By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
....I made this mkistake of falling down the Labour rabbit hole on Social Media, it is like rubber necking at an accident site. Absolute carnage on there.
So much in-fighting and disagreements and re-writing of history.
Clair achieved nothing - Sure Start was Tessa Jowell, Minimum Wage was Gordon Brown, etc..............but of course everything bad was solely down to Blair.
Any MP who speaks out about Corbyn or anti-semitism they are trying to get deselected - including someone who won Canterbury for first time (by 186 votes) in forever - although this was all down to Momentum's campaigning and not the candidate at all of course.
Chuka has said that the likes of McDonnell need to 'call off the dogs', you know that common saying.....apparently it means he has called members out as actual dogs. You couldn't make it up.
It would be funny if it wasn't so serious, how do they expect to win an election? All they talk about is how many members they now have as though that is what will win it for them.
I don't understand why being centrist has become such a bad thing, surely most people are or am I just wrong? The nutters I see on both sides of the divide can't be representative of normal people surely? Why don't people want what was New Labour, don't they realise compromises had to be made by likes of Blair and Brown to push through all the reform they did for the poorest people in the country?
It's all very student politics out there, and if there was a GE called now, the Tory party would increase their majority.
Was it a broad church under Blair in your opinion?
Hard to argue it wasn't isn't it given JC rebelled often and there were no sanctions. No attempt to deselect him, no moaning in public about rebellions or not supporting the leadership.
SB
Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula
0
The Labour party.... on 09:31 - Sep 12 with 2744 views
Was it a broad church under Blair in your opinion?
You didn't ask me but Corbyn wasn't hounded out despite repeatedly going against his party. Now the tables have turned, its not taken long for that tolerance to disappear..
Has anyone ever looked at their own postings for last day or so? Oh my... so sorry. Was Ullaa
The Labour party.... on 09:31 - Sep 12 by StokieBlue
Hard to argue it wasn't isn't it given JC rebelled often and there were no sanctions. No attempt to deselect him, no moaning in public about rebellions or not supporting the leadership.
SB
sorry mr.
Has anyone ever looked at their own postings for last day or so? Oh my... so sorry. Was Ullaa
The Labour party.... on 09:21 - Sep 12 by StokieBlue
Still keeping up the condescending manner I see.
Have you read this entire thread? Do you still believe Labour is a broad church open to all opinions?
Still the funniest thing written on here this week, possibly this year.
SB
Nope, just stating the obvious. Life and death is obviously a social issue.
I've already described the broad church, ranging from Progress to Momentum and encompassing a wide range of political economic approaches. I even referred to my use of Hayek, more traditionally seen as a chum of Thatcherism.
You've got to be a little closed minded to think a membership of over half a million doesn't encompass a wide range of attitudes. Why that diversity is drawn to Corbyn is also a tad obvious: acceptance that things have to change and we can no longer tolerate right wing consensus politics.
0
The Labour party.... on 09:40 - Sep 12 with 2715 views
The Labour party.... on 09:34 - Sep 12 by Gromheort
Nope, just stating the obvious. Life and death is obviously a social issue.
I've already described the broad church, ranging from Progress to Momentum and encompassing a wide range of political economic approaches. I even referred to my use of Hayek, more traditionally seen as a chum of Thatcherism.
You've got to be a little closed minded to think a membership of over half a million doesn't encompass a wide range of attitudes. Why that diversity is drawn to Corbyn is also a tad obvious: acceptance that things have to change and we can no longer tolerate right wing consensus politics.
Once again, stating a number of people as evidence for non-homogeneity is a non-sequitur argument.
Wow, this posting complicated words stuff is great!
Evidence from this thread alone shows the intolerance of positions not aligned with the leadership. Saying something many times doesn't make it true.
SB
Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula
1
The Labour party.... on 09:43 - Sep 12 with 2705 views
The Labour party.... on 09:31 - Sep 12 by giant_stow
You didn't ask me but Corbyn wasn't hounded out despite repeatedly going against his party. Now the tables have turned, its not taken long for that tolerance to disappear..
Forgotten Blair's idea of show trials to remove folk?
Let's not forget that Corbyn is merely respectful of CLP democratic decisions. It would be great, however, to shift away from negative deselections (although they've been none so far) to positive open democratic selections
[Post edited 12 Sep 2018 9:44]
0
The Labour party.... on 09:45 - Sep 12 with 2695 views
The Labour party.... on 09:43 - Sep 12 by Gromheort
Forgotten Blair's idea of show trials to remove folk?
Let's not forget that Corbyn is merely respectful of CLP democratic decisions. It would be great, however, to shift away from negative deselections (although they've been none so far) to positive open democratic selections
[Post edited 12 Sep 2018 9:44]
That's a brilliant way of justifying getting rid of people who don't agree with you - cite democracy.
Given the MP is voted for by the public who aren't all members of Labour surely deselecting someone who won a vote is ignoring the public and thus their democratic vote? Or are things only democratic when it's from your perspective?
The Labour party.... on 09:40 - Sep 12 by StokieBlue
Once again, stating a number of people as evidence for non-homogeneity is a non-sequitur argument.
Wow, this posting complicated words stuff is great!
Evidence from this thread alone shows the intolerance of positions not aligned with the leadership. Saying something many times doesn't make it true.
SB
It's simple recognition of the splintered nature of left wing political economy.
I see it all the time in my CLP. Most are social democrats, but they are open to various more radical socialist approaches. I know it doesn't fit your storyline, but the members have never been so united (despite our heterogeneity)
-1
The Labour party.... on 09:50 - Sep 12 with 2679 views
The Labour party.... on 09:48 - Sep 12 by StokieBlue
That's a brilliant way of justifying getting rid of people who don't agree with you - cite democracy.
Given the MP is voted for by the public who aren't all members of Labour surely deselecting someone who won a vote is ignoring the public and thus their democratic vote? Or are things only democratic when it's from your perspective?
SB
Perhaps we should do away with elections? You do seem disdainful of democracy.
0
The Labour party.... on 09:56 - Sep 12 with 2665 views
The Labour party.... on 09:50 - Sep 12 by Gromheort
Perhaps we should do away with elections? You do seem disdainful of democracy.
Brilliantly done!
Ignore the inconvenient point raised about your democracy and then go for the misdirection. It's textbook stuff, I have to admit.
So only democracy within your peer group matters? What about the public who voted for that MP? They don't matter right? You don't like that they disagree with the leadership so ignore the fact that a number of non-members voted for them.
SB
Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula
1
The Labour party.... on 10:00 - Sep 12 with 2655 views
The Labour party.... on 09:56 - Sep 12 by StokieBlue
Brilliantly done!
Ignore the inconvenient point raised about your democracy and then go for the misdirection. It's textbook stuff, I have to admit.
So only democracy within your peer group matters? What about the public who voted for that MP? They don't matter right? You don't like that they disagree with the leadership so ignore the fact that a number of non-members voted for them.
SB
It was a tad obvious. We have a negative system based on attacking MPs with deselection. We could be moving to a positive system based on local democracy. This also eliminates the problem of parachuting individuals into safe seats for a permanent career.
But heck, let's just whinge about democracy! And I would personally support a system like the US where all registered voters get a say.
[Post edited 12 Sep 2018 10:02]
-2
The Labour party.... on 10:01 - Sep 12 with 2648 views
The Labour party.... on 10:00 - Sep 12 by Gromheort
It was a tad obvious. We have a negative system based on attacking MPs with deselection. We could be moving to a positive system based on local democracy. This also eliminates the problem of parachuting individuals into safe seats for a permanent career.
But heck, let's just whinge about democracy! And I would personally support a system like the US where all registered voters get a say.
[Post edited 12 Sep 2018 10:02]
You've ignored the point. Again. It's becoming tedious.
You were the one whinging about democracy. The only type of democracy is your type of democracy it would seem.
SB
Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula
0
The Labour party.... on 10:05 - Sep 12 with 2642 views
The Labour party.... on 10:01 - Sep 12 by StokieBlue
You've ignored the point. Again. It's becoming tedious.
You were the one whinging about democracy. The only type of democracy is your type of democracy it would seem.
SB
Nope. Happy to open it to all registered voters. Local decision making will maximise the quality of candidates. The days of thinking a PPE degree from Oxbridge is sufficient for a permanent job will disappear...
-1
The Labour party.... on 19:33 - Sep 12 with 2515 views
The Labour party.... on 09:31 - Sep 12 by StokieBlue
Hard to argue it wasn't isn't it given JC rebelled often and there were no sanctions. No attempt to deselect him, no moaning in public about rebellions or not supporting the leadership.
SB
The difference is that Corbyn was voting against the party but with the membership. Now the group of MPs are both voting against the party and against the membership.
Haven’t been on the forum in a while but it’s good to see the same old cycle of nonsense from a handful of posters who think they speak for the entire nation. I assume I’ve already missed a Serena Williams cartoon thread where a bunch of white men explain why it’s not racist.
OP comment about Tories increasing majority is laughable and straight from the school of Dan Hodges. Bold and bewildering. There was “infighting” in 2015, 2016 and 2017. In some ways the ‘chicken coup’ era was even worse than now. Labour increased their national vote by millions compared to the the previous two GEs. Please show your working out young man.
No, not at the moment
1
The Labour party.... on 02:55 - Sep 13 with 2424 views
The Labour party.... on 19:33 - Sep 12 by ZedRodgers
The difference is that Corbyn was voting against the party but with the membership. Now the group of MPs are both voting against the party and against the membership.
Haven’t been on the forum in a while but it’s good to see the same old cycle of nonsense from a handful of posters who think they speak for the entire nation. I assume I’ve already missed a Serena Williams cartoon thread where a bunch of white men explain why it’s not racist.
OP comment about Tories increasing majority is laughable and straight from the school of Dan Hodges. Bold and bewildering. There was “infighting” in 2015, 2016 and 2017. In some ways the ‘chicken coup’ era was even worse than now. Labour increased their national vote by millions compared to the the previous two GEs. Please show your working out young man.
You do realise you're one of the main perpetrators of this nonsense right? No use trying to act above it all, you're rolling around in the muck, stinking out the board, with the other usual suspects.
Pronouns: He/Him/His.
"Imagine being a heterosexual white male in Britain at this moment. How bad is that. Everything you say is racist, everything you say is homophobic. The Woke community have really f****d this country."
The Labour party.... on 09:31 - Sep 12 by StokieBlue
Hard to argue it wasn't isn't it given JC rebelled often and there were no sanctions. No attempt to deselect him, no moaning in public about rebellions or not supporting the leadership.
SB
Last time I looked Stephen Kinnock and the rest were still there.(unfortunately....)
"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
The Labour party.... on 02:55 - Sep 13 by SpruceMoose
You do realise you're one of the main perpetrators of this nonsense right? No use trying to act above it all, you're rolling around in the muck, stinking out the board, with the other usual suspects.
Isn't it really a problem with the media in the UK? Day in day out bashing Coryn - even when there is little to bash BUT, in the party of government there is discord, in-fighting, lies, misdirections, and other issues which would or should be a matter if considerable concern - IF they ever got reported? Even event (or non events as the case may be) in the Lib-Dems it all goes unreported.
That is whay should concern us most
0
The Labour party.... on 10:20 - Sep 13 with 2292 views
Isn't it really a problem with the media in the UK? Day in day out bashing Coryn - even when there is little to bash BUT, in the party of government there is discord, in-fighting, lies, misdirections, and other issues which would or should be a matter if considerable concern - IF they ever got reported? Even event (or non events as the case may be) in the Lib-Dems it all goes unreported.
That is whay should concern us most
1
The Labour party.... on 10:24 - Sep 13 with 2284 views
The Labour party.... on 10:00 - Sep 12 by Gromheort
It was a tad obvious. We have a negative system based on attacking MPs with deselection. We could be moving to a positive system based on local democracy. This also eliminates the problem of parachuting individuals into safe seats for a permanent career.
But heck, let's just whinge about democracy! And I would personally support a system like the US where all registered voters get a say.
[Post edited 12 Sep 2018 10:02]
So I had an interesting thought on the cycle this morning and I'd like to ask you a question if I may?
You've posted on a number of political threads recently and you are almost entirely dismissive of anything which doesn't fit within yours and Labours worldview. You are right and people who voice a different opinion are wrong. You are very condescending of peoples views and resort to insults or obfuscation fairly quickly. I'm not the only poster who has highlighted this behaviour over the last few days but I will happily accept you may feel this is an unfair assessment or even accuse me of the same things - that's fine.
So here is the question:
Do you think you are helping Labour's cause by acting in this way? Labour need to convert a lot of voters from either other parties or floating in order to swing enough seats to win the next election. Posting in the way you do (and the way some of your fellow members act on other forms of social media) doesn't seem like a good way of converting people to your way of thinking. Does this bother you or is it more important that the message remains uncorrupted even if it means it'll never be implemented in government?
Maybe "correcting" peoples views on Labour and the policies is more important than actually implementing the policies?
Honestly don't want a fight, it's a serious question and it would be nice to hear your view on it.
Cheers.
SB
[Post edited 13 Sep 2018 10:27]
Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula
1
The Labour party.... on 10:32 - Sep 13 with 2262 views
The Labour party.... on 10:24 - Sep 13 by StokieBlue
So I had an interesting thought on the cycle this morning and I'd like to ask you a question if I may?
You've posted on a number of political threads recently and you are almost entirely dismissive of anything which doesn't fit within yours and Labours worldview. You are right and people who voice a different opinion are wrong. You are very condescending of peoples views and resort to insults or obfuscation fairly quickly. I'm not the only poster who has highlighted this behaviour over the last few days but I will happily accept you may feel this is an unfair assessment or even accuse me of the same things - that's fine.
So here is the question:
Do you think you are helping Labour's cause by acting in this way? Labour need to convert a lot of voters from either other parties or floating in order to swing enough seats to win the next election. Posting in the way you do (and the way some of your fellow members act on other forms of social media) doesn't seem like a good way of converting people to your way of thinking. Does this bother you or is it more important that the message remains uncorrupted even if it means it'll never be implemented in government?
Maybe "correcting" peoples views on Labour and the policies is more important than actually implementing the policies?
Honestly don't want a fight, it's a serious question and it would be nice to hear your view on it.
Cheers.
SB
[Post edited 13 Sep 2018 10:27]
Given that you've said you don't understand what he's saying a lot of the time, why are you still engaging?
I haven't seen him resorting to insults. I've seen him put up with a lot of sh!t from some on this thread and stay calm despite a lot of provocation.
It's funny (and you do this a lot) that you slate him a fair bit in that first para but then end with "honestly don't want a fight"! It's like, 'I'm gonna get my digs in but I'll be polite about it so it doesn't come back to me'.
You say he's condescending - but read back what you've just said to him!
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
