|
|
Post by Merseymike on Feb 24, 2017 20:31:22 GMT
It's probably because it's just about the only thing we all agree on. That's never occurred to me, but thinking about this you're probably right. Labour just has no key ideological message or approach. It's totally split on what that should be. This is why whatever way things go there has to be decisions taken and an agreement to accept them. But I can't even see that happening at the moment |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2017 20:43:36 GMT
It's probably because it's just about the only thing we all agree on. That's never occurred to me, but thinking about this you're probably right. Labour just has no key ideological message or approach. I think it's also a kind of comfort zone -- not many people really object to 'saving the NHS' on principle even if the issue often fails to gain traction. It's a bit like when the Greens bang on about cycle paths. |
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Feb 24, 2017 20:43:36 GMT
Labour just has no key ideological message or approach. Neither does the Conservative Party. Their appeal is based on competence and stability. |
|
mondialito
Labour
Everything is horribly, brutally possible.
Posts: 4,961 
|
Post by mondialito on Feb 24, 2017 20:56:05 GMT
Anyway it's insane to bring up the nuclear thing as an excuse: it was almost certainly fatal, but why was the issue a problem in the first place? Oh. Without wanting to derail the thread, can I ask if anyone has already pointed out just how f**kwitted Jeremy's lack of commitment to nuclear power was? Even putting aside the whole not supporting the biggest employer in the constituency thing, surely if he believes in becoming a carbon-neutral country which uses little fossil fuels, then nuclear is the only game in town while renewables are still unreliable and CCS is untested. I couldn't help but think that he was either unable or unwilling to realise that or worse, had conflated civil nuclear energy with the nuclear deterrent. |
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 16,025
|
Post by Sibboleth on Feb 24, 2017 21:26:31 GMT
He still lives in 1977 that's the problem. At the time it was a standard Left position to be opposed to nuclear power as it was seen as a threat to the coal industry. For better or worse the energy situation is quite different today.
|
|
mondialito
Labour
Everything is horribly, brutally possible.
Posts: 4,961
|
Post by mondialito on Feb 24, 2017 21:35:41 GMT
Well he must do as 1984 clearly hasn't happened to him yet, WHAT BLOODY COAL INDUSTRY???
|
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Feb 24, 2017 21:49:37 GMT
Don't call me a Corbynite, especially since I have never voted for him as leader and never will. If this doesn't convince you to work every minute to get Corbyn to resign, then nothing will. So you think the best thing for Labour activists to do is spend all their time work to undermine the leader, rather than working towards getting Labour more votes and seats? No wonder your party's losing Parliamentary seats to the government in by-elections if that's what your activists are prioritising. |
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Feb 24, 2017 21:52:07 GMT
One difference being that last time was pretty much your worst ever result in either constituency (at least worst for a long time) and our best ever. They were poor results for us but predictably so in constituencies where we've never had much presence. The drop in copeland was about what i'd expect. Stoke perhaps a bit more, but with all the attention on ukip i suspect some people who may otherwise have considered a green vote voted labour. I only highlighted the fact that ourselves and the GPEW were effectively level in both constituencies to show in sharp relief the corresponding fortunes notwithstanding the nature of our respective results in 2015. But I do think there's a white flag that goes up from Greens whenever there's a by-election. Always excuses, never disappointment (and far worse with GPEW as opposed to SGP which has it's own self inflicted problems by being avowedly pro-independence which is a self inflicted wound). I think the issue is largely that we never really have the resources to throw at Parliamentary by-elections. Especially as it's so rare to have one in a seat where we have an established presence and activist base. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2017 21:52:50 GMT
Well he must do as 1984 clearly hasn't happened to him yet, WHAT BLOODY COAL INDUSTRY??? Local opencast was producing more coal than the deep pits with 25 men and went bust |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Feb 24, 2017 21:55:59 GMT
If this doesn't convince you to work every minute to get Corbyn to resign, then nothing will. So you think the best thing for Labour activists to do is spend all their time work to undermine the leader, rather than working towards getting Labour more votes and seats? Given the person who presently occupies the office of "Leader of the Labour Party" is actively harming the future of the party and therefore also working people, if I spent a single second trying to help that leader stay in post it would be a second spent working against the interests of the party. Work spent undermining the leader and trying to replace him with someone else is work in the best interests of building the party and helping working people. |
|
Jack
Reform Party
Posts: 8,679
|
Post by Jack on Feb 24, 2017 22:00:36 GMT
If this doesn't convince you to work every minute to get Corbyn to resign, then nothing will. So you think the best thing for Labour activists to do is spend all their time work to undermine the leader, rather than working towards getting Labour more votes and seats? No wonder your party's losing Parliamentary seats to the government in by-elections if that's what your activists are prioritising. Given that Corbyn has a net favourability of -35%, I'd say it's a noble cause. |
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 16,025
|
Post by Sibboleth on Feb 24, 2017 22:01:17 GMT
Of course the person who has done the most work lately to undermine Labour's elected Leader is... er... Labour's elected Leader. Who is now a man with approximately negative credibility and is currently doing an excellent job of looking like The Man With The Least Dignity In The World. People have committed seppuku for less.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Feb 24, 2017 22:05:13 GMT
So you think the best thing for Labour activists to do is spend all their time work to undermine the leader, rather than working towards getting Labour more votes and seats? Given the person who presently occupies the office of "Leader of the Labour Party" is actively harming the future of the party and therefore also working people, if I spent a single second trying to help that leader stay in post it would be a second spent working against the interests of the party. Work spent undermining the leader and trying to replace him with someone else is work in the best interests of building the party and helping working people. If you believe that the leader is a liability to the party, that does make some sense. But doing this to the extent of "working every minute" to undermine him, as you urged other Labour members to do, seems a very odd priority. It means that you've basically decided that it's better to wait until he's gone to do anything that actively builds up your party than it is to devote at least some effort to doing so now. And since your MPs have already proved that he can't be easily forced out (or, at least, that they are incapable of managing it), that seems a very dangerous game if you want to make any progress at all in the 2020 election. |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Feb 24, 2017 23:21:17 GMT
The Beeb report that the SWP are blaming Labour not being left-wing enough for...er...the Tories winning Copeland. Well. Hardly anyone cares what the SWP have to say. They are more of a cult than a political party. I'm aware of that. But the Beeb clearly aren't. Plus, it's fun to take the piss out of the Swuppies. |
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Feb 24, 2017 23:46:31 GMT
Given the person who presently occupies the office of "Leader of the Labour Party" is actively harming the future of the party and therefore also working people, if I spent a single second trying to help that leader stay in post it would be a second spent working against the interests of the party. Work spent undermining the leader and trying to replace him with someone else is work in the best interests of building the party and helping working people. If you believe that the leader is a liability to the party, that does make some sense. But doing this to the extent of "working every minute" to undermine him, as you urged other Labour members to do, seems a very odd priority. It means that you've basically decided that it's better to wait until he's gone to do anything that actively builds up your party than it is to devote at least some effort to doing so now. And since your MPs have already proved that he can't be easily forced out (or, at least, that they are incapable of managing it), that seems a very dangerous game if you want to make any progress at all in the 2020 election. I would rather the party died altogether than returned to what it was when I left in 2003. |
|
|
|
Post by janwhitby on Feb 25, 2017 1:25:05 GMT
A month back Corbyn's team leaked to the media that they were going to present Corbyn more as a Trump like figure. Corbyn was elected twice as leader because of the courage of his convictions.
But on BREXIT & Nuclear, Corbyn has backpeddled & we all know what he really thinks about both of this subjects. If Corbyns success (in the attainment of leadership) was through his convictions, a lightbulb should go on somewhere in his team about how not sticking to his beliefs may be linked to failure.
In Copeland Corbyn could have been more like trunp, pro workers and industry and anti nuclear by emulating Trump's pledge to reopen the coal mines and deliver clean coal. Its not fracking, so people will not be scared of it but it can help contribute towards prosperity again.
Bringing back traditional Labour industries will be helpful to the Labour vote in the same way letting in all the people from other countries was in London. As for Snell, he was a dreadful character who will do damage to the party in the long run.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2017 9:57:57 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by AdminSTB on Feb 25, 2017 10:02:09 GMT
Then it must have all been thanks to Corbyn, Abbott and McDonnell that Labour gained Dudley West in 1994 with a 29% swing. |
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on Feb 25, 2017 11:43:18 GMT
Whilst I have not been a Labour Party member for 20 years - having not renewed my membership in 1997 because of Blair - I have generally supported their candidates at local elections.I will now cease to do that whilst Corbyn remains Leader and will switch my vote to the Greens in May . I live in a Labour v Green ward with no other party in serious contention. I am now hoping that Labour loses control of all its County Councils in May and that such a calamity will finally oblige the Union Leaders to intervene.
|
|
Rural Radical
Labour
Now living in a Labour held ward at Borough level for the first time in many years
Posts: 1,627
|
Post by Rural Radical on Feb 25, 2017 11:44:16 GMT
Then it must have all been thanks to Corbyn, Abbott and McDonnell that Labour gained Dudley West in 1994 with a 29% swing. Hmmmmmm. I would love to say that I am surprised by that tweet, but I'm not |
|
