General Election December, 2019 (U.K.)

quokula

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

poor Jeremy is in denial. incredible he hasn't seen fit to quit immediately after this car-crash. worst outing in 84 years!
as much as i dislike Swinson and her preachy voice, at least she had the decency to quit.

Corbyn reminds me of that vid of Hitler in his bunker, drawing up 'plans' for the Eastern front as the Russians are knocking on his door.

delusional doesn't come close to describing this guy.

He announced he was standing down but in the meantime he needs to give them a chance to elect a new leader, which is the obvious and sensible thing to do.

Swinson had no choice because she lost her seat, party rules dictated she couldn’t stay on so a caretaker leader will take her place.

Inquitus

prawnsambo wrote: »

I don't agree. Yes, the membership should have a say, but the MPs have the most involvement with the leader and like it or not, a leader that hasn't got the full support of MPs is always going to be a lame duck. A bit like a football club getting the supporters to elect the new manager. Doesn't matter if the players can't work with him.

That's my exact point as to why the Tory system is better, a Leader needs to have good support among the Parliamentary Party to be effective, as well as letting the membership have a voice. The Tory system sends the 2 most popular candidates with the Parliamentary Party to the membership, it would work better for Labour if things worked the same way.

As you mention, membership of a Political Party do not necessarily align with the Labour Voters, membership generaly is reserved for the more radical supporters who espouse views to more extremes than the party's voters at large.

Duke of Url

It will be interesting now how the Tories go about politics with such a massive majority. They could actually transform England for the Better.

Lefty Bicek

MPFGLB wrote: »

Its not a credible rationale when the media lie and use fake news ??
Have you seen the hatchet job papers and BBC have done on Corbyn
The papers have done for years on the Eu and how they have worked up the immigration thing with never ending stories about the 'bad' immigrants

To say this is wheeling out the bad old media is totally ridiculous
They are bad in most ways one can be in UK

The poverty up north is a result of Tories governments and their policies so that is why it is incredible that people have bought the brexit message as a solution and that is driven by the media in UK..

It's undeniable that the Tories are no friends of working class communities of Britain's industrial wastelands, nor have ever been.

One way or another though, I do not believe it was a media presentation of Brexit as a solution that turned the tide here.

I believe that many of those communities are absolutely without hope, and as equally cynical about the Labour Party (1997 - ) and the EU (1973 - ) as they are about the Tories.

So its a lashing out at the system for many, many people. If that corresponded with a media narrative, well and good.

If it also lashed out at the farcical idiots who think that immigration is an obviously untrammeled good thing, and who called anyone with a vote who questioned that orthodoxy 'racist/xenophobe', then so be it.

And it was a real F*** YOU to the condescending clowns who told them they didn't really understand what they were doing the first time.

As an aside - I lived in the UK for a good number of years and know only too well about how the sh1tty, tacky elements of their media operates.

MPFGLB

Duke of Url wrote: »

It will be interesting now how the Tories go about politics with such a massive majority. They could actually transform England for the Better.

Have they ever ??

Bannasidhe

Chips Lovell wrote: »

The problem with giving membership such a prominent role in electing a party leader is that while Labour has less than half a million members it has (even now) more than 10 million voters. In this case the Labour membership elected someone who was appealing to them, but not to their electorate.

MPs, while they may be a small subset of the party membership, are directly accountable to the party's voters and may be more in tune with what voters want.

It's more than twice the membership of the Conservative Party yet they got to decide who is PM - from a carefully selection 'choice'.

Since this formula was adopted by the LP in 2015 I would imagine the parliamentary party had input - but then I suppose they never imagined the membership would chose the wildcard.


Every voter can join the LP should they wish and have a direct vote in who the leader is - if they can't be bothered why should they get to influence someone else who to pick?

sid waddell

Chips Lovell wrote: »

One other thing on Labour is the claim that Corbyn lost because he was vilified by the media. For his supporters, it's no doubt an appealing narrative, but it rests on shaky ground.

Number one, the papers that most-demonised Corbyn were those that were the least likely to be read by Labour supporters. Socialists don't read the Daily Mail.

Number two, you're giving the media far more credit than it deserves in terms of its ability to brainwash the public. In fact, in terms of brainwashing, all the evidence points to agency lying with the public themselves rather than the media. In other words, a lot of people seek out the messages they want to hear and if they don't find it in the traditional news media, they'll seek out alternative sources, such online outlets, social media etc.

It isn't about the amount of people that actually read those papers, it's their visibility - they're on every newsstand in the country, and how they frame wider debate. You can try to ignore them but but you cannot ignore their effect.

The brainwashing of the public has always been a key tenet of right-wing ideology. It isn't just in the news it reports and the way it reports it, it's the sneering disdain for intellectualism, for education in general, for "liberals", who are constantly vilified as "the enemy", the dismissal of expertise, the promotion of the values of selfish individualism and greed, the manufacturing of "enemies", the deeply and deliberately simplistic soundbyte messaging designed to evoke hostility to those "enemies", moronic "viral stories", moronic trash television etc. It's all a rich tapestry designed to exhaust and demoralise, so that right-politics is seen as inevitable and unavoidable.

Joe_ Public

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Hardly a shocker, and yet so many refuse to believe it could be true

https://twitter.com/OpiniumResearch/status/1205510937995812864

Of course nobody can deny the obvious. Only caveat I'd enter in that poll is it seems to me it's very difficult to divorce the leadership issue from the brexit issue. Doesn't one simply stem from the other? They're indivisible.

Duke of Url

MPFGLB wrote: »

Have they ever ??

I wouldn’t go comparing what happens next with historical events of the past.

Chips Lovell

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Every voter can join the LP should they wish and have a direct vote in who the leader is - if they can't be bothered why should they get to influence someone else who to pick?

Telling people who've stopped voting for your party that it's their own fault because they weren't bothered is unlikely to win them back to the fold.

Joe_ Public

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

It's undeniable that the Tories are no friends of working class communities of Britain's industrial wastelands, nor have ever been.

One way or another though, I do not believe it was a media presentation of Brexit as a solution that turned the tide here.

I believe that many of those communities are absolutely without hope, and as equally cynical about the Labour Party (1997 - ) and the EU (1973 - ) as they are about the Tories.

So its a lashing out at the system for many, many people. If that corresponded with a media narrative, well and good.

If it also lashed out at the farcical idiots who think that immigration is an obviously untrammeled good thing, and who called anyone with a vote who questioned that orthodoxy 'racist/xenophobe', then so be it.

And it was a real F*** YOU to the condescending clowns who told them they didn't really understand what they were doing the first time.

As an aside - I lived in the UK for a good number of years and know only too well about how the sh1tty, tacky elements of their media operates.

I would accept theres some truth in that. Heard it said by a couple of pundits that a frequent issue raised about corbyn in working class areas was the perception he is part of the metropolitan establishment. So, many of them voted for boris johnson instead! Perception is king when it comes to politics.

prawnsambo

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Every voter can join the LP should they wish and have a direct vote in who the leader is - if they can't be bothered why should they get to influence someone else who to pick?

I suppose that's how it worked in the USSR and currently China and North Korea, so maybe you are right. Everyone who votes should join the Labour party so that they can 'decide' who leads it.

Itssoeasy

Well in the cold light of day I think it's far to say that even in their wildest dreams the conservatives couldn't have dreamed this up. From reading this thread last night it seemed the betting and other methods were suffering maybe a conservative majority or a hung parliament.

I think what is also clear is that social media is great in some ways but given that you can block people or phrases which you don't like/agree with it means it is very easy for it to become an echo chamber and just because a hashtag is trending does not mean anything at all. I said it last night unless I've missed something about the UK election process it's still paper ballots going into a box and the election is still won and lost by people voting and not social media and hopefully it never will.

I think Jeremy Corbyn should go as soon as possible as given that while the election result suggests that boris Johnson won, he is still a disaster and the fact that a Jeremy Corbyn lead Labour Party went backwards is telling. The left complain about the ERG and their undue influence on the conservatives but it seem that group called momentum(who I'd never heard of until last night) and the ERG equivalent and for British politics I think I'd be good if groups within parties were a think of the past.

prawnsambo

Duke of Url wrote: »

I wouldn’t go comparing what happens next with historical events of the past.

It's kind of how projections are made. Not sure if there's another way that would give the same degree of accuracy.

Letwin_Larry

Duke of Url wrote: »

It will be interesting now how the Tories go about politics with such a massive majority. They could actually transform England for the Better.

if Boris takes them to a more centrist position, Lab will go the same way as the dodo imo.
the longer Corbyn hangs in there and dithers, the better for Boris. traditional Lab voters/areas who voted Tory through gritted teeth will now feel totally justified in doing so.

sid waddell

MPFGLB wrote: »

You missed the point completely

To blame/defame or knock Corbyn and Swinson characters and blame their defeat on their characters (which alot are doing on here ) is rich when Boris Johnson has proved to be a thoroughly more reprehensible character with sexist, racist remarks and many lies

This is a point everyone is ignoring while knocking Corbyn and Swinson and blaming them


Comparing Corbyn to Hitler you will find is defamation

There's always one set of rules, ie. no rules, for the crypto-fascist charlatan who has created a fantasy world where facts don't matter, and another set of rules entirely for those who occupy a fact based reality and oppose their lunacy.

It comes down to the difference in principles and morals between the crypto-fascist right and anybody to the left of them.

The crypto-facists have none and are expected to have none, and yet people seem to love it, whereas they apply entirely different standards to others.

The fairytale of the Pied Piper of Hamelin explains Trump and Johnson and Bolsonaro as well as anything.

prawnsambo

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

if Boris takes them to a more centrist position, Lab will go the same way as the dodo imo.
the longer Corbyn hangs in there and dithers, the better for Boris. traditional Lab voters/areas who voted Tory through gritted teeth will now feel totally justified in doing so.

I do find it quite amusing that in the last days of his leadership, Corbyn still can't get off the fence.

Letwin_Larry

prawnsambo wrote: »

I do find it quite amusing that in the last days of his leadership, Corbyn still can't get off the fence.

he must really love those splinters.

Inquitus

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

if Boris takes them to a more centrist position, Lab will go the same way as the dodo imo.
the longer Corbyn hangs in there and dithers, the better for Boris. traditional Lab voters/areas who voted Tory through gritted teeth will now feel totally justified in doing so.

Corbyn has said he is going to go in January, given its now xmas, January is a fairly quick timetable for him to stay on, have a leadership election and move on. He could have resigned on the spot, but staying on for a few weeks isn't going to matter much in the grand scheme of things.

Duke of Url

prawnsambo wrote: »

It's kind of how projections are made. Not sure if there's another way that would give the same degree of accuracy.

Projections are made based on historical data?

What the tories will have to do internationally and domestically At the same time has never been done before.

All this with the option of passing everything themselves without needing support from outside the party.

This will be making history in unchartered waters

Berserker5

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

poor Jeremy is in denial. incredible he hasn't seen fit to quit immediately after this car-crash. worst outing in 84 years!
as much as i dislike Swinson and her preachy voice, at least she had the decency to quit.

Corbyn reminds me of that vid of Hitler in his bunker, drawing up 'plans' for the Eastern front as the Russians are knocking on his door.

delusional doesn't come close to describing this guy.

Corbyn is the sort of person that can't be told anything

Or admit he got anything wrong

sid waddell

Duke of Url wrote: »

I wouldn’t go comparing what happens next with historical events of the past.

If more people had compared current day politics to the past and taken lessons from it, maybe the US and the UK and Brazil and Russia and Poland and Hungary and Turkey and Israel and India wouldn't be in the parlous political situations they're now in?

The lesson of World War II was supposed to be "never again", not "nobody can mention anything that happened during the war until it has happened again".

Catastrophes start small because the problems that cause them are allowed to spread like cancer, and end up killing us. The more the cancer spreads, the more difficult it is to stop.

There's a series called The Death of Yugoslavia - people really should watch it in order to see how genocide can be the end result of seemingly trifling matters which are allowed to spiral out of control. And all this happened in Europe in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

prawnsambo

Duke of Url wrote: »

Projections are made based on historical data?

Is this news to you? Ever heard of a form book?

Chips Lovell

sid waddell wrote: »

The brainwashing of the public has always been a key tenet of right-wing ideology. It isn't just in the news it reports and the way it reports it, it's the sneering disdain for intellectualism, for education in general, for "liberals", who are constantly vilified as "the enemy", the dismissal of expertise..

So if I pointed to academic research suggesting that people tend to seek out information that confirms their biases rather than have their biases created by information they're exposed to, would you revise your opinions?;)

hotmail.com

MPFGLB wrote: »

You missed the point completely

To blame/defame or knock Corbyn and Swinson characters and blame their defeat on their characters (which alot are doing on here ) is rich when Boris Johnson has proved to be a thoroughly more reprehensible character with sexist, racist remarks and many lies

This is a point everyone is ignoring while knocking Corbyn and Swinson and blaming them


Comparing Corbyn to Hitler you will find is defamation

Again this isn't defamatory. This is just someone's opinion that you don't agree with.

sid waddell

Chips Lovell wrote: »

So if I pointed to academic research suggesting that people tend to seek out information that confirms their biases rather than have their biases created by information they're exposed to, would you revise your opinions?;)

We are all guilty of this to at least some degree - it's a natural human tendency to seek out security and reassurance - not just in a physical sense but in a mental sense - but I think it's inarguable that Trump and Johnson and Brexit etc. taken this to a frightening level, and it's entirely by design - they are driven by the Russian model of propaganda where an alternative reality is effectively created.

Duke of Url

prawnsambo wrote: »

Is this news to you? Ever heard of a form book?

Tell me where you find the data on how another country handled leaving the EU, delivered multiple trade deals and also delivered domestic policies at the same time.

I need this to perform a projection.

Please factor in everything listed above which needs to be taken into consideration and not separated.

You can start with the last 30 years

Thanks

Letwin_Larry

hotmail.com wrote: »

Again this isn't defamatory. This is just someone's opinion that you don't agree with.

but that's so typical of the Lab/corbyn election 'strategy' (and i'm being generous there). instead of confronting these alleged untruths, this so called defamation, these scandalous accusations they just cry foul like some petulant schoolgirl

"ooh why are you being so mean to me!"

the truth is they couldn't refute them.

thankfully the electorate saw through this nonsense.

MPFGLB

hotmail.com wrote: »

Again this isn't defamatory. This is just someone's opinion that you don't agree with.

A defamatory statement is a false statement of fact that exposes a person to hatred, ridicule, or contempt, causes him to be shunned, or injures him in his business or trade. ...

Comparing someone to Hitler is


BTW I think I have had enough politics to last for a few years so going to sign off

Its been enjoyable debating on here

I think those in the poor areas of England have missed an opportunity and will live to regret their choice

I hope I am wrong but dont think so

I think being against something has a stronger pull in modern democracy (where issues and problems are complex but people demand simple solutions) than being for something different and where simple sound bites make it through the noise even if they are untrue

Chips Lovell

sid waddell wrote: »

We are all guilty of this to at least some degree - it's a natural human tendency to seek out security and reassurance - not just in a physical sense but in a mental sense - but I think it's inarguable that Trump and Johnson and Brexit etc. taken this to a frightening level, and it's entirely by design - they are driven by the Russian model of propaganda where an alternative reality is effectively created.

I think you're seeing it as an entirely one way conversation. In my view, the genius of Trump and Johnson is recognising an alternatively reality that is already there and reaching out to it and reflecting it.