It’s Sir Keir

SUPPORT THE SITE!
November Goal: £70.00
Donations so far: £30.00

Plasticman

Well-Known Radge
Was looking at them - the parachuted in Labour candidates - being beaten by the Greens at Bishopton and Ashley Down.

Ach they done well in the end there, got as many council seats as the Greens... but as you say held on to the mayor, only looks one direction of travel there though eh?

"A tremendous result for the Green party in Bristol, where they more than doubled their number of seats on the city council – and tied with Labour. The parties both won 24 seats. Labour was down from 33 and the Greens up from 11 while the Conservatives remained on 14."

BTW - Im aware that you are as big a fan of Sir K as I am !
 
Last edited:

HenryLB

Donator
I feel like the Labour Party is asking itself the wrong question, fighting the wrong war. Blairites v left, centre v socialists, both insisting that if the party purges the other wing it’ll suddenly become electable.

I don’t think either can win a general election, currently. Even if one faction is triumphant it’ll find it still can’t get into power.
 

Smurf

Auld Enuff Tae Know Better This Radge
I feel like the Labour Party is asking itself the wrong question, fighting the wrong war. Blairites v left, centre v socialists, both insisting that if the party purges the other wing it’ll suddenly become electable.

I don’t think either can win a general election, currently. Even if one faction is triumphant it’ll find it still can’t get into power.

This!
 

Smurf

Auld Enuff Tae Know Better This Radge
Did the left and right in Labour always so despise each other? It's a constant internal battle between the socialists and social democrats. My understanding is that throughout history and indeed in government the social democrats have kind of held the upper hand. However, they could form a cabinet of political differences yet debate the issues and arrive at a compromise? It seems that leaders like Atlee, Wilson & Callaghan were comfortable with this. And subsequently those with differing opinions such as Tony Benn and Dennis Healey could still respect and like each other.

Now I think they'd rather win their internal differences than win power and make a positive difference to those they supposedly represent.

It's. Over.
 

greencol

Skivin cooncil Radge
Did the left and right in Labour always so despise each other? It's a constant internal battle between the socialists and social democrats. My understanding is that throughout history and indeed in government the social democrats have kind of held the upper hand. However, they could form a cabinet of political differences yet debate the issues and arrive at a compromise? It seems that leaders like Atlee, Wilson & Callaghan were comfortable with this. And subsequently those with differing opinions such as Tony Benn and Dennis Healey could still respect and like each other.

Now I think they'd rather win their internal differences than win power and make a positive difference to those they supposedly represent.

It's. Over.
Nothing wrong with disagreements in a government. It keeps everyone on their toes.
Unlike Johnsons tribe.
Cabinet filled with yes men, and anyone who dares to have a differing view gets dumped.
Not good.
 

Doc Shrink

Retired Radge
Nothing wrong with disagreements in a government. It keeps everyone on their toes.
Unlike Johnsons tribe.
Cabinet filled with yes men, and anyone who dares to have a differing view gets dumped.
Not good.

Can't help thinking of the Spitting Image sketch, with Thatcher dressed in a man's suit and her Cabinet all out for dinner; waiter takes the order from Thatcher........

"How Do You Like Your Steak Sir?"

" I Like It Raw."

" What About The Vegetables?"

"They will just have the same"
 

Smurf

Auld Enuff Tae Know Better This Radge
Nothing wrong with disagreements in a government. It keeps everyone on their toes.
Unlike Johnsons tribe.
Cabinet filled with yes men, and anyone who dares to have a differing view gets dumped.
Not good.

Absolutely. Strong cabinets gave good governance. It's now so pathetic leaders decide everything. Shadow ministers can't even give an interview unless cleared by the leaders office!
 
She and her husband loathed him.
The new Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer only loathes immigrants, the poor, trade unions and Scots @Smurf. Splendid choice.


BIG G
 

Smurf

Auld Enuff Tae Know Better This Radge
The new Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer only loathes immigrants, the poor, trade unions and Scots @Smurf. Splendid choice.


BIG G
She makes Starmer look like a personality.
 

HenryLB

Donator
Absolutely. Strong cabinets gave good governance. It's now so pathetic leaders decide everything. Shadow ministers can't even give an interview unless cleared by the leaders office!
That form of government has been eroded so much that it's unrecognisable. Cabinet used to literally run the country and debate policy with 'Downing Street' carrying a tiny headcount - famously somebody said "the PM's office has fewer staff than that of a medium-sized German town".

Now the country is run out of Downing Street with hundreds of people, many employed in managing the comms and media representation. There were some downsides to the cabinet system - chiefly it tended to be reactive and slow - but it at least ensured that a range of voices were heard (sometimes a narrow one, but a range nonetheless). That's gone now.
 

Plasticman

Well-Known Radge
The new Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer only loathes immigrants, the poor, trade unions and Scots @Smurf. Splendid choice.


BIG G

I shall just have a coffee and let this sink in ...

1620722934631.png
 

emerald green

Well-Known Radge
The new Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer only loathes immigrants, the poor, trade unions and Scots @Smurf. Splendid choice.


BIG G
Hang on G..... this cant be right.... we are better together... just neeed to empty out the Tories, or something..
 

paigntonhibby

Well-Known Radge
I shall just have a coffee and let this sink in ...

View attachment 4906
Wanting controls on immigration has absolutely SFA to do with being anti immigrant, racist or any of the other liberal buzz words that are used when people have a different opinion. Many people of legitimate immigrant families want controls on immigrants.
I personally think anybody arriving from france in a dinghy or the back of a lorry should be sent back and told to apply properly. It's not as if they're trying to escape a war ravaged country.
Anybody, whether they're from europe ,africa Asia or wherever should have to meet certain criteria to settle here eg, escaping persecution or to work here.
 

Rocky

Well-Known Radge
Labour are in a horrible position just now where they need their rhetoric to appeal to THEM (right wing nut jobs) whilst their policies appeal to US (good guy lefties). Otherwise they'll simply never be elected so it really matters not a jot what their policies are.

So WE need to avoid falling into the trap of judging Labour on straplines such as clamping down on benefits cheats and controlling immigration and focus instead on the underlying policies. The linked Guardian article in the piece Big G posted is a good example. If you look beyond the headline it was actually an announcement of a Jobs Guarantee policy (A Good Thing) but framed as clamping down on benefit scroungers (which naturally gets OUR backs up). WE might not consider benefit scroungers to be an issue but THEY do and Labour won't win their votes without being seen to address their concerns. WE need to see past the rhetoric to the underlying policies and hope that THEY accept the rhetoric at face value. And we should, of course, have controls to prevent benefits abuse - it's just that it's a tiny issue in the grand scheme of things but THEY perceive it to be a biggie.

So we can either get worked up about mugs with messages about immigration or we can accept that sometimes they're going to have to say things we don't like in order to get elected. Controlled immigration isn't even a bad thing per se so there's plenty of scope for Labour to develop controlled immigration policies which welcome asylum seekers and economic migrants whilst ensuring we have the right mix of skills coming into the country and not just being 'anti-foreigner'.

This isn't a defence of the current leadership, just making the point that there needs to be a degree of pragmatism from all Labour supporters if they ever want to have a shot at actually implementing any policies ever again. If no common ground is found on how lefty the party should be then the only guarantee is that the country will move further and further to the right under successive Tory governments. Pick one from Blairism/Corbynism/Marxism/Whateverism and just get behind whichever one it is until there's at least a sniff of power. That's not to say that anyone should have to give up their principles completely, but surely trying to influence policy from within is better than simply tearing the party apart?

ps Not even sorry about the massive over generalisation and stereotyping, just using it to make a point. I don't really think there's a binary split of them and us.
 
Want to get rid of the ads?
Sign up For a Private Membership!
Click Here
Top