt got in was when they moved into the centre.And I've said this before,when they did this,they lost big chunks of its core support. To me a labour party is supposed to represent socialist values. If I backed a centrist party.. I'd vote liberal. Oh it won't be easy at all but carrying on in the same old way blaming everyone but themselves means they are doomed to a life in opposition and as you have said before even a possible split I'm fairly sure one of the problems is they do blame them selves..well each other. Not so much for me though know they have in fighting. It always seems to be blame something external, blame others anything but stop and think what did they do wrong themselves What have blamed externally? After the last election is was about about.. where did we go wrong?" Certainly not the impression I got. Brexit, right wing press, pesky Tories using some slogans ect ect. Starmer looks more promising but will wait to see his direction | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 Why is what she said wrong? I'd say so. WHY is what she said wrong You cant say anything about the immigrants.. well you can so that's bullshit. The eastern Europeans are just flocking in. Even if you accept that (I remember the daily mail haveing stories about us getting swamped by eastern Europeans which didnt happen)..didn't most of them come here to work? She is a bigot imo. You still not have explained why what she said makes her a bigot You cant say anything about the immigrants..is hardly an enlightened comment. Is it not her right to say that? Why is that bigoted.she has every right to voice her concerns or do you prefer people gagged and scared? It's odd as Brown admitted latter he got it wrong and apologized on radio when it was played back and then went to apologise in person again saying she did not say anything bigoted. " Of course he did.. he didn't have much choice did he? We seem be seeing a lot of people coming in from overseas recently..of course we should welcome them if they have come from a dangerous situation but I worry about the effect on the local economy. You can say anything about immigrants these days See the difference? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 So the last one was 41 years ago and had all the fun of the so called winter of discontent. Yep and tories are still blaming labour for their numerous fuck ups. And still winning.I've only read about that winter of discontent but did not sound fun . At some point someone has got to find a way to make Labour electable. How many more decades do they want in opposition It's not as easy as that. For a start we live in a conservative country (people still think if you can speak Latin and went to Eton you were born to rule) The media is overwhelmingly right wing (people say it doesn't make a difference but it does) The only time in the last 40 years a labour gmnt got in was when they moved into the centre.And I've said this before,when they did this,they lost big chunks of its core support. To me a labour party is supposed to represent socialist values. If I backed a centrist party.. I'd vote liberal. Oh it won't be easy at all but carrying on in the same old way blaming everyone but themselves means they are doomed to a life in opposition and as you have said before even a possible split I'm fairly sure one of the problems is they do blame them selves..well each other. Not so much for me though know they have in fighting. It always seems to be blame something external, blame others anything but stop and think what did they do wrong themselves What have blamed externally? After the last election is was about about.. where did we go wrong? Certainly not the impression I got. Brexit, right wing press, pesky Tories using some slogans ect ect. Starmer looks more promising but will wait to see his direction " You dont got the wrong impression then.. there was months of introspection | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A more pertinent question I guess would be what would have happened if there was no Brexit issue? Would he still have lost?" Yes. Murdoch had it in for him, so he had no chance. And, to make things doubly impossible, some Labour staff actively worked to keep him out of government. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A more pertinent question I guess would be what would have happened if there was no Brexit issue? Would he still have lost? Yes. Murdoch had it in for him, so he had no chance. And, to make things doubly impossible, some Labour staff actively worked to keep him out of government. " . ,,,,I think Labour would have won in 2017 had it not been for the ridiculous leadership election that some Labour MPs forced with their no confidence vote in Corbyn , | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A more pertinent question I guess would be what would have happened if there was no Brexit issue? Would he still have lost? Yes. Murdoch had it in for him, so he had no chance. And, to make things doubly impossible, some Labour staff actively worked to keep him out of government. . ,,,,I think Labour would have won in 2017 had it not been for the ridiculous leadership election that some Labour MPs forced with their no confidence vote in Corbyn , " Another example of Labour sabotaging itself. Anything to keep one man out of gevernment. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 So the last one was 41 years ago and had all the fun of the so called winter of discontent." But Callaghan never won an election....he took over from Wilson. If we are ignoring Blair (as Tory lite) the last "labour" GE victory was 1974....and that took two attempts to beat Heath. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 Why is what she said wrong? I'd say so. WHY is what she said wrong You cant say anything about the immigrants.. well you can so that's bullshit. The eastern Europeans are just flocking in. Even if you accept that (I remember the daily mail haveing stories about us getting swamped by eastern Europeans which didnt happen)..didn't most of them come here to work? She is a bigot imo. You still not have explained why what she said makes her a bigot You cant say anything about the immigrants..is hardly an enlightened comment. Is it not her right to say that? Why is that bigoted.she has every right to voice her concerns or do you prefer people gagged and scared? It's odd as Brown admitted latter he got it wrong and apologized on radio when it was played back and then went to apologise in person again saying she did not say anything bigoted. Of course he did.. he didn't have much choice did he? We seem be seeing a lot of people coming in from overseas recently..of course we should welcome them if they have come from a dangerous situation but I worry about the effect on the local economy. You can say anything about immigrants these days See the difference?" He did not have much choice because he knew he was in the wrong and openly admitted she said was not bigoted. You however still think she is just because she raised a concern. This smothering of people who happen to be concerned over some things is fuelling extreme people and organizations | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 So the last one was 41 years ago and had all the fun of the so called winter of discontent. Yep and tories are still blaming labour for their numerous fuck ups. And still winning.I've only read about that winter of discontent but did not sound fun . At some point someone has got to find a way to make Labour electable. How many more decades do they want in opposition It's not as easy as that. For a start we live in a conservative country (people still think if you can speak Latin and went to Eton you were born to rule) The media is overwhelmingly right wing (people say it doesn't make a difference but it does) The only time in the last 40 years a labour gmnt got in was when they moved into the centre.And I've said this before,when they did this,they lost big chunks of its core support. To me a labour party is supposed to represent socialist values. If I backed a centrist party.. I'd vote liberal. Oh it won't be easy at all but carrying on in the same old way blaming everyone but themselves means they are doomed to a life in opposition and as you have said before even a possible split I'm fairly sure one of the problems is they do blame them selves..well each other. Not so much for me though know they have in fighting. It always seems to be blame something external, blame others anything but stop and think what did they do wrong themselves What have blamed externally? After the last election is was about about.. where did we go wrong? Certainly not the impression I got. Brexit, right wing press, pesky Tories using some slogans ect ect. Starmer looks more promising but will wait to see his direction You dont got the wrong impression then.. there was months of introspection " There you go - external factors not focusing on their own performance | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A more pertinent question I guess would be what would have happened if there was no Brexit issue? Would he still have lost?" We can never know for sure but 2017 is the closest to that scenario as Labour and conservative both pledged to uphold the referendum. Against May who had the worst campaign I can remember he still did not win. I know he done better and increased his vote but still failed against an incredibly weak PM. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 So the last one was 41 years ago and had all the fun of the so called winter of discontent. But Callaghan never won an election....he took over from Wilson. If we are ignoring Blair (as Tory lite) the last "labour" GE victory was 1974....and that took two attempts to beat Heath." Wow 46 years since they won an election then | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A more pertinent question I guess would be what would have happened if there was no Brexit issue? Would he still have lost? We can never know for sure but 2017 is the closest to that scenario as Labour and conservative both pledged to uphold the referendum. Against May who had the worst campaign I can remember he still did not win. I know he done better and increased his vote but still failed against an incredibly weak PM. " So even when he did better than blair,brown and Miliband it was down to tory incompetence rather than winning votes? May was forced into a minority gmnt and doing deals with bigots. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Labours stance on brevity was not the reason they lost it was simply put being too far to the left. Most of the country is fairly central and far left and far right in equal measure scare them off. Corban did not help himself with very idealistic an unreasonable spending announcements." They were no where near far left whilst we currently have the most right wing gmnt in living memory. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 So the last one was 41 years ago and had all the fun of the so called winter of discontent. Yep and tories are still blaming labour for their numerous fuck ups. And still winning.I've only read about that winter of discontent but did not sound fun . At some point someone has got to find a way to make Labour electable. How many more decades do they want in opposition It's not as easy as that. For a start we live in a conservative country (people still think if you can speak Latin and went to Eton you were born to rule) The media is overwhelmingly right wing (people say it doesn't make a difference but it does) The only time in the last 40 years a labour gmnt got in was when they moved into the centre.And I've said this before,when they did this,they lost big chunks of its core support. To me a labour party is supposed to represent socialist values. If I backed a centrist party.. I'd vote liberal. Oh it won't be easy at all but carrying on in the same old way blaming everyone but themselves means they are doomed to a life in opposition and as you have said before even a possible split I'm fairly sure one of the problems is they do blame them selves..well each other. Not so much for me though know they have in fighting. It always seems to be blame something external, blame others anything but stop and think what did they do wrong themselves What have blamed externally? After the last election is was about about.. where did we go wrong? Certainly not the impression I got. Brexit, right wing press, pesky Tories using some slogans ect ect. Starmer looks more promising but will wait to see his direction You dont got the wrong impression then.. there was months of introspection There you go - external factors not focusing on their own performance" You realise introspection means looking inwards? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 Why is what she said wrong? I'd say so. WHY is what she said wrong You cant say anything about the immigrants.. well you can so that's bullshit. The eastern Europeans are just flocking in. Even if you accept that (I remember the daily mail haveing stories about us getting swamped by eastern Europeans which didnt happen)..didn't most of them come here to work? She is a bigot imo. You still not have explained why what she said makes her a bigot You cant say anything about the immigrants..is hardly an enlightened comment. Is it not her right to say that? Why is that bigoted.she has every right to voice her concerns or do you prefer people gagged and scared? It's odd as Brown admitted latter he got it wrong and apologized on radio when it was played back and then went to apologise in person again saying she did not say anything bigoted. Of course he did.. he didn't have much choice did he? We seem be seeing a lot of people coming in from overseas recently..of course we should welcome them if they have come from a dangerous situation but I worry about the effect on the local economy. You can say anything about immigrants these days See the difference? He did not have much choice because he knew he was in the wrong and openly admitted she said was not bigoted. You however still think she is just because she raised a concern. This smothering of people who happen to be concerned over some things is fuelling extreme people and organizations" No one is being smothered, but I do agree there was a period when immigration was hardly talked about. I still dont think we got an explanation on why those gangs up and down the country got away with it ,for so long. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Labours stance on brevity was not the reason they lost it was simply put being too far to the left. Most of the country is fairly central and far left and far right in equal measure scare them off. Corban did not help himself with very idealistic an unreasonable spending announcements." | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A more pertinent question I guess would be what would have happened if there was no Brexit issue? Would he still have lost? We can never know for sure but 2017 is the closest to that scenario as Labour and conservative both pledged to uphold the referendum. Against May who had the worst campaign I can remember he still did not win. I know he done better and increased his vote but still failed against an incredibly weak PM. So even when he did better than blair,brown and Miliband it was down to tory incompetence rather than winning votes? May was forced into a minority gmnt and doing deals with bigots." There is no denying that Mays campaign was a disaster so definitely played a part. I did say he done better than the past but he did not win against a weak PM. If you don't win you don't get to implement your policies. The fact he got more votes than predecessors does not get him into office. It's winning the election that does that and that's what they keep failing at | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 So the last one was 41 years ago and had all the fun of the so called winter of discontent. Yep and tories are still blaming labour for their numerous fuck ups. And still winning.I've only read about that winter of discontent but did not sound fun . At some point someone has got to find a way to make Labour electable. How many more decades do they want in opposition It's not as easy as that. For a start we live in a conservative country (people still think if you can speak Latin and went to Eton you were born to rule) The media is overwhelmingly right wing (people say it doesn't make a difference but it does) The only time in the last 40 years a labour gmnt got in was when they moved into the centre.And I've said this before,when they did this,they lost big chunks of its core support. To me a labour party is supposed to represent socialist values. If I backed a centrist party.. I'd vote liberal. Oh it won't be easy at all but carrying on in the same old way blaming everyone but themselves means they are doomed to a life in opposition and as you have said before even a possible split I'm fairly sure one of the problems is they do blame them selves..well each other. Not so much for me though know they have in fighting. It always seems to be blame something external, blame others anything but stop and think what did they do wrong themselves What have blamed externally? After the last election is was about about.. where did we go wrong? Certainly not the impression I got. Brexit, right wing press, pesky Tories using some slogans ect ect. Starmer looks more promising but will wait to see his direction You dont got the wrong impression then.. there was months of introspection There you go - external factors not focusing on their own performance You realise introspection means looking inwards?" I mean blaming things like brexit ect is looking at external factors. Brevity was not an issue in the past and they still lost | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 Why is what she said wrong? I'd say so. WHY is what she said wrong You cant say anything about the immigrants.. well you can so that's bullshit. The eastern Europeans are just flocking in. Even if you accept that (I remember the daily mail haveing stories about us getting swamped by eastern Europeans which didnt happen)..didn't most of them come here to work? She is a bigot imo. You still not have explained why what she said makes her a bigot You cant say anything about the immigrants..is hardly an enlightened comment. Is it not her right to say that? Why is that bigoted.she has every right to voice her concerns or do you prefer people gagged and scared? It's odd as Brown admitted latter he got it wrong and apologized on radio when it was played back and then went to apologise in person again saying she did not say anything bigoted. Of course he did.. he didn't have much choice did he? We seem be seeing a lot of people coming in from overseas recently..of course we should welcome them if they have come from a dangerous situation but I worry about the effect on the local economy. You can say anything about immigrants these days See the difference? He did not have much choice because he knew he was in the wrong and openly admitted she said was not bigoted. You however still think she is just because she raised a concern. This smothering of people who happen to be concerned over some things is fuelling extreme people and organizations No one is being smothered, but I do agree there was a period when immigration was hardly talked about. I still dont think we got an explanation on why those gangs up and down the country got away with it ,for so long." Calling a person bigoted for having concerns is smothering. It has been an on going problem and has affected me especially since the BLM started. At least Brown had the Grace to admit it | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A more pertinent question I guess would be what would have happened if there was no Brexit issue? Would he still have lost? We can never know for sure but 2017 is the closest to that scenario as Labour and conservative both pledged to uphold the referendum. Against May who had the worst campaign I can remember he still did not win. I know he done better and increased his vote but still failed against an incredibly weak PM. So even when he did better than blair,brown and Miliband it was down to tory incompetence rather than winning votes? May was forced into a minority gmnt and doing deals with bigots. There is no denying that Mays campaign was a disaster so definitely played a part. I did say he done better than the past but he did not win against a weak PM. If you don't win you don't get to implement your policies. The fact he got more votes than predecessors does not get him into office. It's winning the election that does that and that's what they keep failing at" I'm not sure if you are being deliberately obtuse or not. As stated before we live in a conservative country,a conservative dominated press and for the majority of the last 100 years have had a conservative gmnt.Those are facts,not opinions.So a leader comes from nowhere and pushes the gmnt into a minority gmnt ,should be then sacked for not winning? For labour to win the next election here is what they need . A charismatic leader. A leader who will end the civil war in tue party. The press on their side. Policies which will appeal to their traditional support aswell as middle England. A significant number of tories to vote for them. Easy. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 Why is what she said wrong? I'd say so. WHY is what she said wrong You cant say anything about the immigrants.. well you can so that's bullshit. The eastern Europeans are just flocking in. Even if you accept that (I remember the daily mail haveing stories about us getting swamped by eastern Europeans which didnt happen)..didn't most of them come here to work? She is a bigot imo. You still not have explained why what she said makes her a bigot You cant say anything about the immigrants..is hardly an enlightened comment. Is it not her right to say that? Why is that bigoted.she has every right to voice her concerns or do you prefer people gagged and scared? It's odd as Brown admitted latter he got it wrong and apologized on radio when it was played back and then went to apologise in person again saying she did not say anything bigoted. Of course he did.. he didn't have much choice did he? We seem be seeing a lot of people coming in from overseas recently..of course we should welcome them if they have come from a dangerous situation but I worry about the effect on the local economy. You can say anything about immigrants these days See the difference? He did not have much choice because he knew he was in the wrong and openly admitted she said was not bigoted. You however still think she is just because she raised a concern. This smothering of people who happen to be concerned over some things is fuelling extreme people and organizations No one is being smothered, but I do agree there was a period when immigration was hardly talked about. I still dont think we got an explanation on why those gangs up and down the country got away with it ,for so long. Calling a person bigoted for having concerns is smothering. It has been an on going problem and has affected me especially since the BLM started. At least Brown had the Grace to admit it" Is Tommy Robinson bigoted? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A more pertinent question I guess would be what would have happened if there was no Brexit issue? Would he still have lost? We can never know for sure but 2017 is the closest to that scenario as Labour and conservative both pledged to uphold the referendum. Against May who had the worst campaign I can remember he still did not win. I know he done better and increased his vote but still failed against an incredibly weak PM. So even when he did better than blair,brown and Miliband it was down to tory incompetence rather than winning votes? May was forced into a minority gmnt and doing deals with bigots. There is no denying that Mays campaign was a disaster so definitely played a part. I did say he done better than the past but he did not win against a weak PM. If you don't win you don't get to implement your policies. The fact he got more votes than predecessors does not get him into office. It's winning the election that does that and that's what they keep failing at I'm not sure if you are being deliberately obtuse or not. As stated before we live in a conservative country,a conservative dominated press and for the majority of the last 100 years have had a conservative gmnt.Those are facts,not opinions.So a leader comes from nowhere and pushes the gmnt into a minority gmnt ,should be then sacked for not winning? For labour to win the next election here is what they need . A charismatic leader. A leader who will end the civil war in tue party. The press on their side. Policies which will appeal to their traditional support aswell as middle England. A significant number of tories to vote for them. Easy." So why don't they do it? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A more pertinent question I guess would be what would have happened if there was no Brexit issue? Would he still have lost? We can never know for sure but 2017 is the closest to that scenario as Labour and conservative both pledged to uphold the referendum. Against May who had the worst campaign I can remember he still did not win. I know he done better and increased his vote but still failed against an incredibly weak PM. So even when he did better than blair,brown and Miliband it was down to tory incompetence rather than winning votes? May was forced into a minority gmnt and doing deals with bigots. There is no denying that Mays campaign was a disaster so definitely played a part. I did say he done better than the past but he did not win against a weak PM. If you don't win you don't get to implement your policies. The fact he got more votes than predecessors does not get him into office. It's winning the election that does that and that's what they keep failing at I'm not sure if you are being deliberately obtuse or not. As stated before we live in a conservative country,a conservative dominated press and for the majority of the last 100 years have had a conservative gmnt.Those are facts,not opinions.So a leader comes from nowhere and pushes the gmnt into a minority gmnt ,should be then sacked for not winning? For labour to win the next election here is what they need . A charismatic leader. A leader who will end the civil war in tue party. The press on their side. Policies which will appeal to their traditional support aswell as middle England. A significant number of tories to vote for them. Easy. So why don't they do it?" Seriously? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A more pertinent question I guess would be what would have happened if there was no Brexit issue? Would he still have lost? We can never know for sure but 2017 is the closest to that scenario as Labour and conservative both pledged to uphold the referendum. Against May who had the worst campaign I can remember he still did not win. I know he done better and increased his vote but still failed against an incredibly weak PM. So even when he did better than blair,brown and Miliband it was down to tory incompetence rather than winning votes? May was forced into a minority gmnt and doing deals with bigots. There is no denying that Mays campaign was a disaster so definitely played a part. I did say he done better than the past but he did not win against a weak PM. If you don't win you don't get to implement your policies. The fact he got more votes than predecessors does not get him into office. It's winning the election that does that and that's what they keep failing at I'm not sure if you are being deliberately obtuse or not. As stated before we live in a conservative country,a conservative dominated press and for the majority of the last 100 years have had a conservative gmnt.Those are facts,not opinions.So a leader comes from nowhere and pushes the gmnt into a minority gmnt ,should be then sacked for not winning? For labour to win the next election here is what they need . A charismatic leader. A leader who will end the civil war in tue party. The press on their side. Policies which will appeal to their traditional support aswell as middle England. A significant number of tories to vote for them. Easy." Not being anything just saying things need to change if they want to ever hold office again. More of the same equals more of the same results | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 Why is what she said wrong? I'd say so. WHY is what she said wrong You cant say anything about the immigrants.. well you can so that's bullshit. The eastern Europeans are just flocking in. Even if you accept that (I remember the daily mail haveing stories about us getting swamped by eastern Europeans which didnt happen)..didn't most of them come here to work? She is a bigot imo. You still not have explained why what she said makes her a bigot You cant say anything about the immigrants..is hardly an enlightened comment. Is it not her right to say that? Why is that bigoted.she has every right to voice her concerns or do you prefer people gagged and scared? It's odd as Brown admitted latter he got it wrong and apologized on radio when it was played back and then went to apologise in person again saying she did not say anything bigoted. Of course he did.. he didn't have much choice did he? We seem be seeing a lot of people coming in from overseas recently..of course we should welcome them if they have come from a dangerous situation but I worry about the effect on the local economy. You can say anything about immigrants these days See the difference? He did not have much choice because he knew he was in the wrong and openly admitted she said was not bigoted. You however still think she is just because she raised a concern. This smothering of people who happen to be concerned over some things is fuelling extreme people and organizations No one is being smothered, but I do agree there was a period when immigration was hardly talked about. I still dont think we got an explanation on why those gangs up and down the country got away with it ,for so long. Calling a person bigoted for having concerns is smothering. It has been an on going problem and has affected me especially since the BLM started. At least Brown had the Grace to admit it Is Tommy Robinson bigoted?" The famous whataboutary . | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A more pertinent question I guess would be what would have happened if there was no Brexit issue? Would he still have lost? We can never know for sure but 2017 is the closest to that scenario as Labour and conservative both pledged to uphold the referendum. Against May who had the worst campaign I can remember he still did not win. I know he done better and increased his vote but still failed against an incredibly weak PM. So even when he did better than blair,brown and Miliband it was down to tory incompetence rather than winning votes? May was forced into a minority gmnt and doing deals with bigots. There is no denying that Mays campaign was a disaster so definitely played a part. I did say he done better than the past but he did not win against a weak PM. If you don't win you don't get to implement your policies. The fact he got more votes than predecessors does not get him into office. It's winning the election that does that and that's what they keep failing at I'm not sure if you are being deliberately obtuse or not. As stated before we live in a conservative country,a conservative dominated press and for the majority of the last 100 years have had a conservative gmnt.Those are facts,not opinions.So a leader comes from nowhere and pushes the gmnt into a minority gmnt ,should be then sacked for not winning? For labour to win the next election here is what they need . A charismatic leader. A leader who will end the civil war in tue party. The press on their side. Policies which will appeal to their traditional support aswell as middle England. A significant number of tories to vote for them. Easy. So why don't they do it? Seriously?" Unfortunately with an answer like that it's plain to see why Labour has lost the last four General Elections. The UK has moved on a lot since the 1970's. Tony Blair recognised that and appealed to the middle ground voters who are the ones who really count. Basically Labour need a Tony Blair MK2 with centre ground polices to win a good majority next time round. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 Why is what she said wrong? I'd say so. WHY is what she said wrong You cant say anything about the immigrants.. well you can so that's bullshit. The eastern Europeans are just flocking in. Even if you accept that (I remember the daily mail haveing stories about us getting swamped by eastern Europeans which didnt happen)..didn't most of them come here to work? She is a bigot imo. You still not have explained why what she said makes her a bigot You cant say anything about the immigrants..is hardly an enlightened comment. Is it not her right to say that? Why is that bigoted.she has every right to voice her concerns or do you prefer people gagged and scared? It's odd as Brown admitted latter he got it wrong and apologized on radio when it was played back and then went to apologise in person again saying she did not say anything bigoted. Of course he did.. he didn't have much choice did he? We seem be seeing a lot of people coming in from overseas recently..of course we should welcome them if they have come from a dangerous situation but I worry about the effect on the local economy. You can say anything about immigrants these days See the difference? He did not have much choice because he knew he was in the wrong and openly admitted she said was not bigoted. You however still think she is just because she raised a concern. This smothering of people who happen to be concerned over some things is fuelling extreme people and organizations No one is being smothered, but I do agree there was a period when immigration was hardly talked about. I still dont think we got an explanation on why those gangs up and down the country got away with it ,for so long. Calling a person bigoted for having concerns is smothering. It has been an on going problem and has affected me especially since the BLM started. At least Brown had the Grace to admit it Is Tommy Robinson bigoted? The famous whataboutary . " Simple question | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 Why is what she said wrong? I'd say so. WHY is what she said wrong You cant say anything about the immigrants.. well you can so that's bullshit. The eastern Europeans are just flocking in. Even if you accept that (I remember the daily mail haveing stories about us getting swamped by eastern Europeans which didnt happen)..didn't most of them come here to work? She is a bigot imo. You still not have explained why what she said makes her a bigot You cant say anything about the immigrants..is hardly an enlightened comment. Is it not her right to say that? Why is that bigoted.she has every right to voice her concerns or do you prefer people gagged and scared? It's odd as Brown admitted latter he got it wrong and apologized on radio when it was played back and then went to apologise in person again saying she did not say anything bigoted. Of course he did.. he didn't have much choice did he? We seem be seeing a lot of people coming in from overseas recently..of course we should welcome them if they have come from a dangerous situation but I worry about the effect on the local economy. You can say anything about immigrants these days See the difference? He did not have much choice because he knew he was in the wrong and openly admitted she said was not bigoted. You however still think she is just because she raised a concern. This smothering of people who happen to be concerned over some things is fuelling extreme people and organizations No one is being smothered, but I do agree there was a period when immigration was hardly talked about. I still dont think we got an explanation on why those gangs up and down the country got away with it ,for so long. Calling a person bigoted for having concerns is smothering. It has been an on going problem and has affected me especially since the BLM started. At least Brown had the Grace to admit it Is Tommy Robinson bigoted? The famous whataboutary . Simple question " A simple whataboutary. Trying to com p are her to him is shameful. Even Brown did not stoop do low | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A more pertinent question I guess would be what would have happened if there was no Brexit issue? Would he still have lost? We can never know for sure but 2017 is the closest to that scenario as Labour and conservative both pledged to uphold the referendum. Against May who had the worst campaign I can remember he still did not win. I know he done better and increased his vote but still failed against an incredibly weak PM. So even when he did better than blair,brown and Miliband it was down to tory incompetence rather than winning votes? May was forced into a minority gmnt and doing deals with bigots. There is no denying that Mays campaign was a disaster so definitely played a part. I did say he done better than the past but he did not win against a weak PM. If you don't win you don't get to implement your policies. The fact he got more votes than predecessors does not get him into office. It's winning the election that does that and that's what they keep failing at I'm not sure if you are being deliberately obtuse or not. As stated before we live in a conservative country,a conservative dominated press and for the majority of the last 100 years have had a conservative gmnt.Those are facts,not opinions.So a leader comes from nowhere and pushes the gmnt into a minority gmnt ,should be then sacked for not winning? For labour to win the next election here is what they need . A charismatic leader. A leader who will end the civil war in tue party. The press on their side. Policies which will appeal to their traditional support aswell as middle England. A significant number of tories to vote for them. Easy. So why don't they do it? Seriously? Unfortunately with an answer like that it's plain to see why Labour has lost the last four General Elections. The UK has moved on a lot since the 1970's. Tony Blair recognised that and appealed to the middle ground voters who are the ones who really count. Basically Labour need a Tony Blair MK2 with centre ground polices to win a good majority next time round." Couple of problems with that Murdoch can only support 1 party at a time Last time they moved to the centre resulted in brexit | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 Why is what she said wrong? I'd say so. WHY is what she said wrong You cant say anything about the immigrants.. well you can so that's bullshit. The eastern Europeans are just flocking in. Even if you accept that (I remember the daily mail haveing stories about us getting swamped by eastern Europeans which didnt happen)..didn't most of them come here to work? She is a bigot imo. You still not have explained why what she said makes her a bigot You cant say anything about the immigrants..is hardly an enlightened comment. Is it not her right to say that? Why is that bigoted.she has every right to voice her concerns or do you prefer people gagged and scared? It's odd as Brown admitted latter he got it wrong and apologized on radio when it was played back and then went to apologise in person again saying she did not say anything bigoted. Of course he did.. he didn't have much choice did he? We seem be seeing a lot of people coming in from overseas recently..of course we should welcome them if they have come from a dangerous situation but I worry about the effect on the local economy. You can say anything about immigrants these days See the difference? He did not have much choice because he knew he was in the wrong and openly admitted she said was not bigoted. You however still think she is just because she raised a concern. This smothering of people who happen to be concerned over some things is fuelling extreme people and organizations No one is being smothered, but I do agree there was a period when immigration was hardly talked about. I still dont think we got an explanation on why those gangs up and down the country got away with it ,for so long. Calling a person bigoted for having concerns is smothering. It has been an on going problem and has affected me especially since the BLM started. At least Brown had the Grace to admit it Is Tommy Robinson bigoted? The famous whataboutary . Simple question A simple whataboutary. Trying to com p are her to him is shameful. Even Brown did not stoop do low" Im not comparing the 2 at all. I asked do you consider him a bigot You implied people are smothered...does this apply to Tommy Robinson? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A more pertinent question I guess would be what would have happened if there was no Brexit issue? Would he still have lost? We can never know for sure but 2017 is the closest to that scenario as Labour and conservative both pledged to uphold the referendum. Against May who had the worst campaign I can remember he still did not win. I know he done better and increased his vote but still failed against an incredibly weak PM. So even when he did better than blair,brown and Miliband it was down to tory incompetence rather than winning votes? May was forced into a minority gmnt and doing deals with bigots. There is no denying that Mays campaign was a disaster so definitely played a part. I did say he done better than the past but he did not win against a weak PM. If you don't win you don't get to implement your policies. The fact he got more votes than predecessors does not get him into office. It's winning the election that does that and that's what they keep failing at I'm not sure if you are being deliberately obtuse or not. As stated before we live in a conservative country,a conservative dominated press and for the majority of the last 100 years have had a conservative gmnt.Those are facts,not opinions.So a leader comes from nowhere and pushes the gmnt into a minority gmnt ,should be then sacked for not winning? For labour to win the next election here is what they need . A charismatic leader. A leader who will end the civil war in tue party. The press on their side. Policies which will appeal to their traditional support aswell as middle England. A significant number of tories to vote for them. Easy. So why don't they do it? Seriously? Unfortunately with an answer like that it's plain to see why Labour has lost the last four General Elections. The UK has moved on a lot since the 1970's. Tony Blair recognised that and appealed to the middle ground voters who are the ones who really count. Basically Labour need a Tony Blair MK2 with centre ground polices to win a good majority next time round. Couple of problems with that Murdoch can only support 1 party at a time Last time they moved to the centre resulted in brexit" And Tony Blair promised the people a vote on Europe. However he then didn't give us one but he sowed the seed. I still remember the power cuts and candles in the house under a Labour government in the 70's. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A more pertinent question I guess would be what would have happened if there was no Brexit issue? Would he still have lost? We can never know for sure but 2017 is the closest to that scenario as Labour and conservative both pledged to uphold the referendum. Against May who had the worst campaign I can remember he still did not win. I know he done better and increased his vote but still failed against an incredibly weak PM. So even when he did better than blair,brown and Miliband it was down to tory incompetence rather than winning votes? May was forced into a minority gmnt and doing deals with bigots. There is no denying that Mays campaign was a disaster so definitely played a part. I did say he done better than the past but he did not win against a weak PM. If you don't win you don't get to implement your policies. The fact he got more votes than predecessors does not get him into office. It's winning the election that does that and that's what they keep failing at I'm not sure if you are being deliberately obtuse or not. As stated before we live in a conservative country,a conservative dominated press and for the majority of the last 100 years have had a conservative gmnt.Those are facts,not opinions.So a leader comes from nowhere and pushes the gmnt into a minority gmnt ,should be then sacked for not winning? For labour to win the next election here is what they need . A charismatic leader. A leader who will end the civil war in tue party. The press on their side. Policies which will appeal to their traditional support aswell as middle England. A significant number of tories to vote for them. Easy. So why don't they do it? Seriously? Unfortunately with an answer like that it's plain to see why Labour has lost the last four General Elections. The UK has moved on a lot since the 1970's. Tony Blair recognised that and appealed to the middle ground voters who are the ones who really count. Basically Labour need a Tony Blair MK2 with centre ground polices to win a good majority next time round. Couple of problems with that Murdoch can only support 1 party at a time Last time they moved to the centre resulted in brexit And Tony Blair promised the people a vote on Europe. However he then didn't give us one but he sowed the seed. I still remember the power cuts and candles in the house under a Labour government in the 70's." Yes there is nothing we want more than labour leader who will do as Murdoch tells him. I can remember record levels of poverty and one of the biggest search rates in europe under the tories..oh wait. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 Why is what she said wrong? I'd say so. WHY is what she said wrong You cant say anything about the immigrants.. well you can so that's bullshit. The eastern Europeans are just flocking in. Even if you accept that (I remember the daily mail haveing stories about us getting swamped by eastern Europeans which didnt happen)..didn't most of them come here to work? She is a bigot imo. You still not have explained why what she said makes her a bigot You cant say anything about the immigrants..is hardly an enlightened comment. Is it not her right to say that? Why is that bigoted.she has every right to voice her concerns or do you prefer people gagged and scared? It's odd as Brown admitted latter he got it wrong and apologized on radio when it was played back and then went to apologise in person again saying she did not say anything bigoted. Of course he did.. he didn't have much choice did he? We seem be seeing a lot of people coming in from overseas recently..of course we should welcome them if they have come from a dangerous situation but I worry about the effect on the local economy. You can say anything about immigrants these days See the difference? He did not have much choice because he knew he was in the wrong and openly admitted she said was not bigoted. You however still think she is just because she raised a concern. This smothering of people who happen to be concerned over some things is fuelling extreme people and organizations No one is being smothered, but I do agree there was a period when immigration was hardly talked about. I still dont think we got an explanation on why those gangs up and down the country got away with it ,for so long. Calling a person bigoted for having concerns is smothering. It has been an on going problem and has affected me especially since the BLM started. At least Brown had the Grace to admit it Is Tommy Robinson bigoted? The famous whataboutary . Simple question A simple whataboutary. Trying to com p are her to him is shameful. Even Brown did not stoop do low Im not comparing the 2 at all. I asked do you consider him a bigot You implied people are smothered...does this apply to Tommy Robinson?" It's a classic whataboutary as you know Full well and accuse others of. It's shameful. I am not a fan of brown though do feel he took the hit for Blair's Iraq war but he realised he was talking rubbish in accusing her and had the decency to say so rather than bringing Robinson into it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 Why is what she said wrong? I'd say so. WHY is what she said wrong You cant say anything about the immigrants.. well you can so that's bullshit. The eastern Europeans are just flocking in. Even if you accept that (I remember the daily mail haveing stories about us getting swamped by eastern Europeans which didnt happen)..didn't most of them come here to work? She is a bigot imo. You still not have explained why what she said makes her a bigot You cant say anything about the immigrants..is hardly an enlightened comment. Is it not her right to say that? Why is that bigoted.she has every right to voice her concerns or do you prefer people gagged and scared? It's odd as Brown admitted latter he got it wrong and apologized on radio when it was played back and then went to apologise in person again saying she did not say anything bigoted. Of course he did.. he didn't have much choice did he? We seem be seeing a lot of people coming in from overseas recently..of course we should welcome them if they have come from a dangerous situation but I worry about the effect on the local economy. You can say anything about immigrants these days See the difference? He did not have much choice because he knew he was in the wrong and openly admitted she said was not bigoted. You however still think she is just because she raised a concern. This smothering of people who happen to be concerned over some things is fuelling extreme people and organizations No one is being smothered, but I do agree there was a period when immigration was hardly talked about. I still dont think we got an explanation on why those gangs up and down the country got away with it ,for so long. Calling a person bigoted for having concerns is smothering. It has been an on going problem and has affected me especially since the BLM started. At least Brown had the Grace to admit it Is Tommy Robinson bigoted? The famous whataboutary . Simple question A simple whataboutary. Trying to com p are her to him is shameful. Even Brown did not stoop do low Im not comparing the 2 at all. I asked do you consider him a bigot You implied people are smothered...does this apply to Tommy Robinson? It's a classic whataboutary as you know Full well and accuse others of. It's shameful. I am not a fan of brown though do feel he took the hit for Blair's Iraq war but he realised he was talking rubbish in accusing her and had the decency to say so rather than bringing Robinson into it. " If you actually read what I.posted,I actually agreed with that part of what you said. But you said people were smothered and were not allowed to express an opinion. I used Tommy Robinson as an example that this is nonsense | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kier Starmer is making the Labour Party electable again, by taking it back towards the centre. The question is, will the likes of Momentum allow that? Momentum are members of the labour party .They have a right to decide which way the party is going. Under Corbyn they saw an explosion in young peoples vote who are sick of Tories and watered down tories. They will lose that support Under Corbyn with this explosion of young people and Momentum deep rooted in Labour how many General Election's did Labour win? Zero. It may be wise for them to remember the old saying' if things don't change they will remain the same' But that's not really the point is it? Under corbyn labour gained a groundswell of support from young people who were sick of tory and tory light.No they didnt win the election, but to jettison this support in the hope of gaining middle england again seems a flawed policy. Actually I think its very much the point unless they actually strive to stay in opposition So because they lost the election they alienate their core support? They did not just loose one election they have been looking elections for many years. If that's their aim then great but if they actually want to get elected then they need to find a new way Under brown and Miliband..they tried that tory lite approach and were destroyed. New labour had already disenfranchised big chunks of the north Taking the party back to the left was a new way and it did draw considerable support. I just think going back to the centre again which take us back to the brown/Miliband years. Not sure I would call Miliband and Brown Tory light but definitely not as far to the left as corbyn. Miliband just never seemed to command anything and just did not seem to apeal. Brown was always on a tough ticket following Blair and associated to the war. Of course when he called that woman a bigot on air it was all over. Labour can carry on as they are and carry on getting the same results, I'm sure other parties will be very happy for that to happen. Starmer has a hard job making them electable without upsetting the momentum group to much Miliband was incredibly weak. Brown was actually right about that woman. Do you think she was wrong to voice her concerns to Brown when he visited?. I think it was a defining moment for him. Either way like corbyn and Miliband he lost. If you ignore Blair who you dislike for being to Tory how far back do you have to go for the last Labour PM Nope but she was a bigot Fairly sure you ask questions you already know the answer too? James callaghan in 79 Why is what she said wrong? I'd say so. WHY is what she said wrong You cant say anything about the immigrants.. well you can so that's bullshit. The eastern Europeans are just flocking in. Even if you accept that (I remember the daily mail haveing stories about us getting swamped by eastern Europeans which didnt happen)..didn't most of them come here to work? She is a bigot imo. You still not have explained why what she said makes her a bigot You cant say anything about the immigrants..is hardly an enlightened comment. Is it not her right to say that? Why is that bigoted.she has every right to voice her concerns or do you prefer people gagged and scared? It's odd as Brown admitted latter he got it wrong and apologized on radio when it was played back and then went to apologise in person again saying she did not say anything bigoted. Of course he did.. he didn't have much choice did he? We seem be seeing a lot of people coming in from overseas recently..of course we should welcome them if they have come from a dangerous situation but I worry about the effect on the local economy. You can say anything about immigrants these days See the difference? He did not have much choice because he knew he was in the wrong and openly admitted she said was not bigoted. You however still think she is just because she raised a concern. This smothering of people who happen to be concerned over some things is fuelling extreme people and organizations No one is being smothered, but I do agree there was a period when immigration was hardly talked about. I still dont think we got an explanation on why those gangs up and down the country got away with it ,for so long. Calling a person bigoted for having concerns is smothering. It has been an on going problem and has affected me especially since the BLM started. At least Brown had the Grace to admit it Is Tommy Robinson bigoted? The famous whataboutary . Simple question A simple whataboutary. Trying to com p are her to him is shameful. Even Brown did not stoop do low Im not comparing the 2 at all. I asked do you consider him a bigot You implied people are smothered...does this apply to Tommy Robinson? It's a classic whataboutary as you know Full well and accuse others of. It's shameful. I am not a fan of brown though do feel he took the hit for Blair's Iraq war but he realised he was talking rubbish in accusing her and had the decency to say so rather than bringing Robinson into it. If you actually read what I.posted,I actually agreed with that part of what you said. But you said people were smothered and were not allowed to express an opinion. I used Tommy Robinson as an example that this is nonsense " Can't converse with people that stoop so low so will bid you a good evening | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Corbyn was great for the Labour party, Worst result since the 1930s Classic! It was great to see Dennis Skinner losing his seat. Maybe anti sematism in the party, Promising to spend billions of pounds, indecision over Brexit all had something to do with it, or maybe the people of Britain just didn't want a pm that looked like Albert Steptoe." Semitism No.we got one who looked like a cross between the incredible hulk and a hairdo fried egg (F boyle) So well done. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"You need to move on mate and get over it, Boris will more than likely win the next election, "Ha ha He womt even be pm by then | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I see mystic meg is back" Didnt realise you were not allowed to make a prediction | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"You made a statement,not a prediction" You made a statement mystic meg is back. I'm not mystic meg. You are wrong. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"You made a statement,not a prediction" Everything stated on fab is automatically taken as an opinion not fact, unless stated otherwise. This is a swinging forum not an encyclopedia.  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I didnt say you were mystic meg, I didn't include any quotes from anyone. Still if the cap fits wear it" Did I include quotes? It was an opinion which I never presented as a fact But valiant effort nevertheless. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I didnt say you were mystic meg, I didn't include any quotes from anyone. Still if the cap fits wear it Did I include quotes? It was an opinion which I never presented as a fact But valiant effort nevertheless." Even if it was presented as a fact, any reference to the future can only ever be an opinion. I can say the sun will rise in the morning. It might be a close certainty but one day it won't happen. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| back to top |  |
