Jump to content

The Labour Leadership Campaign


Recommended Posts

 

If he or anyone else can demonstrate a way to deliver the "full package", then they'll get lots of votes.

 

No they won't, because the narrative for austerity is too prevalent a lie. Someone could come along and solve the whole fucking lot, and the right wing press would annihilate them.

 

That is the problem CT, the real answers are being drowned the fuck out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

No they won't, because the narrative for austerity is too prevalent a lie. Someone could come along and solve the whole fucking lot, and the right wing press would annihilate them.

 

That is the problem CT, the real answers are being drowned the fuck out.

Austerity won't be an issue in 2020. The budget is forecast to be in surplus before the election.

 

Therefore it's upto Labour or anyone else to put a package to the public showing what they can do differently with the same tax take.

 

Free tuition fees, nationalised industries etc etc. if Labour can seriously put a plan together that uses the same money but delivers a better return then great.

 

Too often though, the left concentrates on lots of exciting policies but never manages to explain how the full package will work / be paid for.

 

Instead they do what Milliband did and talk about mansion taxes, reducing fraud, going after bankers etc. Both sides do it to different degrees.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've covered this ground so many times with people who don't understand Labour's finance record that my head actually wants to explode every time we get into it now, but are you aware, that prior to the 2008 financial crash, caused by Tories on this side of the Atlantic and their equivalents on the other side, the deficit was 1) stable and 2) less than the last time a Tory government was in power, as a proportion of GDP.

 

So, in a nutshell, Labour were delivering exactly what you've just said that they should do to get ahead.

 

The point is, the media have perpetuated a lie for which we are all now suffering.

Edited by Rayvin
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

No they won't, because the narrative for austerity is too prevalent a lie. Someone could come along and solve the whole fucking lot, and the right wing press would annihilate them.

 

That is the problem CT, the real answers are being drowned the fuck out.

Also, don't kid yourself with this right wing press lark. The vast majority of the country didn't vote right wing.

 

A good left wing party / leader who could put together a workable good package would get votes back from Greens, Lib Dems, UKIP and Conservative.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, don't kid yourself with this right wing press lark. The vast majority of the country didn't vote right wing.

 

A good left wing party / leader who could put together a workable good package would get votes back from Greens, Lib Dems, UKIP and Conservative.

 

The country voted the way they were told to by the media. As proven by the unexpected gains that the Tories made following the shitstorm they created over the SNP. I agree that the country isn't right wing generally. What the country is, sadly, is fucking stupid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't see what being pushed or jumping would achieve? Surely that would just pave the way for a return to centre politics. A sort of admission that Corbyns viewpoint has failed.

 

As for principals, I'm sure lots of us would agree with most of his patter, but the problem is delivering a lot of those things whilst while still managing the economy successfully.

 

If he or anyone else can demonstrate a way to deliver the "full package", then they'll get lots of votes.

You're missing the point if you think the tories won the election from the centre. You're also missing the point if you think his dafter opinions will make it into any manifesto. He's a catalyst for change, not a policy wonk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice boost for everyone else but Kendall with David Milliband backing her - just shows it was a good job he didn't win 5 years. I know CT will say he would have won but if he backs Kendal with what that implies about his position then what would have been the point?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Off to see Corbyn tonight in town, still no idea which way I'm going to be voting to be honest.

 

There's no way Corbyn will win in 2020, however I wouldn't be adverse to him taking charge for a couple of years to challenge a lot of the one-sided rhetoric in the media, before parachuting someone a lot more electable in such as David Miliband or Dan Jarvis. The way he's portrayed in the media is his biggest problem, as someone earlier in the thread mentioned the majority of the public support nationalisation of key industries, but such a proposal by Mr Corbyn is being portrayed as 'extreme' and 'militant' when it's anything but.

 

The fact he seems to be eurosceptic anarl is a massive plus in my eyes, however he seems a bit 'liberal lefty' for my liking socially.

 

Cooper is the other person that's impressed me a lot, and tonight's going to decide whether her or Corbyn get my 1st preference.

 

I am slightly worried by the amount of people that seem to be happy to posture from the sides with a 'rather principles than power' stance, which is all very well, but you can't really do a good job of protecting the most vulnerable in society while sat on the opposition benches.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that a lot of people are saying that Corbyn as leader for a couple of years could bring the party back to the left but there's also a real chance that amid plunging opinion polls it could be a disaster that really confines left-wing politics to the past with the next leader wanting to totally distance themselves from Corbyn's reign.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that a lot of people are saying that Corbyn as leader for a couple of years could bring the party back to the left but there's also a real chance that amid plunging opinion polls it could be a disaster that really confines left-wing politics to the past with the next leader wanting to totally distance themselves from Corbyn's reign.

 

Really? Thing is, some people have left wing views. Enough people to warrant actually getting Corbyn into power in the first place. The same people who vote him in are going to hold the same views in two years time, with or without Corbyn. The next leader will still have to appeal to those same people.

 

I don't see how it could be any worse than Labour and the Tories squabbling over the centre ground for no other reason than wanting to be in power. That very phenomenon is why so many people are totally disillusioned with politics.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Really? Thing is, some people have left wing views. Enough people to warrant actually getting Corbyn into power in the first place. The same people who vote him in are going to hold the same views in two years time, with or without Corbyn. The next leader will still have to appeal to those same people.

 

I don't see how it could be any worse than Labour and the Tories squabbling over the centre ground for no other reason than wanting to be in power. That very phenomenon is why so many people are totally disillusioned with politics.

 

Yeah but I'm not talking just about the Labour election but in a general election. Corbyn is likely to get 300,000 votes, that is nothing on a national level. The Tories are selling something a lot of the public want. If you want to sell the public a left wing agenda then you're going to need an amazing salesman and Corbyn isn't it. His image to the general public is something of a joke. What you're going to do is have the public associate left wing politics with a shabbily dressed old man and that is only going to hinder the message.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yeah but I'm not talking just about the Labour election but in a general election. Corbyn is likely to get 300,000 votes, that is nothing on a national level. The Tories are selling something a lot of the public want. If you want to sell the public a left wing agenda then you're going to need an amazing salesman and Corbyn isn't it. His image to the general public is something of a joke. What you're going to do is have the public associate left wing politics with a shabbily dressed old man and that is only going to hinder the message.

 

I dunno, you have a lot of faith in politics if you think the individual matters more than the vested interests of mass media and their backers. The reality is that the media will feed the ignorant a crock of shit regardless of who is leading Labour.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The individual certainly isn't everything but without the individual you have nothing. And it isn't just the right-wing media that are against Corbyn, both the Mirror and The Guardian have thrown their weight behind other candidates.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The individual certainly isn't everything but without the individual you have nothing. And it isn't just the right-wing media that are against Corbyn, both the Mirror and The Guardian have thrown their weight behind other candidates.

 

Dunno about the Mirror but the Guardian are only acting out of fear - I've read most of their editorials. Either that or the feminist overtones at that newspaper which I always thought were there for the sole reason of causing click generating arguments BTL are actually now more important to them than left wing views (hence the backing for Cooper, a candidate who hasn't actually offered any policies for anyone to get behind).

 

I didn't mean Corbyn specifically either. I just meant that the right wing media shut out Labour. Not the Tories, not policies, but fear-mongering over the SNP and other crazed ramblings. I increasingly believe that Blair did a deal with the devil to win power (Murdoch) and that this deal has since expired. We won't see a Labour government again until the powers that be feel it serves their interests.

 

Democracy my arse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Or maybe Labour have been a shambles since Blair jumped on the money train? Despite what you may think of Blair's policies he was a more than competent leader. No one since him has appeared to be anything like it since. In Cameron the Tories had a very beatable leader but Labour haven't had anyone close to capable of matching him. Policy is only part of it, personality is just as important.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no doubt in the early 21st century United Kingdom you need to be more of a PR man than conviction politician to be PM.I can live with that, but it looks like all the best policy presenters Labour have think that austerity is ok. Tbh, I have a fair bit of respect for Burnham and Cooper, they've done good work on a range of issues. But they've seemingly been brainwashed by the media too. What do they aim to do if they somehow get into government? The way they are speaking its going to be trebles all round and a return to social reforms, an end to child poverty, a narrowing of the gap between rich and poor etc etc. All very laudable but they've all just voted in favour of austerity. Do they not see how fucking ridiculously hyporcriticle that stand is?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm yet to see your response to the deficit comment from yesterday, CT - especially given the comment of yours that I was replying to, I actually think a response would be interesting. I'm prepared to be wrong for what it's worth.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The point about Labour needing a slick media savvy leader is well made. If you don't just know of him, google Michael Foot to see what a principled and clever but shambolic and media unfriendly old man does for your election chances.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh you'll be wrong.

At best you might get some drivel about Labour's crash.

 

I think CT even secretly understands that the crash wasn't down to Labour, the Tories would have experienced the same situation had they been in power and Labour's perceived weakeness on the economy is part of a narrative the media have established and the public have bought.

 

The only labour leadership candidate seemingly prepared to challenge that narrative is Corbyn. No surprise thy so many with vested interests are saying he's unelectable. I would welcome him even if he is. It's time UK politics was shaken up. What's the point in two near identical main political parties. May as well vote green or ukip as things stand, depending on which end of the spectrum your views lie.

Edited by Dr Gloom
Link to post
Share on other sites

The point about Labour needing a slick media savvy leader is well made. If you don't just know of him, google Michael Foot to see what a principled and clever but shambolic and media unfriendly old man does for your election chances.

Wasn't that because of the divisions within the party after he was elected and the sdp breaking off and nicking votes? It's hard to imagine he lost the personality battle with Thatcher. And that was the era that saw Major elected too - hardly the most charasmatic leader. Perhaps image just wasn't as important back then. Maybe it isn't now but we're just led to believe it is? Perhaps a leader capable of energising apathetic voters could shake things up despite looking like a university professor approaching retirement

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what you fellows struggle with. Labour didn't cause the world wide crash but they had a hand in both with the way they took control away from the Bank of England and by their sheer mismanagement of deregulation.

 

To imply they had no hand in it is ludicrous.

 

Brown himself said.

 

Mr Brown he had come under "relentless pressure" from the City not to over-regulate.

"We know in retrospect what we missed. We set up the Financial Services Authority (FSA) believing that the problem would come from the failure of an individual institution," he said.

"So we created a monitoring system which was looking at individual institutions. That was the big mistake.

"We didn't understand how risk was spread across the system, we didn't understand the entanglements of different institutions with the other and we didn't understand even though we talked about it just how global things were, including a shadow banking system as well as a banking system.

 

They all admit they got it wrong, that's before we get into PFI's, selling off the gold and all the money they wasted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...