General Politics Thread

[doulikefish]

Just now, Jmothecat2 said:

 

I'm not going to pretend to be a Corbynista but he's the leader of my party and I desperately wanted them to win, fought for them to win and genuinely liked the manifesto, as I have said numerous times that manifesto is a mainstream Labour manifesto that enthused Labour activists from all areas of the party.

 

lol

[pandarilla]

I see that Owen Jones has retweeted that video then, without even a shred of guilt, started banging on about this new CCTV footage of Corbyn on the Virgin train and saying how Branson and Virgin were spreading lies.

He's a jumped up hypocrite.

A total careerist to boot. Spent the past two years prepping a soft left coup against Corbyn before his volte-face when Corbyn nearly won the election.

What's with the hate for Owen Jones?

Is this the Guardian columnist and general media guy we're talking about?

Anyone on the left who didn't doubt corbyn at some point is either lying or an absolute fanatic. I've always liked his policies but some of the leadership decisions were not good.

Yes he was getting trounced by the media but he didn't help himself sometimes. Things turned around when he hit the campaign trail but up to that point there was some legitimate issues.

Criticising Jones for being a careerist also seems a bit rich. Is that not literally his job? He's a left wing commentator. If he wasn't trying to build a career out of that I'd be concerned.

[Bully Wee Villa]

You're not really contributing much here. JMo comes under plenty of criticism for his views. As I'm basically Far Left, I agree with much of the criticism! However I don't really have much doubt that he's committed to the party, he's been in it far longer than me and works far harder for the party than I do (as I'm basically lazy and scared of talking to strangers in real life).

 

 

[RiG]

1 hour ago, pandarilla said:

What's with the hate for Owen Jones?

 

 

I don't know about any history with Jones and Corbyn but today he tweeted the following:

Fair enough, calling Virgin out on their bollocks which is fine by me. Yet despite chastising them for propagating a lie he seemed quite willing to retweet this which is paints a pretty distorted picture:

Given that the Scottish Government didn't, at the time, have the power to award public sector companies the rights to run the Scotrail franchise, it seems odd that Jones is propagating this drivel. It's especially ironic given that the party he supports did nothing to try and take steps to allow a public sector bid to run the railways in Scotland (at least) where I am sure such a bid would be welcomed rather than having to entertain bids from other countries.

[Baxter Parp]

Yes, but that would be UK Labour as opposed to Welsh Labour, wouldn't it? You're right, it's clear that Labour is in favour of nationalising the railways so I see no harm in Corbyn mentioning that in Scotland.

SNP had to fight to get the possibility of a public-run franchise and won that only last year. Labour were in power 13 years and did f**k all. For "momentum" to then create this xenophobic little video is ignorance and hypocrisy of a high order.

[Granny Danger]

Jmo is being Trump like in his recollection.

Next think he will be denying that he ever sang the praises of Tony Blair.

[Bully Wee Villa]

SNP had to fight to get the possibility of a public-run franchise and won that only last year. Labour were in power 13 years and did f**k all. For "momentum" to then create this xenophobic little video is ignorance and hypocrisy of a high order.

 

That was a capitalist Labour Party. Corbyn is taking them in a different direction. As evidenced by the fact that renationalising the railways was in the Manifesto. That would never have happened under Blair/Brown who fought the membership to abolish Clause IV.

 

[renton]

14 hours ago, pandarilla said:

 

 

 

 

What's with the hate for Owen Jones?

Is this the Guardian columnist and general media guy we're talking about?

Anyone on the left who didn't doubt corbyn at some point is either lying or an absolute fanatic. I've always liked his policies but some of the leadership decisions were not good.

Yes he was getting trounced by the media but he didn't help himself sometimes. Things turned around when he hit the campaign trail but up to that point there was some legitimate issues.

Criticising Jones for being a careerist also seems a bit rich. Is that not literally his job? He's a left wing commentator. If he wasn't trying to build a career out of that I'd be concerned.
 

 

 

With Jones, right now he seems to have had a damascene type moment with respect to Corbyn and now seems to be trying make up for his previous wobble of faith with renewed zealotry. It's unedifying to watch, particularly where his previous even handedness with respect to the SNP and it's goals is replaced by shrill cries of centrism, and silence when Corbyn is dragging is ass around SNP held seats instead of attacking the actual fucking Tories in Scotland. It gives the lie to Labour's priorities in Scotland: Unionism first, above all else, even winning.

[Jmothecat2]

With Jones, right now he seems to have had a damascene type moment with respect to Corbyn and now seems to be trying make up for his previous wobble of faith with renewed zealotry. It's unedifying to watch, particularly where his previous even handedness with respect to the SNP and it's goals is replaced by shrill cries of centrism, and silence when Corbyn is dragging is ass around SNP held seats instead of attacking the actual fucking Tories in Scotland. It gives the lie to Labour's priorities in Scotland: Unionism first, above all else, even winning.

Our target seats are SNP held ones, why wouldn't we campaign in the places we have the biggest chance of winning?

[renton]

23 minutes ago, Jmothecat2 said:

 

 

Our target seats are SNP held ones, why wouldn't we campaign in the places we have the biggest chance of winning?

 

Because, and I'd hope this is obvious, it doesn't help you win a fucking election. You could win every SNP seat going and the margin between Corbyn the PM and Corbyn the two time loser would be exactly the same. Win the 13 Tory seats, on the other hand.... of course you won't, because for Scottish Labour, the SNP will always be the real enemy, the only foe worth vanquishing, even at the cost of a plurality or majority at Westminster.

Edited August 24, 2017 by renton

[Bully Wee Villa]

They should be targeting Tory AND SNP seats. Not sure why they wouldn't.

 

However, there isn't much point in investing a fortune in constituencies where they have zero chance when the resources would be better allocated elsewhere.

 

[Jmothecat2]

Because, and I'd hope this is obvious, it doesn't help you win a fucking election. You could win every SNP seat going and the margin between Corbyn the PM and Corbyn the two time loser would be exactly the same. Win the 13 Tory seats, on the other hand.... of course you won't, because for Scottish Labour, the SNP will always be the real enemy, the only foe worth vanquishing, even at the cost of a plurality or majority at Westminster.

We are unlikely to win any of the Tory seats in Scotland. We should and do use our resources campaigning in Tory held target seats in the rest of the UK but I see no obvious gains to be had in Scotland from the Tories. There are about five or six SNP held seats where their majority over us is less than 1,000. Why wouldn't we try to campaign to win those seats more than trying, almost certainly in vain, to win Ayr (I'm not sure if this is the top Scottish Tory held seat but I'm pretty certain it's there or there about) where we are quite far behind?

[renton]

1 minute ago, Jmothecat2 said:

 

 

We are unlikely to win any of the Tory seats in Scotland. We should and do use our resources campaigning in Tory held target seats in the rest of the UK but I see no obvious gains to be had in Scotland from the Tories. There are about five or six SNP held seats where their majority over us is less than 1,000. Why wouldn't we try to campaign to win those seats more than trying, almost certainly in vain, to win Ayr (I'm not sure if this is the top Scottish Tory held seat but I'm pretty certain it's there or there about) where we are quite far behind?

 

Spending all your money to win one Tory seat in Scotland is worth far more to Corbyn than spending the money to combat the SNP in 6 seats - the former reduces the deficit between being the largest party and not by one, the latter by none. Surely the money wouldn't necessarily stay in Scotland either, to paraphrase our foreign secretary: A pound spent campaigning in Glasgow is not worth the same as a pound spent campaigning in the Home Counties.

The whole thing makes less sense when you figure that the SNP would support a Corbyn government, even in the face of his hard Brexit stance. You might think that having more people taking the Labour whip would be better than relying on outside support but then the actions of the PLP hardly endorse that view.  Finally, the bare dribble of votes from SNP to Labour in 2017 might mean that those low majorities are not so easy to overturn anyway. Most of the SNP vote went to Did Not Vote, followed by a substantial leakage to the Tories in the North East - very few seemed moved to jump on Comrade Corbyn's bandwagon. Paradoxically, that might mean the North east is a better place to campaign for Labour: A Unionist message clearly resonates there, where the Tories are about to carry the can for pissing them off mightily in Brexit negotiations. whereas the SNP could well bounce back in the central belt, if they come back with a decent campaign next time out (which still might end up on the other side of another Indy Ref).

The only reason for treading on a nominally friendly party (at least in terms of Westminster mathematics) is due to petty belligerence on the part of Labour. The same kind of throat cutting exercise that occurred in the South West in 2015, as Labour chewed through Liberal Democrat votes, but not in enough strength to stop the Tories coming through the middle. Which would clearly exacerbate any attempt by Corbyn, to close that gap.

[topcat(The most tip top)]

What if Corbyn genuinely thinks that defending the union from the SNP is important?

It's his party he can do what he wants

[Crossbill]

1 hour ago, Jmothecat2 said:

 

We are unlikely to win any of the Tory seats in Scotland. We should and do use our resources campaigning in Tory held target seats in the rest of the UK but I see no obvious gains to be had in Scotland from the Tories. There are about five or six SNP held seats where their majority over us is less than 1,000. Why wouldn't we try to campaign to win those seats more than trying, almost certainly in vain, to win Ayr (I'm not sure if this is the top Scottish Tory held seat but I'm pretty certain it's there or there about) where we are quite far behind?

 

 

My constituency, Aberdeen South was Labour from 1987 to 2015 with only a single break when it went Conservative from 1992-1997.  Why is this not a target seat for you?

[Jmothecat2]

Spending all your money to win one Tory seat in Scotland is worth far more to Corbyn than spending the money to combat the SNP in 6 seats - the former reduces the deficit between being the largest party and not by one, the latter by none. Surely the money wouldn't necessarily stay in Scotland either, to paraphrase our foreign secretary: A pound spent campaigning in Glasgow is not worth the same as a pound spent campaigning in the Home Counties.
The whole thing makes less sense when you figure that the SNP would support a Corbyn government, even in the face of his hard Brexit stance. You might think that having more people taking the Labour whip would be better than relying on outside support but then the actions of the PLP hardly endorse that view.  Finally, the bare dribble of votes from SNP to Labour in 2017 might mean that those low majorities are not so easy to overturn anyway. Most of the SNP vote went to Did Not Vote, followed by a substantial leakage to the Tories in the North East - very few seemed moved to jump on Comrade Corbyn's bandwagon. Paradoxically, that might mean the North east is a better place to campaign for Labour: A Unionist message clearly resonates there, where the Tories are about to carry the can for pissing them off mightily in Brexit negotiations. whereas the SNP could well bounce back in the central belt, if they come back with a decent campaign next time out (which still might end up on the other side of another Indy Ref).
The only reason for treading on a nominally friendly party (at least in terms of Westminster mathematics) is due to petty belligerence on the part of Labour. The same kind of throat cutting exercise that occurred in the South West in 2015, as Labour chewed through Liberal Democrat votes, but not in enough strength to stop the Tories coming through the middle. Which would clearly exacerbate any attempt by Corbyn, to close that gap.

Having more Labour MPs isn't something to be ignored. We are targeting plenty of Tory held seats, it just so happens that none of them are in Scotland. Why waste time and effort on seats we aren't going to win when we can spend time and effort on seats we can win? You seem to think we should have an attitude of 'oh, those seats are SNP held, good enough' rather than 'those seats we can take to increase the number of Labour MPs at Westminster, let's go get them.' And whilst it doesn't seem the most likely outcome Labour are still targeting a majority, not simply outnumbering the Tories. I'm absolutely not saying we should ignore all seats we don't have a chance in, there are and will be and should be local campaigns in every seat we stand in, but it's clear that the limited time the leader is going to spend campaigning in seats we don't hold they should be in the ones were he can make a difference and we aim to take next time. Priority number 1 is getting as many Labour MPs elected as possible.

[renton]

54 minutes ago, Jmothecat2 said:

 

 

Having more Labour MPs isn't something to be ignored. We are targeting plenty of Tory held seats, it just so happens that none of them are in Scotland. Why waste time and effort on seats we aren't going to win when we can spend time and effort on seats we can win? You seem to think we should have an attitude of 'oh, those seats are SNP held, good enough' rather than 'those seats we can take to increase the number of Labour MPs at Westminster, let's go get them.' And whilst it doesn't seem the most likely outcome Labour are still targeting a majority, not simply outnumbering the Tories. I'm absolutely not saying we should ignore all seats we don't have a chance in, there are and will be and should be local campaigns in every seat we stand in, but it's clear that the limited time the leader is going to spend campaigning in seats we don't hold they should be in the ones were he can make a difference and we aim to take next time. Priority number 1 is getting as many Labour MPs elected as possible.

 

Priority 1 should be having enough seats to form a government with your guy as PM. A subtly different proposition. If your party hadn't targeted the Lib Dems so hard in '15, the outcome of that election could've been quite different. That is something to be borne in mind. Those SNP seats your targeting, you mortally wound the SNP without taking the seat yourself, and due to the Indy/Unionist dimension ever present now in Scotland, there is always a chance of Ruthie Tank Commander's mob coming through the middle. Thus, rather than maximizing either the number of Labour MPs or even the number of MPs who'd support Corbyn as PM, your campaigning has actually added to the number of Tory MPs. This is a real proposition, and something to be mindful of - it's not a straight up Blue vs. Red engagement.

In all honesty, the fate of those SNP MPs at the moment lies more with Sturgeon than Corbyn. The majority of lost SNP votes, certainly in the central belt, were lost to apathy rather than the Labour party. I think if Sturgeon comes back after the summer with something approaching a radical manifesto for the next Holyrood term, and thread the needle on the timing of the next Indy ref, she'd re-energize a lot of the lost voters to perhaps come back. 

It's still mind boggling that Corbyn wouldn't spend his time up here camped out in Tory seats, if for nothing more than the PR stunt of parking tanks on Tory ground, two fingers up, we'll take you anytime anywhere kind of thing. They are the ones he needs to beat to be PM, after all.

Edited August 24, 2017 by renton

[doulikefish]

Someone should ask the snake charmer about how much the labour party loves spending a few hundred billion on nukes when cancelling out the tory austerity

[WhiteRoseKillie]

1 hour ago, Jmothecat2 said:

 

Having more Labour MPs isn't something to be ignored. We are targeting plenty of Tory held seats, it just so happens that none of them are in Scotland. Why waste time and effort on seats we aren't going to win when we can spend time and effort on seats we can win? You seem to think we should have an attitude of 'oh, those seats are SNP held, good enough' rather than 'those seats we can take to increase the number of Labour MPs at Westminster, let's go get them.' And whilst it doesn't seem the most likely outcome Labour are still targeting a majority, not simply outnumbering the Tories. I'm absolutely not saying we should ignore all seats we don't have a chance in, there are and will be and should be local campaigns in every seat we stand in, but it's clear that the limited time the leader is going to spend campaigning in seats we don't hold they should be in the ones were he can make a difference and we aim to take next time. Priority number 1 is getting as many Labour MPs elected as possible.

 

Glad to see you with this opinion, jmo, as if your predictive skills remain on a par with your doom-laden prophecies in June, I'll be dealing with a decent human being in Richard Burgon fairly soon, rather than the latest entitled buffoon to grace the Justice role. Lidington's such an ignoramus, it almost makes you nostalgic for Gove's brief tenure. Almost.

From conversations, debates and meetings both online and irl, a number of things make me a lot more confident of a majority (and a fúcking big one at that) next time round. Firstly, scales have fallen from the eyes of a lot of Public Sector workers who (for whatever bizarre reason) voted Tory after the cúnts actually cheered retaining the pay cap. And that when Grenfell was still warm. Secondly, a lot of people don't want to go back to the bad old days of the troubles, and it's not just tgfitw who see the DUP as a set of bigoted chancers who could only ever come to prominence in that particular corner of the country. Thirdly,  there were a lot of people whose attitude last time round was "I'm normally Labour, but what's the point? They're going into oblivion. They must be, because the BBC/SKY/Mail told me so." While not many will actually be in Hastings, there are plenty around the country who will be feeling some responsibility for the likes of Rudd still being in a job. 

Most importantly, though, is a greater scrutiny of the Government, as each lie or obvious incompetence that is uncovered means that the next one becomes harder to cover up. 

I'll confess that, at the beginning of the year, I was unsure about the quality of our Front Bench, given the revolving door which had seen so-called "big hitters" come and then flounce off, "unable" to work with a Socialist leader. I have been mightily impressed with the performances and Political maturity of the likes of Long-Baillie, Gardiner, Ashworth, and especially Angela Rayner - my new political crush. The speech she gave at the Big Meeting was superb - heartfelt, empathetic, and honest. Contrast that with what is across from them and it's like night and day. Something which is plain to anyone who watches Marr or Peston, where politicos are stripped of the support from the benches behind. 

In summary - Bring it on, the People* are ready for change!

 

*Not "peepul".

[NotThePars]

If Corbyn targets and wins seats such as Livingston then he gains allies such as Rhea Wolfson which I imagine is a big factor. I don't expect that the effort to take even some of the SNP seats who should be nominally left wing will be anywhere near as challenging as taking East Ren for example.