2017 GE 1

[Dr Gloom 19845]

7 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

Disagree on the last bit. Now is the time to dig our heels in and ensure that when people just cannot bear the Tories any more, there is an opposition that can actually improve people's lives while forging lasting change - one that isn't going to be compromised by the need to appeal to short termism. I was wavering a bit in the run up to the election until the manifesto came out, and now I'm firmly back in the 'this needs to happen' camp.

 

We needed something that stood apart from the Tories, and we've got it. If the Tories landslide us I'll concede that the time still isn't right, but it's no longer looking so likely that they will. Which means there is quite possibly sufficient appetite for Corbyn's policies, and the need for change. Corbyn won't win, but if he's able to do well enough to paralyse the government (minority rule) then he'll have been a success IMO.

 

his policies are good. i agree on the manifesto, but if he were able to bring himself to combine the solid socialist policies in it with feigning a bit of patriotism/strength on defence instead of coming across like a complete pacifist, he's stand a better chance. 

 

though tbf, i just skim read some of the top lines of the speech and it sounded much better than what was leaked. 

[Park Life 70]

Gloom not sure if he can get on the train, checks and double checks the destination.

 

It's a good manifesto and our foreign policy is partly to blame (not wholly).

 

I hear what you're saying with reg to speaking to the electorate. What better time eh? He comes across as too principled for his own good.

[Park Life 70]

 

[Dr Gloom 19845]

6 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

This is the Mail's article on it:

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4544384/Corbyn-faces-backlash-bid-exploit-Manchester-bomb.html

 

Check the comments - the most upvoted are in agreement with Corbyn. As I said, he's speaking across the aisle here.

 

I mean the Mail is clearly aware of this as well given that the article is peppered with every conceivable factoid about things Corbyn has said in the past that could make him look weak on terrorism.

 

who could have predicted the mail would take that line? 

[Dr Gloom 19845]

4 minutes ago, Park Life said:

Gloom not sure if he can get on the train, checks and double checks the destination.

 

It's a good manifesto and our foreign policy is partly to blame (not wholly).

 

I hear what you're saying with reg to speaking to the electorate. What better time eh? He comes across as too principled for his own good.

 

if this manifesto was in the arms of a competent and pragmatic leader, the tories would be genuinely worried. 

[Renton 17841]

5 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

 

if this manifesto was in the arms of a competent and pragmatic leader, the tories would be genuinely worried. 

 

This. Hope I'm wrong but with May as opposition it feels like a huge wasted opportunity. An opportunity we can't afford to miss. 

[Rayvin 4964]

6 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

 

who could have predicted the mail would take that line? 

 

Well, everyone - but the point is their own readers, on balance, are agreeing with Corbyn. If the comment section is anything to go by.

 

This isn't surprising, because actually, people like UKIP and Trump have called for non-intervention too. It is accepted on both sides that our roles in these conflicts come with consequences. The only side that doesn't want to hear it (buzzword alert) are the Neoliberals. And the Neocons, but that's a slightly different issue.

 

So actually, the only people Corbyn's speed with offend are people who believe we have a role as 'world police' to play, and those who are still Imperials. Every fucker else will agree with him.

[Rayvin 4964]

Just now, Renton said:

 

This. Hope I'm wrong but with May as opposition it feels like a huge wasted opportunity. An opportunity we can't afford to miss. 

 

We never would have gotten this manifesto without Corbyn. For all his faults, he was necessary to get us here.

[Park Life 70]

The polls will close further. Magic and portents will be seen across the land. Karma begins to squeeze as Saturn returns. The old songs were heard down a forgotten alley.

[Meenzer 14085]

5 minutes ago, Park Life said:

The polls will close further. Magic and portents will be seen across the land. Karma begins to squeeze as Saturn returns. The old songs were heard down a forgotten alley.

 

Fuck me, someone's been listening to the Mountain Goats

 

[Kid Dynamite 5941]

39 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

This. Hope I'm wrong but with May as opposition it feels like a huge wasted opportunity. An opportunity we can't afford to miss. 

 

So you agree with the manifesto? Have you claimed 'YOUR' Labour Party back? 

[Renton 17841]

1 hour ago, Rayvin said:

 

We never would have gotten this manifesto without Corbyn. For all his faults, he was necessary to get us here.

 

Well as you know that's not an opinion I share, I think we would have got a progressive manifesto with a different leader. Maybe not as left wing as you'd like, but then I'm not convinced the country can actually afford free further education either.

 

It always goes back to the point though, it's pointless having a good manifesto if you're unelectable. Corbyn is reaping the benefits of an equally pathetic party leader who has been criminally over confident and treated her core voters with contempt. Then made to look even weaker by being the first leader to flip flop over a manifesto. A half decent leader of the opposition would be land sliding over her now, not just desperate to try and reach parity.

 

That said, he has surprised me as doing well under pressure. Trouble is, there are some truly horrific interviews in his recent past. And then there's Abbot. 

Edited May 26, 2017 by Renton

[NJS 3986]

1 hour ago, Renton said:

 

This. Hope I'm wrong but with May as opposition it feels like a huge wasted opportunity. An opportunity we can't afford to miss. 

If Smith had won, it would have been another Miliband austerity lite manifesto. 

[NJS 3986]

20 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

Well as you know that's not an opinion I share, I think we would have got a progressive manifesto with a different leader. Maybe not as left wing as you'd like, but then I'm not convinced the country can actually afford free further education either.

 

It always goes back to the point though, it's pointless having a good manifesto if you're unelectable. Corbyn is reaping the benefits of an equally pathetic party leader who has been criminally over confident and treated her core voters with contempt. Then made to look even weaker by being the first leader to flip flop over a manifesto. A half decent leader of the opposition would be land sliding over her now, not just desperate to try and reach parity.

 

That said, he has surprised me as doing well under pressure. Trouble is, there are some truly horrific interviews in his recent past. And then there's Abbot. 

Every time I see the word "progressive" I think of either Clinton, Blair or Nick fucking Clegg. 

 

It's a toxic piece of shite which implies anything but progress for the majority. 

Edited May 26, 2017 by NJS

[Renton 17841]

7 minutes ago, NJS said:

Every time I see the word "progressive" I think of either Clinton, Blair or Nick fucking Clegg. 

 

It's a toxic piece of shite which implies anything but progress for the majority. 

 

 

Two of those have never been in power , unless you mean Bill Clinton who I'd rate as one of the better presidents personally. We've done this to death though. Yes, you think new Labour were the same as the Tories, despite dozens of policies and empirical evidence to suggest otherwise. And despite your own personal affluence, you'd rather have an idealist in permanent opposition than a popular alternative.

[NJS 3986]

12 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

 

Two of those have never been in power , unless you mean Bill Clinton who I'd rate as one of the better presidents personally. We've done this to death though. Yes, you think new Labour were the same as the Tories, despite dozens of policies and empirical evidence to suggest otherwise. And despite your own personal affluence, you'd rather have an idealist in permanent opposition than a popular alternative.

I did mean Bill - he and his wife started the speak where you claim to be left leaning but are actually centrist at best because they're "ashamed" to call themselves left wing or heaven forbid use the "S" word - as admitted by Blair. 

 

Dozens of policies? Really? 

 

If the polls are broadly right and Corbyn actually does better than Miliband you'll put it down to May being shit and won't consider the possibility that people want something else. You'll also forget that the first big jump in those polls was when the manifesto was published not when May fucked up hers. 

[Rayvin 4964]

3 minutes ago, NJS said:

 

 

If the polls are broadly right and Corbyn actually does better than Miliband you'll put it down to May being shit and won't consider the possibility that people want something else. You'll also forget that the first big jump in those polls was when the manifesto was published not when May fucked up hers. 

 

That's actually a worry I have. May fucking up and everyone attributing any swing to Corbyn to her. The only reason that matters is sustainability of the narrative, but I'd rather have 'the people wanted change' as the reason when the alternative is 'the Tories are just unbelievably shit'.

[Renton 17841]

2 minutes ago, NJS said:

I did mean Bill - he and his wife started the speak where you claim to be left leaning but are actually centrist at best because they're "ashamed" to call themselves left wing or heaven forbid use the "S" word - as admitted by Blair. 

 

Dozens of policies? Really? 

 

If the polls are broadly right and Corbyn actually does better than Miliband you'll put it down to May being shit and won't consider the possibility that people want something else. You'll also forget that the first big jump in those polls was when the manifesto was published not when May fucked up hers. 

May is undoubtedly weaker than Cameron. And the poll changes were fairly simultaneous for both events. Do you honestly think Corbyn is considered credible by the populace? But okay, if he even equals Miliband I'll admit I was wrong. I assume of he doesn't you'll admit you were wrong? 

[Dr Gloom 19845]

2 hours ago, Rayvin said:

 

Well, everyone - but the point is their own readers, on balance, are agreeing with Corbyn. If the comment section is anything to go by.

 

This isn't surprising, because actually, people like UKIP and Trump have called for non-intervention too. It is accepted on both sides that our roles in these conflicts come with consequences. The only side that doesn't want to hear it (buzzword alert) are the Neoliberals. And the Neocons, but that's a slightly different issue.

 

So actually, the only people Corbyn's speed with offend are people who believe we have a role as 'world police' to play, and those who are still Imperials. Every fucker else will agree with him.

 

i only scanned it but i didn't see any evidence of this

[Rayvin 4964]

1 minute ago, Dr Gloom said:

 

i only scanned it but i didn't see any evidence of this

 

Scanned what? The Mail?

 

The top rate comment reads:

 

But he's right, this is Bush and Blair's fault.

 

It present has 3600 upvotes and 700 downvotes

 

Second top:

 

I'm not a Corbyn lover but I think he is dead right

 

Upvote:  2536

Downvt: 800

 

There's plenty more...

[Dr Gloom 19845]

2 hours ago, Park Life said:

The polls will close further. Magic and portents will be seen across the land. Karma begins to squeeze as Saturn returns. The old songs were heard down a forgotten alley.

 

definitely been on the shroom tea

[NJS 3986]

10 minutes ago, Renton said:

May is undoubtedly weaker than Cameron. And the poll changes were fairly simultaneous for both events. Do you honestly think Corbyn is considered credible by the populace? But okay, if he even equals Miliband I'll admit I was wrong. I assume of he doesn't you'll admit you were wrong? 

We'll see I guess - I've consistently said I think he's a decent bloke but poor leader but he's impressed me in this campaign. 

 

If Labour loses which I still think they will, then yes, Corbyn's perceived weaknesses will be a factor and I'll say so. My hope now however is that a decent campaign on a decent manifesto won't lead to a Kendall-esque (or whoever) retreat to the centre after the defeat. 

[Dr Gloom 19845]

13 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

Scanned what? The Mail?

 

The top rate comment reads:

 

But he's right, this is Bush and Blair's fault.

 

It present has 3600 upvotes and 700 downvotes

 

Second top:

 

I'm not a Corbyn lover but I think he is dead right

 

Upvote:  2536

Downvt: 800

 

There's plenty more...

 

yes, i only saw the usual bile, calling corbyn a comrade or whatever.  i only scanned it though; interesting to hear that the tide might be turning even among readers of that rag

[Rayvin 4964]

9 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

 

yes, i only saw the usual bile, calling corbyn a comrade or whatever.  i only scanned it though; interesting to hear that the tide might be turning even among readers of that rag

 

I think it's just on this issue tbf. Kippers and the right wing loonies are no fans of foreign interventions, so Corbyn will be striking a chord with them. He should, fingers crossed, come out of this relatively unscathed.

 

EDIT - but make no mistake, there's no chance of the same people voting for him. It just dilutes the impact of criticism of this speech that more people are seen to agree with him.

Edited May 26, 2017 by Rayvin

[Happy Face 29]

I'm 4 pages back, but not following the "look at Sweden" logic as to why foreign policy doesn't incur blowback.

 

Sweden sent hundreds of troops to Afghanistan didn't they?

 

I'm not sure if that was in the truck maniacs head more than his refused residency. We might find out when the trial begins.