UK commits hari kari?

Consequences of a sheet political landscape.
You have one or two bigger parties and a few other smaller ones that between them manage to fack things up monumentally.

A team of amateurs and weak characters in control of the only vehicles to leadership, and their membership thereof, so that strong and wise leadership is a thing of the past as weakness breeds with weakness to produce a mega strain of weakness.

Democracy? You're having a laugh.

Leave alone the referendum, tear everything up, tear up the parties and the whole political scene and start over.

comment by jlou1978 (U15376)
posted 3 hours, 28 minutes ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 19 minutes ago
comment by jlou1978 (U15376)
posted 7 minutes ago
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In think some people are confusing Jeremy Corbyn the individual, and Jeremy Corbyn the leader of Labour party.
The party put forward policy based on a democratic vote within the party, and not simply based on what Jeremy Corbyn thinks should be policy.
The policies of this current Labour party are not those of an extreme socialist party, and are a lot more social democratic in their approach.
The narrative that is put forward in regard to Corbyn, simply doesnt stand up to scrutiny, when the overall policies of the Labour party are taken into account.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which particular narrative about Corbyn doesn't stand up to scrutiny? That he isn't particularly bright? That his economic policies don't add up? That he has installed as Home Secretary an individual who isn't fit for office? That he is myopic on party loyalty given the amount of times he voted against his party when he was back-bench? That the concept of a "Brexit for jobs and business" is meaningless drivel?

From the mid-late 80s Labour has had internally struggles between the relatively moderate "New Labour" and the more left-wing old Labour. Currently, the party, strengthened by the growth of Momentum and the additional support that has brought for Corbyn, is materially to the left of where it was when it was winning elections. I don't think anyone has used the term "extreme socialist" though unless I've missed something?

As above, with the growth of Momentum and the reactive election of Jeremy Corbyn as the leader, Labour policy has shifted to the left. Bluntly, Britain hasn't.

Britain hasn't voted for a socialist party in decades, and polling suggests that this will continue to be the case, particularly with the demographic challenges;

- older folk living longer who are more likely to vote conservative
- more migrants who are more likely to vote Labour unable to vote in GE
- decades long decline in birth rate of British born individuals who at younger ages more likely to vote labour.

Fundamentally, I'd rather have an electable Labour party treading the centre ground, introducing the minimum wage, crafting the Good Friday Agreement, saving the NHS in the late 90's and early 00's from the collapse that was round the corner following decades of underfunding from the Tories, than the "socialist" one that wants to nationalise the National Grid, that falsely believes that its policies can lead to ensuring "the national debt is lower at the end of the next Parliament than it is today" (https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-the-labour-manifesto), and that has continued to lag behind the Tories in the polls despite the shambles happening at CCHQ.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's your opinion.
Which seems to be more how you mold a party to fit the current political climate, rather create a party of true beliefs, and principals.
For real alternatives, the difference needs to be more fundamental for me.
I'm not sure looking at the comparative voting history in the house, you could describe Corbyn of being dim, in comparison to his colleagues.
Of course he isn't always correct, nobody is, but he seems to have found himself on the right side of history in terms of how he approached important issues he voted on in the past, compared to his much more academically distinguished colleagues.
Your assertion in regard to Diane Abbott is a little strange also. I'm not her biggest fan by any stretch, but as we watch the current incompetence of the prime minister, and the utter mess she was as Home Secretary, the bar hasn't been set previously beyond a Cambridge graduates abilities surely ?(I know you like the academically decorated amongst our ruling classes.😉).
I'm sure there are a lot like yourself who yearn for the days of centerist politics, where the adults operate, as they used to say.
Well I'm afraid the days of the centerist elitists, trying to manage things so they roughly stay the same are over, and for me, it's good to see a certain amount of ideology return to the Labour party, rather than a pinky blue party, at pains to directly appeal to the middle classes in this country, whilst at the same time turning their face away from the very people they were meant to represent.
But that's just my view, so each to their own as they say.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
True beliefs and principals that aren't shared by enough people to get them into office.

comment by Alisson Chains (U3979)
posted 1 minute ago

True beliefs and principals that aren't shared by enough people to get them into office.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is exactly my point. I'd love Labour to get back to being perceived as a credible alternative to the Tories by the wider electorate. It'd be better for the country and for the poorest people in society who have suffered under the Tories in recent years.

Cracking username btw

comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 53 seconds ago
comment by Alisson Chains (U3979)
posted 1 minute ago

True beliefs and principals that aren't shared by enough people to get them into office.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is exactly my point. I'd love Labour to get back to being perceived as a credible alternative to the Tories by the wider electorate. It'd be better for the country and for the poorest people in society who have suffered under the Tories in recent years.

Cracking username btw

----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree with much of what you've said, you've articulated it better than I'd be able to.

This Tory party are currently an embarrassment but Labour are just no longer a credible alternative. People are stuck in a position where they have to vote for the lesser of two evils (much like in the last US Presidential election).

Voters are crying out for a moderate centrist party, the same was happening in France and Macron capitalised on that gap in the political spectrum. There is room for a new centrist party in Britain.

comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 4 hours, 9 minutes ago
comment by The Duality of Van (Dijk) (U21747)
posted 1 minute ago
I think it says a lot when someone singles-out Diane Abbott for criticism, she's an impressive parliamentarian who misspoke and has swathes of experience
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which "misspoke" do you refer to? I reference two instances (one of which she didn't back down from) but there are many more. I'd also suggest that someone who seems unable to say "I don't know, but I will find out" when asked a question is someone who lacks the integrity to have oversight of a government department.

Furthermore, I'd challenge you to demonstrate why you think she has swathes of experience?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Dianne Abbot is a brilliant constituency MP, you don`t get voted in with a 35,000 majority if you are not. A couple of highlighted TV gaffs that keep getting brought up at every opportunity will not change that. Every MP makes gaffs on TV, but they very rarely get mentioned.

Dianne Abbot is a brilliant constituency MP, you don`t get voted in with a 35,000 majority if you are not. A couple of highlighted TV gaffs that keep getting brought up at every opportunity will not change that. Every MP makes gaffs on TV, but they very rarely get mentioned.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Let me be clear. If she was just a backbench MP then I would have no particular interest in her. However, she is the shadow Home Secretary. If Jeremy Corbyn was to get it she could have one of the 4 Great Offices of State. She is one of the 4 most senior MPs in the Labour Party, and I will continue to judge her by the high standards of those who have gone before her, the likes of Jack Straw, Alan Johnson and Jacqui Smith.

the high standards of those who have gone before her, the likes of Jack Straw
========================
Jack Straw was a lying conniving little shiiiiiiiiiit.🤣🤣🤣

Well there we go, again just falling back into bland insults without anything to back it up. Jack Straw, for all that you may disagree with his policies as Home Secretary, understood his brief. He was on television extremely frequently and had none of the verbal faux-pas of Diane Abbott.

It appears you’ve exhausted all quality from your argument but I would encourage you to consider the questions and comments I’ve raised if you want to increase your understanding of the qualities of the various people discussed.

comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 8 hours, 48 minutes ago
Dianne Abbot is a brilliant constituency MP, you don`t get voted in with a 35,000 majority if you are not. A couple of highlighted TV gaffs that keep getting brought up at every opportunity will not change that. Every MP makes gaffs on TV, but they very rarely get mentioned.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Let me be clear. If she was just a backbench MP then I would have no particular interest in her. However, she is the shadow Home Secretary. If Jeremy Corbyn was to get it she could have one of the 4 Great Offices of State. She is one of the 4 most senior MPs in the Labour Party, and I will continue to judge her by the high standards of those who have gone before her, the likes of Jack Straw, Alan Johnson and Jacqui Smith.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Jack Straw has gone down as one of the biggest liars in political history, the very people Labour is well rid of, Jackie Smith has been reduced to sitting on morning TV talking nonsense with Tory political commentators, and Alan Johnson just was not very good. Sorry but you can keep all three of those.

Judging Dianne Abbott without giving her a chance is like not giving somebody a job because you don't
Iike their face. She may turn into the greatest Home Secretary of all time, but just to dismiss her without giving her a chance is crass in the extreme.

Dianne Abbot is in one of the safest Labour seats in the UK - that's why she is elected with such a high minority.

Nothing to do with her stand out ability. She does stand out to be fair.

Stands out as being utterly incompetent.