MPs quitting Labour & Conservative parties discussion thread

Berserker

markodaly wrote: »

Blaming is an easy game. One can blame Thatcher or Blair or whoever all you want, but it won't get Corbyn into power.

He would fit in very well in the hard left over here. Shoe in for the likes of SF/AAA/PBP. Lots of sound bites blaming everyone for everything, votes of no confidence at every opportunity to make yourself look relevant but he's got no alternative when push comes to shove.

Leroy42

Hasn't she a;ready apologised for the mistake?

Joe_ Public

Cryptopagan wrote: »

No, she said "it's not just about being black or a funny tinge [stumbles over her words] different, you know...from the BME community"

How can that be interpreted as anything other than a reference to people of colour?

Even Ash Sarkar, whom Smith was addressing, acknowledged the context I referred to in a Guardian article but continued to attack Smith anyway.

It is clear that Smith realises instantly she has walked into a minefield and she’s stumbling there. If you watch the broadcast, it’s 99% clear she is trying to make a reference to Sarkar’s white relative and it immediately goes wrong. To think she would look at an Asian person on a panel and refer to her as “funny tinged” is absurd and I’m certain didn’t happen.

Cryptopagan

Aegir wrote: »

Not that he was a prank, but the fact he only just managed to scrape a nomination and pretty much did so to make up the numbers and then went on to win by a landslide is down to a social media campaign where for £3 students could join the labour party and stick it to the man.

That's nonsense. His win was overwhelming among full members also.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-won-a-landslide-with-full-labour-party-members-not-just-3-supporters-10498221.html

Cryptopagan

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Even Ash Sarkar, whom Smith was addressing, acknowledged the context I referred to in a Guardian article but continued to attack Smith anyway.

It is clear that Smith realises instantly she has walked into a minefield and she’s stumbling there. If you watch the broadcast, it’s 99% clear she is trying to make a reference to Sarkar’s white relative and it immediately goes wrong. To think she would look at an Asian person on a panel and refer to her as “funny tinged” is absurd and I’m certain didn’t happen.

She said "black or a funny tinge", stumbled over her words, next tried "a different", before settling on "from the BME community"

She was talking about people from the BME community who are not "black", and she was trying to find a term for them, and her first attempt was "a funny tinge".

Cryptopagan

Cryptopagan wrote: »

That's nonsense. His win was overwhelming among full members also.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-won-a-landslide-with-full-labour-party-members-not-just-3-supporters-10498221.html

full members that have to pay a massive £4.30 per month?

Cryptopagan

Aegir wrote: »

full members that have to pay a massive £4.30 per month?

You said it was only voters who were not full members (those that registered as supporters for a one off £3 payment) who gave Corbyn his win, which, as evidenced at the link provided, is nonsense.

Perhaps you think members of a different party should elect the Labour leader, some party where membership costs more? Well not the Tories anyhow, they only pay £25 a year. The SNP? DUP maybe?

Harry Palmr

quokula wrote: »

Since Corbyn became leader, their membership has grown to become the largest party in Europe and at the only general election they fought they achieved their biggest swing in vote share since World War 2.

That's a pretty strange definition of shrinking their base.

None of which counts for anything in practical politics. A lot of uni students signed up thanks to Momentum (Corbyns own cheerleading wing) but does anyone imagine they they are doing much to boost Labours chances at the next election as he goes directly against what they want - namely a second referendum and to remain.

Joe_ Public

Cryptopagan wrote: »

She said "black or a funny tinge", stumbled over her words, next tried "a different", before settling on "from the BME community"

She was talking about people from the BME community who are not "black", and she was trying to find a term for them, and her first attempt was "a funny tinge".

Ok, we’ll have to disagree. The context for me - the guest having described her relative as “of a pinkish colour - is very important here. Of course, i can’t read smiths mind but that was what i believe she was trying to refer to and horribly tripped herself up.

Rjd2

Joe_ Public wrote: »

There’s a real sh!tty discussion taking place on politics live on bbc right now, concerning Angela Smith and her use of the phrase “a funny tinge” in a topic about race on yesterday’s show. It’s depressing that having missed the significance of it during the live screening, the bbc somehow manages to get it grievously wrong on their second go at it today.

While what Smith said was clumsy and unfortunate, those watching clearly understood she wasn’t referring to any people of colour but to someone - actually white - another guest had referred to as “pink faced”. To discuss it without this crucial context is shockingly lax from the bbc.

I’ve no cause with Smith or her colleagues but have sympathy with her in this instance. If this is best bbc can do, no wonder political discourse is in such a shocking state on these islands.

Smith is an average politician, and I don't really want to waste time saying anything positive about her, but I agree with the above. She was clumsy and she had to say sorry which she did quickly, that should have been that.

Cryptopagan

Cryptopagan wrote: »

You said it was only voters who were not full members (those that registered as supporters for a one off £3 payment) who gave Corbyn his win, which, as evidenced at the link provided, is nonsense.

Perhaps you think members of a different party should elect the Labour leader, some party where membership costs more? Well not the Tories anyhow, they only pay £25 a year. The SNP? DUP maybe?

the conservative leader is elected by sitting MPs.

quokula

Harry Palmr wrote: »

None of which counts for anything in practical politics. A lot of uni students signed up thanks to Momentum (Corbyns own cheerleading wing) but does anyone imagine they they are doing much to boost Labours chances at the next election as he goes directly against what they want - namely a second referendum and to remain.

You seem to have missed the second half of that sentence which pointed out that in their only true electoral test they gained a swing in vote share that's unprecedented in the modern era.

And that was in an election they were projected to lose 100+ seats in. They're currently projected to come out pretty much neck and neck with the Tories in another election and there's no reason to think they won't outperform those projections either, Labour make huge gains once election coverage laws kick in and the media are forced to cover their policies and not just endless unsubstantiated smears.

Leroy42

quokula wrote: »

You seem to have missed the second half of that sentence which pointed out that in their only true electoral test they gained a swing in vote share that's unprecedented in the modern era.

And that was in an election they were projected to lose 100+ seats in. They're currently projected to come out pretty much neck and neck with the Tories in another election and there's no reason to think they won't outperform those projections either, Labour make huge gains once election coverage laws kick in and the media are forced to cover their policies and not just endless unsubstantiated smears.

But, is there a reason to think they will outperform the polls either?

Clearly last time TM had a nightmare campaign and Corbyn was finally able to talk directly to the electorate. There was a huge Corbyn surge.

Can you really expect that to happen again? And if on what basis? For many at the last GE it was the first time they actually paid attention to Corbyn, but to consider another bounce you have to think that people have simply switched off again. IMO that is quite a stretch.

Cryptopagan

Aegir wrote: »

the conservative leader is elected by sitting MPs.

Well, that's a bit of a non sequitur, but you are wrong about this too. Two Conservative leadership candidates are nominated by the parliamentary party, and put before the party membership, who then vote for the leader. May was elected without the poll of party members, however, as the only other challenger, Andrea Leadsom, withdrew.

MrMusician18

Aegir wrote: »

the conservative leader is elected by sitting MPs.

You're wrong there. The parliamentary party picks the final two and then they go to a membership election.

The exception is when there's only one entry. Then the leader is proclaimed winner by default

Cryptopagan

Cryptopagan wrote: »

Well, that's a bit of a non sequitur, but you are wrong about this too. Two Conservative leadership candidates are nominated by the parliamentary party, and put before the party membership, who then vote for the leader. May was elected without the poll of party members, however, as the only other challenger, Andrea Leadsom, withdrew.

fair enough, it is a rabbit hole though.

If Labour hadn't miraculously tripled their membership in the lead up to the campaign, Jeremy Corbyn would not be leader.

Franz Von Peppercorn

markodaly wrote: »

I was alive in the 70's and there is no way that the 70's were better than any of those years you mention. None.what.so.ever.

Need I remind you that the IMF had to give the UK a loan to tie them over.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1976_IMF_Crisis

That decade had its own term called 'The British Disease'.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_British_disease

The thing about the 1970s was the malaise that set in. There was unprecedented government spending since the war and with that huge government inefficiencies and waste had built up that were never tackled or reformed.

People knew that the party had come to an end but didn't know how to fix a broken system. Coal mines that had run dry still had to keep staff is one example of this waste. If the government of the day wanted to close a dry mine, there would be strikes in an attempt to bring down the government of the day.

Unions ran the country, make no bones about that. Cabinet papers were sent to the powerful TUC for approval by the late 1970's and James Callaghan is on record saying.


https://www.zum.de/whkmla/sp/0809/kyungmook/kkmlog.html

People have very very selective memories or indeed revise history to such an extent they leave out who chunk of it to suit a political narrative.

Well I wasn't there but the most important thing for workers would be wage growth and well, it was better than the 2010s and the 2000s.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/jan/31/real-wages-falling-longest-period-ons-record

Real wages have been falling consistently since 2010, the longest period for 50 years, according to the Office for National Statistics, adding that low productivity growth seems to be pushing wages down.

Real wage growth averaged 2.9% in the 1970s and 1980s, 1.5% in the 1990s, 1.2% in 2000s, but has fallen to minus 2.2% since the first quarter of 2010, the ONS figures showed.

The article is from 2014. Thought that might bother you so I did a bit more research and

https://fullfact.org/economy/how-have-wages-changed/

Peaking at the stats there the ten years from 2008 to 2018 see real wages drop from £560 to £520. In comparison from 1970 2.9% compounded would see growth of about 33% per decade. That £560 would have been £745 and we'd all be happy with capitalism.

Folkstonian

It really demonstrates how desperately worried and keen to discredit the newly formed independent group the far leftists of Corbyn’s labour are that they are going all out to make an equivalence between an isolated slip of the tongue yesterday and several years of widespread, institutional, targeted antisemitic abuse and bullying.

I’m glad they are worried, I think they should be too. I hope the independents thrive.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Folkstonian wrote: »

It really demonstrates how desperately worried and keen to discredit the newly formed independent group the far leftists of Corbyn’s labour are that they are going all out to make an equivalence between an isolated slip of the tongue yesterday and several years of widespread, institutional, targeted antisemitic abuse and bullying.

I’m glad they are worried, I think they should be too. I hope the independents thrive.

I think if we spent the same amount of time investigating the racism of the conservatives over the years as we have the anti semitism of a Labour Party whose last leader was Jewish we would find vastly more transgressions.

Like the piccananies comment of one of the Tory Brexiteers, a gaff that would destroy the political career of most politicians in most countries.

ancapailldorcha

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

I think if we spent the same amount of time investigating the racism of the conservatives over the years as we have the anti semitism of a Labour Party whose last leader was Jewish we would find vastly more transgressions.

Like the piccananies comment of one of the Tory Brexiteers, a gaff that would destroy the political career of most politicians in most countries.

The difference is that the Labour party is supposed to champion the downtrodden while the Tories are supposed to ensure that they remain downtrodden.

Folkstonian

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

I think if we spent the same amount of time investigating the racism of the conservatives over the years as we have the anti semitism of a Labour Party whose last leader was Jewish we would find vastly more transgressions.

Like the piccananies comment of one of the Tory Brexiteers, a gaff that would destroy the political career of most politicians in most countries.

This manner of response reminds me of the Harry and Paul Question Time sketch;

‘But the tories, the tories the tories. The tories.’

It’s no good trying to deflect and distract from the issue. I’m sure there are some racists in the Conservative party, but I don’t think they are hunting in packs on social media to bully people speaking up about bigotry from the party ranks. We don’t see many black Tory MPs talking about the abuse they cop from fellow conservatives for speaking up about racism. When we do, if the media are still ignoring it, I’ll concede that you have a point.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Folkstonian wrote: »

This manner of response reminds me of the Harry and Paul Question Time sketch;

‘But the tories, the tories the tories. The tories.’

It’s no good trying to deflect and distract from the issue. I’m sure there are some racists in the Conservative party, but I don’t think they are hunting in packs on social media to bully people speaking up about bigotry from the party ranks. We don’t see many black Tory MPs talking about the abuse they cop from fellow conservatives for speaking up about racism. When we do, if the media are still ignoring it, I’ll concede that you have a point.

Well there is Diane Abbot, Corbyn's right hand woman.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/18/diane-abbott-calls-for-twitter-to-clamp-down-on-hate-speech

Folkstonian

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Well there is Diane Abbot, Corbyn's right hand woman.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/18/diane-abbott-calls-for-twitter-to-clamp-down-on-hate-speech

I must have missed the day she joined the Conservative party, and all the stacks of evidence that the abuse she copped came from Tory members and councillors. I was probably out foraging for bits of leftover offal!

Franz Von Peppercorn

Folkstonian wrote: »

I must have missed the day she joined the Conservative party, and all the stacks of evidence that the abuse she copped came from Tory members and councillors. I was probably out foraging for bits of leftover offal!

I know you wanted to restrict the criterion, but I didn't let you. Diane gets 40% of the abuse on twitter for female MPs, she's from a visible and historically oppressed minority, and she is clearly getting attacked by right wingers, many of them no doubt conservatives.

prawnsambo

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Well I wasn't there but the most important thing for workers would be wage growth and well, it was better than the 2010s and the 2000s.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/jan/31/real-wages-falling-longest-period-ons-record

The article is from 2014. Thought that might bother you so I did a bit more research and

https://fullfact.org/economy/how-have-wages-changed/

Peaking at the stats there the ten years from 2008 to 2018 see real wages drop from £560 to £520. In comparison from 1970 2.9% compounded would see growth of about 33% per decade. That £560 would have been £745 and we'd all be happy with capitalism.

You can't look at real wages and not take unemployment into account. And that rose drastically during the late 1970s into the late 1980s.

Havockk

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The difference is that the Labour party is supposed to champion the downtrodden while the Tories are supposed to ensure that they remain downtrodden.

Except that in the rush to embrace neo-liberalism Blair abandoned the very people that Labour traditionally stood up for. Mark Blyth pointed this out very early after the vote in 2016.

Harry Palmr

Ruth George really helping the split.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47296591

Ruth George sorry for claiming ex-Labour MPs may have Israeli backing

A Labour MP has apologised for claiming a group of ex-colleagues who quit the party in protest over anti-Semitism may be backed by the Israeli government.

Ruth George, the MP for High Peak, suggested it was "possible" the seven MPs who jumped ship on Monday were being supported by the state of Israel.

prawnsambo

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Ruth George really helping the split.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47296591

This is the dog-whistle stuff that's just bubbling along nicely there.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

I know you wanted to restrict the criterion, but I didn't let you. Diane gets 40% of the abuse on twitter for female MPs, she's from a visible and historically oppressed minority, and she is clearly getting attacked by right wingers, many of them no doubt conservatives.

40% of abuse on twitter for female MPs how does anyone come up with a stat like that? does some sit there counting the number of abusive posts each female MP gets?

so by that logic, any abuse Kemi Badenoch gets on Twitter must come from Labour supporters?

This is another rabbit hole, all parties are making big strides in their diversity https://www.bbc.com/news/election-2017-40232272

incidentally, when the UK leaves the EU, the number of BME MEPs will halve in number, from 12 to 6, which when you consider the EU covers areas of the Caribbean and Indian Ocean, is a pretty shocking statistic.

prawnsambo

Aegir wrote: »

40% of abuse on twitter for female MPs how does anyone come up with a stat like that? does some sit there counting the number of abusive posts each female MP gets?

It's not that hard. You can use the search facility on Twitter to look for certain keywords in tweets to a particular handle. I could do it for you now, but I'd have to charge you.