Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Labour Leadership Contest


The Next Labour Leader  

118 members have voted

  1. 1. Who do you want to cunt Cameron in the bastard?

    • Liz Kendall - she invented mintcake.
    • Andy Burnham - such sadness in those eyes
    • Yvette Cooper - uses her maiden name because she doesn't want to be called "I've ate balls"
    • Jeremy Corbyn - substitute geography teacher


Recommended Posts

Stop me if I am wrong (which is a possibility) but with Burnham blogging he will nationalise the railways, is that not a 'leftie' thing to do?

He's not saying that. He's saying that he'd let the public sector bid on contracts against the private sector.

 

It's not lefty, just common sense that a majority of people support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's not saying that. He's saying that he'd let the public sector bid on contracts against the private sector.

 

It's not lefty, just common sense that a majority of people support.

I've only seen the headlines in brief but they are indicating that he 'will' renationalise the railways.

 

It just feels to me he's plucked an idea that the left have cried out for ever since they were sold off to favour Corbyn's voters.

 

I agree it's common sense and I have even said myself on these very boards that all public services including gas and electric should be nationalised. But some posters called myself and others commies for suggesting it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has burnham ever made his opinion known on nationalising the railways before? Because if he hasn't and is now only just coming out with it (given Corbyn has been saying it a while and it polls well) then it shows him to do exactly what people have said, blow in whatever direction the wind goes.

One of the main reasons I like Corbyn is because I totally believe what he says, I don't think I believe a single word that comes out of any of the other candidates mouths.

 

I still think the press will do everything they can to destroy Corbyn but as another poster said its better to die on your feet then have the likes of Burnham or Cooper pandering to the media,business etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paul Krugman writing in the New York Times....

 

 

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/08/04/corbyn-and-the-cringe-caucus/?_r=0

 

 

 

I haven’t been closely following developments in UK politics since the election, but people have been asking me to comment on the emergence of Jeremy Corbyn as a serious contender for Labour leadership.

 

 

And I do have a few thoughts.

 

First, it’s really important to understand that the austerity policies of the current government are not, as much of the British press portrays them, the only responsible answer to a fiscal crisis. There is no fiscal crisis, except in the imagination of Britain’s Very Serious People; the policies had large costs; the economic upturn when the UK fiscal tightening was put on hold does not justify the previous costs. More than that, the whole austerian ideology is based on fantasy economics, while it’s actually the anti-austerians who are basing their views on the best evidence from modern macroeconomic theory and evidence.

 

Nonetheless, all the contenders for Labour leadership other than Mr. Corbyn have chosen to accept the austerian ideology in full, including accepting false claims that Labour was fiscally irresponsible and that this irresponsibility caused the crisis. As Simon Wren-Lewis says, when Labour supporters reject this move, they aren’t “moving left”, they’re refusing to follow a party elite that has decided to move sharply to the right.

 

What’s been going on within Labour reminds me of what went on within the Democratic Party under Reagan and again for a while under Bush: many leading figures in the party fell into what Josh Marshall used to call the “cringe”, basically accepting the right’s worldview but trying to win office by being a bit milder. There was a Stamaty cartoon during the Reagan years that, as I remember it, showed Democrats laying out their platform: big military spending, tax cuts for the rich, benefit cuts for the poor. “But how does that make you different from Republicans?” “Compassion — we careabout the victims of our policies.”

 

I don’t fully understand the apparent moral collapse of New Labour after an election that was not, if you look at the numbers, actually an overwhelming public endorsement of the Tories. But should we really be surprised if many Labour supporters still believe in what their party used to stand for, and are unwilling to support the Cringe Caucus in its flight to the right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many billions would that cost? Several hundred billion for the first 3 alone.

 

 

We've just lost around a billion on the sale of RBS shares to Gideon's mates in the city to which the media have hardly given a shit about....So judging it by that surely the media or public won't care about how much we pay to get them back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since 2007 the UK has committed to spending £1.162 trillion at various points on bailing out the banks. This figure has however fluctuated wildly during the period and by March 2011 it was £456.33bn. That total outstanding support was equivalent to 31% of GDP in March.

 

• The £456.33bn figure breaks down into£123.93bn in loan or share purchases, which required a cash injection from the government to the banks, and £332.4bn in guarantees and indemnities which haven't actually been paid, but were offered to shore up the failing bank system.

 

• Of the £123.93bn, the Royal Bank of Scotland received £45.80bn, Lloyds £20.54bn, Northern Rock a total of £22.99bn, Bradford and Bingley £8.55bn and a further £26.05bn went on "loans to support deposit".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was on the newsnight the other night and was great. Honest and different. I do wish he would smarten up dress wish just a tad. I know it does not matter but the t shirt under and open necked shirt is not a great look.

 

As long as it's not contrived, which it isn't, I couldn't give a monkey's how he dresses to be honest, Anny.

 

His magic ingredient just now is authenticity, and he shouldn't really be doing anything which compromises that at this stage in my view, however minor.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was on the newsnight the other night and was great. Honest and different. I do wish he would smarten up dress wish just a tad. I know it does not matter but the t shirt under and open necked shirt is not a great look.

 

Negworthy.

His non-conformity in dress-code is yet another reason I like the guy a lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As long as it's not contrived, which it isn't, I couldn't give a monkey's how he dresses to be honest, Anny.

 

His magic ingredient just now is authenticity, and he shouldn't really be doing anything which compromises that at this stage in my view, however minor.

 

 

Negworthy.

His non-conformity in dress-code is yet another reason I like the guy a lot.

 

 

I agree in one sense and I could not give a toss but like it or nor to get elected in this country you ned to look like you can be a credible PM and sit in meetings with the likes of Obama and Putin. Rather than non-conformity

The lowest common denominator is the country wins you NO10

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get what you mean, but I think to an extent this has become about more than just Corbyn and whether he wins the Leadership election, or would be electable as Prime Minister down the road, if that's what comes to pass.

 

He's enthusing, encouraging and galvanising a lot of disenchanted people, and that could yet be an important success whether he wins or loses, if it shows you can still help to amplify a significant political movement in this country without just being an identikit platitude-bot in a suit, through inspiring people with genuinely held and long backed-up beliefs.  One of his main weapons is authentically looking and sounding nothing like the rest of them, right down to his uni lecturers's clothes and delivery and his refusal to get dragged into the constant facile war-of-words designed to divert people's attention.

 

Digressing now, but it's like this thing I keep reading from Labour MP's, or significant figures of the party's past, about how if Corbyn wins the election then Labour face being the party of opposition for 10+ years.  Personally, I'd sooner a real Labour party be providing proper opposition, and debate across a significantly wider spectrum being the norm in the Commons, however the media then try to spin it, than Tory and Tory-Lite fighting over marginal differences and the net effect that has on the populace.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...