That's pretty much where I am on it, although I don't think BJ is half as stupid as he makes himself look.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
Thats exactly what i was saying to my friend the other day!
He's a moron, sure, but i do think it's a lot more devious and cunning that he lets on. I think he's deliberately messing around now to incite a VoNC against him and force a GE as he can't seem to get the majority needed at the moment to secure one otherwise. If/when the Tories win an election, he'll boot the DUP to one side then we'll see the true BJ come out. Whether people will still like him then is another story though.
The people who benefit from his idea will support him, I think we both know that will be, but yeah I'm from NI and he has played the DUP like the clowns they are.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I somewhat agree but this is the problem.
We have been plunged into a mess by an electoral mechanism that is widely different from the mechanism of the solution you have proposed. If a GE was held today, it's very likely we get a huge Tory majority but at the same time, if a referendum was held today, it's possible remain wins by 5-10 points. I don't think it should be one or the other. We need both.
I posted it as a joke.
In fairness they are still waiting for your answer.
Don't spoil my thunder.
To be fair I don't think that and I've said for quite a while i wouldn't be supporting Corbyn in another leadership campaign. Just because i defend him from what i see as ludicrous accusations doesn't mean i think he's necessarily the best person for the job.
For instance it's horseshit that the reason Lib Dems won't work with Labour is Corbyn, they've done the exact same thing for the last 3 labour leaders. They build an objection to Labour in as standard to keep themselves relevant and to be fair i see why they need to do that.
Does this mean the Labour Party will be disbanded if Corbyn leaves or pops his clogs?
Personally I think there are a decent number of MP's who could take over as Labour leader. Who replaces Corbyn is actually quite a easy question to answer for anyone on the left.
Who would be your choice?
Who do you think would be at this point? Starmer? he seems to carry himself very well.
Is it just possible that with Boris delaying the next stage of the Bill and waiting to see what kind of extension he can get from the EU, and the EU waiting for the UK Government to tell them what sort of extension they want, and what significant event they would justify for having the extension granted... that suddenly its the 31st October already?
Hard to believe this would happen, but after all that's transpired over the last three and half years anything is possible, its a bit like the 'Only Fools and Horses' sketch where the safety net is set under the wrong chandelier... Oops sorry folks!
Crucially the blame could/would be shared all round, everyone gets an eyeful when the muck hits the fan!
It couldn't happen could it...Nah, but just in case, "Where's the handbrake"?
Hard to believe this would happen, but after all that's transpired over the last three and half years anything is possible, its a bit like the 'Only Fools and Horses' sketch where the safety net is set under the wrong chandelier... Oops sorry folks!
Crucially the blame could/would be shared all round, everyone gets an eyeful when the muck hits the fan!
It couldn't happen could it...Nah, but just in case, "Where's the handbrake"?
And give @esmufc07 some tips, no chance.
But really I would be fine with -
. Mcdonnell
. Rebecca Long Bailey
. Dawn Bulter
. Cat Smith
. Laura Pidock
. Lloyd Russell-Moyle
And if they stuck to a left manifesto
.David Lammy
.Keir Starmer
I'm far more interested in having a democratic and socialist Labour Party than just having a socialist leader.
Resisting the initial implementation is not the same as reversing things now. The Tories would be mad to mess with employment standards or the NHS. They should stick to the economy, law and order and immigration.
But they'll argue that stripping away employment law protections is a net positive for the economy.
Question not targeted at me but... I think Keir Starmer is the obvious choice. I'd absolutely love to have a socialist government in the UK but the reality is that it's not happening any time soon. I'd rather Starmer gets the party back into power on a more moderate platform and can put up with a centrist government in the short term because realistically the idealistic choice right now is just letting a group of fascists into power.
Tory is the default position in this country and it doesn't seem to matter if the party has been hijacked by a bunch of right wing nut jobs. If the only way to get them out of power is to have a more moderate Labour party then so be it. I'd rather campaign for a socialist agenda with a party in power that might actually listen than campaign for the same thing with a Government that will never listen and an opposition party that listens but cannot act on it.
It all depends on what platform they stand on to be fair. If Starmer mainly sticks to Corbyn's socialist policies which poll very well then i can see him as a sensible choice given his perception and lack of baggage.
I'd like McDonnel but i don't think in practice he'd be a good idea given the baggage. I'd like the leader to be a socialist but appear boring so as to see them through, Starmer probably meets that criteria just about.
Also it really should be a woman if possible but I'm not convinced that any meet my policy preference or ability right now. I'm older than Pidock and that feels so very wrong to me
Fair point. It's harder to walk these things back than to block them to begin with. Mind you, it's going to be a lot easier for them once out of the EU.
That's right. I have been reasonably impressed with Starmer. He seems very sensible and logical (so no chance...).
Seriously, that is always a problem for a party in opposition for some time. You don't necessarily get the exposure.
And if a woman and why not Rebecca Longbailey seems like a rising star.
What is crystal clear is that without a change of leader Labour just doesn't have sufficient voter appeal.
Have you not noticed the ease with which the Lib Dems have absorbed rebel Tories? That tells you all you need to know. A Labour/Lib Dem coalition is untenable given the ideological discord between the two (this would largely apply in "normal" circumstances but especially so given the two leaders represent more hard-line factions within each party). I can see very little area for collaboration. A compromise on a solution to Brexit is possible.
I know there has been defectors from Labour yes, but surely both parties should know that a GE is likely to come back in favour of the Tories, even if they do need propping up again.
Totally agree, for one thing there is no need for such measures. All that most Tories worried about prior to the UK entering the 'Common Market' was 'wildcat strikes', now the laws that already apply mean these measures cannot easily circumvented. Shortages of Labour (post Brexit) will mean employers having to up their game in the employment stakes, increasing attractiveness of their employment offers, loosening the purse strings not tightening them. Its doubtful whether many companies or businesses would move to the EU, just in terms of solving labour problems, they might under the proposed points scheme, seek to provide job opportunities, that either tempt workers already here, to retrain, upskill etc. and/ or develop person specifications that align with the points system.
As for the NHS, this is something the Tories are now very wary about 'meddling' with, especially in terms of so called privatisation. As we have seen under varying Governments mistakes in the running of the NHS are notoriously difficult(time and cost) to put right when they are attempted wholesale. Baseline provision will need to be made/improved especially improvements in Mental Health, Care of the Elderly and crucially 'end of life care'. None of these really offer an opportunity for privatisation, since they are all now part of the nations quest for the 'holy grail' in health care and will be even more so, post Brexit!
Hence why BJ is also so resistant to a 2nd referendum. I agree and yet this is Labour's fault for not having a credible leader who can unite the left and centrist needs required to form a majority.
I hope that Leave run a brilliantly simple and comprehendible campaign during the GE explaining how Brexit will practically negatively effect peoples lives. I think that will swing many Leave voters who also voted Labour in existing Labour strongholds. But that wont be enough. Corbyn will struggle with middle class centrists due to his policies.
I'm pretty sure the Lib Dem leader(Swinson) while propping up the Cameron government voted with the tories more than Michael Gove.
The Lib Dems aren't in anyway a left wing party(Centre right mostly).
It won't happen. With the Labour party moving to the left the Tories will position themselves on the side of the worker. Nobody in their right mind is going to attempt to take the country back to the 1920's. The fears are groundless in my view. As are the ones with the environment. If you want to be elected you need to be on board with all these issues. I don't think bosses will be chucking 12 year old boys into cotton mills anytime soon.
What is more I think that any amendments that seek to guarantee preservation of workers rights and environmental standards should be, and probably will be voted through without much opposition. The Government has probably already ear-marked these as giveaways during the committee stage being that Theresa May had already made concessions. They may have taken those clauses out of the WA and put them in the PD precisely so that they could allow the opposition to table amendments to put them back in the WA and claim a victory.
It is the potential CU and and 2nd ref amendments that are Johnson's biggest headache.
That's the point though. In normal circumstances, Swinson would much rather work with the Tories than Labour, and Swinson and a lot of Lib Dem donors who have turned to them following the meltdown of the Tory party fear Corbyn more than Brexit.
There really is no democracy is there?
Cat Smith based upon what, her affiliation with Corbyn? She has a young family and acts largely as a local MP as opposed to a careerist.
RLB would be my guess.
No so much because of Corbyn but she is on the left of the party, seems decent enough at speaking and is a women(The next leader should really be a women). It would be a massive step up but I think that would be case for a lot of left labour MP's.
Yeah if I was to put money on it, I think it going to be her(If Labour don't form a government after the next election)
Hmm I'm not convinced by Long-Bailey. She seems competent enough but doesn't strike me as an ideal leader for Labour, admittedly I've not seen a great deal of her but I've never been impressed by her. I'd much rather Pidcock. Starmer has the potential to be an ideal candidate who can appeal to the left without rousing the same contempt Corbyn does among the centre. I agree that the next leader should be a woman though, and I worry that my view of Starmer as an ideal candidate emanates somewhat from patriarchal notions of what a "leader" should look and act like.
She gave the closing speach on Saturday. Not sure whether that choice was mandatory but it looked very much to me like 'bringing on the young talent'
Why, aside from tokenism and expedient politics, should the next leader be a woman unless the reason is actual talent? The reason surely has to be the right one, otherwise it'd just be cheap politics & condescension. Even a pragmatic 'electability factor' is a shabby albeit understandable reason.
I completely agree, and I'd much prefer 2nd ref then GE. Unfortunately a second ref seems basically impossible with the parliamentary numbers, and so there seems little point in sitting waiting for something that's almost certainly not going to happen.
Ideally if Brexit is to happen, I'd prefer in an ideal world that the GE wait until after the initial effects became clear too, but with the transition period etc thats way too long to wait.
I don't see anyway for this not to be an election about Brexit, and sadly I do think the Tories will win it comfortably. Corbyn should never be forgiven for his incompetence.
Because the reason is actual talent. If there were not a strong selection of female MPs to choose from then you'd have a point, but there is. Labour is yet to have a female leader, and if the party is unable to amend that with the options at its disposal right now, then it begs the question why not and when will they?
There's a certain amount of optics in most political choices
BJ bought a cute dog from a rescue centre and the press made a deal of it. Now he may well be an animal lover but there was some political mileage there too.
Excellent.
I just feared the worst reasons (as I listed previously), which I feel would be insulting to women.Yeah. I appreciate that I'm being naive, really.Honest John said:
Sexist SteveJ - "it's a man's game"
For sure. It would be counterproductive to promoting equality to elect someone clearly ill-equipped for the job, or at least ill-equipped compared to other candidates, purely based on gender. That said, an element of tokenism all other things being equal is not a bad thing. As I said, I'd happily see someone like Pidcock or Starmer elected leader. Is it wrong for me to factor in Pidcock's gender based on the fact Labour is yet to have a female leader when making my choice? I don't think so. The point is that she is an equally credible candidate to the others based on merit alone, and if a barrier can be broken down with her selection, then it's fair to deem that a small but not inconsequential plus-point in her favour (but equally I do not think a position to the contrary is unreasonable).Excellent.