| Labour should have walked this election. 13:39 - Dec 5 with 5942 views | usm |
It was/is there for the taking, but Corbyn is simply unelectable.
Far too much of a risk, economically and security so it looks like its going to be the Tories again, largely due to the lack of a viable alternative. |  |
| |  |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 18:03 - Dec 5 with 1094 views | tractordownsouth |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 17:59 - Dec 5 by Lord_Lucan |
Yeah ok mate. You are correct, in fact everything you say is correct*****
*****I am hoping that this will save both of us hours of pointless arguing where we end up exactly where we started.
You can buy me a thank you beer if and when you see me. |
Hahahah fair play, may nominate this for Post of the Year! |  |
| |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 18:13 - Dec 5 with 1075 views | Radlett_blue |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 17:57 - Dec 5 by Pinewoodblue |
I don't subscribe to the view that if Labour fail Corbyn is to blame.
He was a reluctant nomination and stood to give party membership to have a wider choice being more to left than the already nominated candidates. Didn't he only just manage to get the necessary support from Labour MPs needed to be on the ballot paper. Of the candidates he had the lowest level of support from his peers.
He was the outsider but appealed to the membership. Card carrying friends had no intention of supporting him preferring Andy Burnham of Yvette Cooper however they all ended up in the Corbyn camp.
A Labour party lead by Andy Burnham would be much better placed to form a Government. Labour's problem is that the party activists are more left than the voters Labour need to attract to gain power.
Corbyn may be the leader but the manifesto is a collective document it pleases activists but scares the sh1te out of too many of the electorate. |
Yes, Corbyn was struggling to get the 35 nominations from MPs to enable him to run. Some such as Sadiq Khan said that they nominated Corbyn not because they supported him, but having him on the ballot paper would make for a more interesting contest. I hope they're happy now!
Labour also had the problem that many people became party members at short notice purely so that they could vote. I know a staunch Tory friend of mine who paid his £5 (I think that was all it cost) so he could vote for Corbyn because he felt it would make Labour unelectable.
Having such left wing policies (not seen since the days of Michael Foot) has galvanised some of the youth vote (hence Labour's better than expected showing in the last General Election) but these policies aren't popular with much of Labour's traditional support, while most of the more able Labour MPs won't sit in his cabinet. The failure of a leadership challenge shows that Corbyn is an immovable object under Labour's current system.
I may be proven wrong next week, but if we do have an opposition that is considered unelectable by the majority of the country, I don't think that's particularly healthy for the country and arguably Labour needs to be reformed in the way Kinnock did in the 1980s as even if Corbyn resigns, their current system is likely to produce another left wing leader. |  |
| |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 18:15 - Dec 5 with 1072 views | ZedRodgers |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 16:44 - Dec 5 by lowhouseblue |
i think that was meant for me.
it was a serious error to be running a large structural budget deficit over the economic cycle so that before the crisis struck the uk's fiscal position was already fragile. responsibility for that lies with brown who - for all his undoubted very good points - fiddled the fiscal projections to disguise the real extent of the structural deficit. that's the sense in which the extent of the fiscal shock caused by 2008 was particularly severe in the uk. |
Do you understand that during this period, the current (before parliament dissolved) Chancellor of the Exchequer was dispensing subprime mortgages at Deutsche Bank like they were going out of fashion? You know, the actual cause of the crash.
The criminally negligent conduct which brought world finance to its knees was carried out by Sajid Javid, amongst others, but you're banging on about Gordon Brown's inability to prepare for it being a reason to vote against Corbyn's Labour. |  |
| |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 18:17 - Dec 5 with 1068 views | BABLUE |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 16:56 - Dec 5 by baxterbasics |
In the boom time, you run a surplus and pay down debt. That way you have room when recession hits (as they inevitably do).
Blair and Brown did not do this. They had record tax receipts and still overspent for a good decade.
Edit -a point already made, more eloquently, by Lowhouse. [Post edited 5 Dec 2019 16:58]
|
They overspent on things like repairing schools and hospitals that the Tories didn’t bother with.
They were more interested in tax cuts for the well off and selling anything they could at cut down prices that their mates in the city benefited from.
For the few and not the many. Typical Tory |  | | |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 18:18 - Dec 5 with 1063 views | eireblue |
Red Ed, was un-electable, apparently. As was a Welsh Windbag.
No reason to think a campaign based on emotive topics and simple lies, wouldn’t have been equally effective against a different leader.
 |  | | |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 18:20 - Dec 5 with 1056 views | lowhouseblue |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 18:15 - Dec 5 by ZedRodgers |
Do you understand that during this period, the current (before parliament dissolved) Chancellor of the Exchequer was dispensing subprime mortgages at Deutsche Bank like they were going out of fashion? You know, the actual cause of the crash.
The criminally negligent conduct which brought world finance to its knees was carried out by Sajid Javid, amongst others, but you're banging on about Gordon Brown's inability to prepare for it being a reason to vote against Corbyn's Labour. |
well that doesn't really relate to my post which was about the structural budget deficit running up to 2008.
i was talking to someone at the weekend who knows corbyn - not a member of his team but someone who over the years has spoken to him regularly and on an entirely civil basis. this person's view is that corbyn will have resigned by the end of next friday, that he pretty much hates his current role and won't hang about for the autopsy. do you think he will hang about for longer? |  |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 18:28 - Dec 5 with 1039 views | Darth_Koont |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 18:18 - Dec 5 by eireblue |
Red Ed, was un-electable, apparently. As was a Welsh Windbag.
No reason to think a campaign based on emotive topics and simple lies, wouldn’t have been equally effective against a different leader.
|
Indeed. I'm not sure people remember how far Blair had to go over to the dark side to get the support of the press barons and ultimately the electorate - he basically had to become an establishment Democrat with a Republican worldview. Still better than a Tory government but that was also the period of IDS and a general malaise around their social politics and traditional values.
It would be interesting to see nowadays how far a Labour or even a LibDem leader would need to go to get the attention of those who are so enamoured with the current right-wing populist nonsense. |  |
| |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 18:39 - Dec 5 with 1005 views | footers |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 18:20 - Dec 5 by lowhouseblue |
well that doesn't really relate to my post which was about the structural budget deficit running up to 2008.
i was talking to someone at the weekend who knows corbyn - not a member of his team but someone who over the years has spoken to him regularly and on an entirely civil basis. this person's view is that corbyn will have resigned by the end of next friday, that he pretty much hates his current role and won't hang about for the autopsy. do you think he will hang about for longer? |
Surprised your pal hasn't leaked this very important information about the leader of the opposition to the press! What a scoop, and yet he keeps his hunch all to himself. How thoughtful!
The Dear Leader's leaflet dropped through my box today :) Can't wait to put a big old cross in the box for Uncle Jezza himself! |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Labour should have walked this election. on 18:51 - Dec 5 with 991 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 18:20 - Dec 5 by lowhouseblue |
well that doesn't really relate to my post which was about the structural budget deficit running up to 2008.
i was talking to someone at the weekend who knows corbyn - not a member of his team but someone who over the years has spoken to him regularly and on an entirely civil basis. this person's view is that corbyn will have resigned by the end of next friday, that he pretty much hates his current role and won't hang about for the autopsy. do you think he will hang about for longer? |
There wasn’t a large deficit running up to the crash, not by historical (or recent) standards. Hindsight is all well and good, but Labour’s plans were fully supported by Osborne at the time (if I remember rightly he was very buoyant about the economic prospects in 2007 and would have gone further). See my reply to Harry further up the thread.
I’d also forgotten Jarvid was part of the broader ‘machine’ that caused the crash. The Tories aren’t on particularly solid ground taking on this fight. Not that it’s a fight we should be having anyway (see my reply to Harry again).
Needless to say, when the Tory message is ‘we’re strong on the economy’ it needs to be assessed as critically as their claim to have halved homelessness. But it never is. |  |
| |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 19:01 - Dec 5 with 974 views | lowhouseblue |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 18:51 - Dec 5 by Swansea_Blue |
There wasn’t a large deficit running up to the crash, not by historical (or recent) standards. Hindsight is all well and good, but Labour’s plans were fully supported by Osborne at the time (if I remember rightly he was very buoyant about the economic prospects in 2007 and would have gone further). See my reply to Harry further up the thread.
I’d also forgotten Jarvid was part of the broader ‘machine’ that caused the crash. The Tories aren’t on particularly solid ground taking on this fight. Not that it’s a fight we should be having anyway (see my reply to Harry again).
Needless to say, when the Tory message is ‘we’re strong on the economy’ it needs to be assessed as critically as their claim to have halved homelessness. But it never is. |
https://www.ifs.org.uk/budgets/gb2009/09chap2.pdf
"Labour entered the current crisis with one of the largest structural budget deficits in the industrial world and a bigger debt than most OECD countries, having done less to reduce debt and — in particular — borrowing than most since 1997..." | |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 19:10 - Dec 5 with 965 views | HARRY10 |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 18:03 - Dec 5 by lowhouseblue |
i think we're probably posting at cross purposes. i responded to your question to explain why the uk was poorly placed fiscally when the credit crisis occurred. while you are posting about why the credit crisis occurred and how brown responded. the two posts are not incompatible but they are clearly discussing different things. |
It was not poorly placed fiscally, if only that it would not have been able to take the measures it did. That is just a myth, that gets peddled to varying degrees. I have been told that the country was actually bankrupt when the coalition took power in 2010.
This continuing of spreadimg these myths is not by accident, as it feeds into the narrative that every fault has been caused by Labour, and so they will do it again.
Much as the simple minded will tell you that it was much safer in the East End when the Krays were at large. Which again falls into the thought of telling a lie repeatedly so it is eventually believed. |  | | |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 19:13 - Dec 5 with 959 views | lowhouseblue |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 19:10 - Dec 5 by HARRY10 |
It was not poorly placed fiscally, if only that it would not have been able to take the measures it did. That is just a myth, that gets peddled to varying degrees. I have been told that the country was actually bankrupt when the coalition took power in 2010.
This continuing of spreadimg these myths is not by accident, as it feeds into the narrative that every fault has been caused by Labour, and so they will do it again.
Much as the simple minded will tell you that it was much safer in the East End when the Krays were at large. Which again falls into the thought of telling a lie repeatedly so it is eventually believed. |
see ifs report linked above. | |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 19:25 - Dec 5 with 940 views | ghostofescobar |
Agreed. The Tories biggest electoral trump card is Corbyn. The Tories have to do nothing other than not be Corbyn. |  |
| |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 19:33 - Dec 5 with 923 views | Lord_Lucan |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 19:25 - Dec 5 by ghostofescobar |
Agreed. The Tories biggest electoral trump card is Corbyn. The Tories have to do nothing other than not be Corbyn. |
Why do you think Boris hasn't done Andrew Neil, it is absolutely pointless as it can only go against him. All Boris has to do is - nothing. |  |
| |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 20:04 - Dec 5 with 890 views | BLUEGOLD |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 19:33 - Dec 5 by Lord_Lucan |
Why do you think Boris hasn't done Andrew Neil, it is absolutely pointless as it can only go against him. All Boris has to do is - nothing. |
Johnson is a spineless lying asshole.
Why would anyone vote for him
Oops, I forgot racist and misogynist too | | | |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 08:39 - Dec 6 with 830 views | BigManBlue |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 15:07 - Dec 5 by usm |
Its not just the bomb though is it.
What about his "tolerance" of the IRA and terrorism generally, his dislike of the monarchy, his dislike of the USA - if push comes to shove, like it or not, we'll need the US. And if he does manage to wreck the economy, the whole lot goes to sh1t.
Far too much of a risk from my perspective - and I'm a bit of a risk taker....occasionally. |
Sorry for the late reply, but as an honest question, why does disliking the monarchy make one a security threat?
I can see the point about leniency towards terrorist organisations, but nationalist leaders have done much the same throughout modern history and dressed it up as "non interventionism" or "America first" (I'll concede the point that this usually goes alongside ratcheting up military spending to frankly pointless levels). And the way America is happy to drop allies makes me glad we're not entirely dependant on them (yet!)
Edit - monarch for monarchy. Even I have a soft spot for Liz... [Post edited 6 Dec 2019 8:40]
|  |
| |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 09:50 - Dec 6 with 811 views | Radlett_blue |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 20:04 - Dec 5 by BLUEGOLD |
Johnson is a spineless lying asshole.
Why would anyone vote for him
Oops, I forgot racist and misogynist too |
Because (1) if he is PM with a working majority, he will deliver Brexit, which will please around half the country (including many traditional Labour voters).
(2) Because the alternative PM is Jeremy Corbyn. Left wing, borderline Marxist policies don't appeal to many people with experience & knowledge of the impact of those policies. | |
| |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 09:55 - Dec 6 with 800 views | footers |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 09:50 - Dec 6 by Radlett_blue |
Because (1) if he is PM with a working majority, he will deliver Brexit, which will please around half the country (including many traditional Labour voters).
(2) Because the alternative PM is Jeremy Corbyn. Left wing, borderline Marxist policies don't appeal to many people with experience & knowledge of the impact of those policies. |
At least your former group will get to gain "experience & knowledge of the impact of those policies" once Brexit is 'done', innit. Lol. Like being made redundant. | |
| |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 09:59 - Dec 6 with 787 views | Herbivore |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 09:50 - Dec 6 by Radlett_blue |
Because (1) if he is PM with a working majority, he will deliver Brexit, which will please around half the country (including many traditional Labour voters).
(2) Because the alternative PM is Jeremy Corbyn. Left wing, borderline Marxist policies don't appeal to many people with experience & knowledge of the impact of those policies. |
How much Marx have you read? |  |
| |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 10:10 - Dec 6 with 778 views | BLUEGOLD |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 09:50 - Dec 6 by Radlett_blue |
Because (1) if he is PM with a working majority, he will deliver Brexit, which will please around half the country (including many traditional Labour voters).
(2) Because the alternative PM is Jeremy Corbyn. Left wing, borderline Marxist policies don't appeal to many people with experience & knowledge of the impact of those policies. |
In what way is Nationalising natural monopolies Marxist?
You do realise that in Europe a lot of them are state owned?
A slightly higher tax rate for those earning the most isn’t really unfair is it? It’s not going up to 98% is it.
Having corporation tax at about the EU average is hardly radical either.
Borrowing money to fund infrastructure seems reasonable too.
Don’t believe the guff in the MSM.
Johnson has avoided the 2 big one on one interviews on ITV and BBC, yet there is nothing in the right wing press about it. No pictures of chickens like there would be if Corbyn had done it.
Look up George Carlin video it’s a big club and you ain’t in it fora but more about how it all works | | | |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 10:15 - Dec 6 with 776 views | noggin |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 09:59 - Dec 6 by Herbivore |
How much Marx have you read? |
None, but he has read The Daily Mail. |  |
| |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 10:18 - Dec 6 with 772 views | chicoazul |
Mad to think Corbyn is unelectable, he is very very popular. Although it's funny, I remember the Political Brains Trust on here lecturing us all over the course of several elections that "you dont vote for a Pwesideeennt in this countwyyyy you vote for your MPeeeee" and now that's changed. Funny. Looking forward to excellent TWTD discourse no matter what happens next Friday. |  |
| |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 10:20 - Dec 6 with 762 views | Herbivore |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 10:15 - Dec 6 by noggin |
None, but he has read The Daily Mail. |
This is probably true, sadly. It bothers me that people keep referencing Marx, what Labour are proposing isn't even close to Marxism. It's fairly moderate social democracy. We're just a very right leaning country that views progressive policies as being radical when they really aren't. | |
| |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 10:23 - Dec 6 with 754 views | lowhouseblue |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 10:20 - Dec 6 by Herbivore |
This is probably true, sadly. It bothers me that people keep referencing Marx, what Labour are proposing isn't even close to Marxism. It's fairly moderate social democracy. We're just a very right leaning country that views progressive policies as being radical when they really aren't. |
the spending and borrowing which labour is claiming is without precedent. and it rises by the day. the problem they have isn't to do with ideology it's to do with economic credibility. radical reform, good. crashing the economy, very bad. | |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 10:28 - Dec 6 with 750 views | chicoazul |
| Labour should have walked this election. on 16:56 - Dec 5 by baxterbasics |
In the boom time, you run a surplus and pay down debt. That way you have room when recession hits (as they inevitably do).
Blair and Brown did not do this. They had record tax receipts and still overspent for a good decade.
Edit -a point already made, more eloquently, by Lowhouse. [Post edited 5 Dec 2019 16:58]
|
Debt is completely and utterly irrelevant to government. Running a country is nothing like running a household. Japan has titanic debt levels and is pretty much a model country for us to aspire to IMVHO. Forget about debt. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
