The New Leader of the Labour Party

[AngryOfTuebrook]

5 hours ago, A Red said:

Not socialist policies

"Democratic Socialism".

 

The policies of the Labour manifesto  (which you said cost us the election).

[aRdja]

3 hours ago, Bjornebye said:

Apparently it’s anti-Semitic to question Jess Phillips credentials as Labour leader. 

Said by the same people who have destroyed Corbyn in the media. 
 

I despair. 
 

I feel for the Jewish community being constantly weaponised by the Right. I really fear for the eventual backlash.

[Bruce Spanner]

11 hours ago, Mudface said:

Media blitz in tomorrow's papers, I assume.

Yeah, he starts the tours to test the waters as well tomorrow. Still assuming that the left member block, will, er, block him and split the vote, but I assume he’s looked at numbers and sees it as potentially viable.

 

I’m at a Q&A with him tomorrow evening if anyone’s got anything they want me to ask him?

 

First question ‘Beans on a fry up, yes or you’re wrong?’ Obvs.

[Anubis]

7 hours ago, Bjornebye said:

Apparently it’s anti-Semitic to question Jess Phillips credentials as Labour leader. 

Said by the same people who have destroyed Corbyn in the media. 
 

I despair. 
 

Er, why exactly?

[Numero Veinticinco]

52 minutes ago, Anubis said:

Er, why exactly?

Why not? Might as well give it a crack. Seems an excellent way of winning an argument.

 

If you disagree, you're antisemitic. 

[SasaS]

2 hours ago, Bruce Spanner said:

Yeah, he starts the tours to test the waters as well tomorrow. Still assuming that the left member block, will, er, block him and split the vote, but I assume he’s looked at numbers and sees it as potentially viable.

 

I’m at a Q&A with him tomorrow evening if anyone’s got anything they want me to ask him?

 

First question ‘Beans on a fry up, yes or you’re wrong?’ Obvs.

"You're 57. Where do you keep the portrait, attic, cellar or a secret room?"

[Anubis]

29 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Why not? Might as well give it a crack. Seems an excellent way of winning an argument.

 

If you disagree, you're antisemitic. 

 

 

 

If she practices no religion, and isn’t of Jewish heritage, how does antisemitism come into it?

[Numero Veinticinco]

2 minutes ago, Anubis said:

 

 

 

If she practices no religion, and isn’t of Jewish heritage, how does antisemitism come into it?

Just what an antisemite would say. 

[Dr Nowt]

Gets an angry response, doesn’t it.

 

Job done.

[A Red]

8 hours ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

"Democratic Socialism".

 

The policies of the Labour manifesto  (which you said cost us the election).

Yes they did along with brexit and Corbyn.

 

Why did Labour stand on a manifesto committed to spending billions nationalising industries and not lowering VAT, a tax described by labour as a tax on the poor ?

[AngryOfTuebrook]

15 minutes ago, A Red said:

Yes they did along with brexit and Corbyn.

 

Why did Labour stand on a manifesto committed to spending billions nationalising industries and not lowering VAT, a tax described by labour as a tax on the poor ?

Nationalisation doesn't "cost billions"; quite the opposite. 

 

I  would have liked to see VAT reduced, but it's a question of priorities and balancing the budget - it's not much use having a few more quid in your pocket if your quality of life is fucked by the destruction of the NHS and by being stuck in insecure poorly-paid employment and overpriced housing that's unfit for habitation. 

 

Again - where's the evidence that it was anything other than Brexit and/or perceptions of Corbyn that made trading Labour voters vote Tory?

[AngryOfTuebrook]

9 hours ago, Bjornebye said:

Apparently it’s anti-Semitic to question Jess Phillips credentials as Labour leader. 

Said by the same people who have destroyed Corbyn in the media. 
 

I despair. 
 

No idea who this shark-jumping nobhead is, but she's quick to get the smears out.

[SasaS]

3 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

Nationalisation doesn't "cost billions"; quite the opposite. 

 

I  would have liked to see VAT reduced, but it's a question of priorities and balancing the budget - it's not much use having a few more quid in your pocket if your quality of life is fucked by the destruction of the NHS and by being stuck in insecure poorly-paid employment and overpriced housing that's unfit for habitation. 

 

Again - where's the evidence that it was anything other than Brexit and/or perceptions of Corbyn that made trading Labour voters vote Tory?

 

As I remember, there was no manifesto bounce in the polls and there is anecdotal evidence in various articles reporting activists struggling to explain the manifesto policies, due to lack of focus or priorities. For what it's worth surveys said that it was the leadership more than Brexit.  

[Rico1304]

16 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

Nationalisation doesn't "cost billions"; quite the opposite. 

 

I  would have liked to see VAT reduced, but it's a question of priorities and balancing the budget - it's not much use having a few more quid in your pocket if your quality of life is fucked by the destruction of the NHS and by being stuck in insecure poorly-paid employment and overpriced housing that's unfit for habitation. 

 

Again - where's the evidence that it was anything other than Brexit and/or perceptions of Corbyn that made trading Labour voters vote Tory?

So, how are you paying for the nationalisation then?  

[moof]

3 hours ago, Bruce Spanner said:

Yeah, he starts the tours to test the waters as well tomorrow. Still assuming that the left member block, will, er, block him and split the vote, but I assume he’s looked at numbers and sees it as potentially viable.

 

I’m at a Q&A with him tomorrow evening if anyone’s got anything they want me to ask him?

 

First question ‘Beans on a fry up, yes or you’re wrong?’ Obvs.

Why would they block him? He’s a clear favourite on the left, is he not? There are a few people on twitter who call him a blairite but I don’t think that’s a widely held sentiment and it’s certainly not a fair one. And while some people will support Long Bailey as the “leftmost” candidate, I don’t think perceived disloyalty to the current/outgoing leadership is in any way a deal breaker, not since the election result. I expect starmer to take it, comfortably. Which is right because on balance he is very probably the best person for the job. 

[Duff Man]

 

[Moo]

I think Starmer would be a disaster for Labour, Phillips too.  Long-Bailey wouldn't be much better. 

I hope a really strong candidate appears a bit out of left-field for all our sakes. 

[Jairzinho]

Quote

Anyone want to design a "Gobby Cow" t-shirt, promise I'll get the best one made! Met a great woman who prints t-shirts today in Bury Market (which I'm reliable informed is the best market in the world.). Send in your designs!

Neck on the line, this person isn't going to be the prime minister.

[A Red]

37 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

Nationalisation doesn't "cost billions"; quite the opposite. 

 

I  would have liked to see VAT reduced, but it's a question of priorities and balancing the budget - it's not much use having a few more quid in your pocket if your quality of life is fucked by the destruction of the NHS and by being stuck in insecure poorly-paid employment and overpriced housing that's unfit for habitation. 

 

Again - where's the evidence that it was anything other than Brexit and/or perceptions of Corbyn that made trading Labour voters vote Tory?

So nationalising is free, no upfront costs?  If it is free then I can see that the argument for spending money on the NHS etc is more important than reducing VAT. 

 

Spending more on services are not a unique socialist policies, nationalising is, along with communism.

 

The evidence, as i said earlier is that Labour loses whenever it has a socialist agenda. If it goes in to the next election on the same manifesto, my opinion based on history, is that it will get twatted again.

 

 

[Bruce Spanner]

36 minutes ago, moof said:

Why would they block him? He’s a clear favourite on the left, is he not? There are a few people on twitter who call him a blairite but I don’t think that’s a widely held sentiment and it’s certainly not a fair one. And while some people will support Long Bailey as the “leftmost” candidate, I don’t think perceived disloyalty to the current/outgoing leadership is in any way a deal breaker, not since the election result. I expect starmer to take it, comfortably. Which is right because on balance he is very probably the best person for the job. 

The PLP & NEC want a female, momentum want Corbyns heir & diversity, not a straight, white’ middle class bloke with a peerage, that doesn’t fit the optics of getting ‘traditional labour voter’ back, and will throw everything at getting that. You’re not dealing with ‘traditional labour’ you’re dealing with all those who grabbed power of the party and those who joined because of Corbyn, they are the big unpredictable numbers.

He also doesn’t have an unblemished voting record, which could be dragged out if things get messy.

 

I hope I’m wrong as he seems to be the best candidate, but I am not core labour anymore and the grudges of the old guard, unions & momentum are more numerous than ‘traditional labour member’

 

Thats why.

 

Its a numbers game based on a hypothetical, sepia tinged ideological position and it’s fucking embarrassing.

[Dr Nowt]

17 minutes ago, Jairzinho said:

Neck on the line, this person isn't going to be the prime minister.

You must be a misogynist. It’s the only rational explanation for you thinking that.

[Denny Crane]

52 minutes ago, SasaS said:

 

As I remember, there was no manifesto bounce in the polls and there is anecdotal evidence in various articles reporting activists struggling to explain the manifesto policies, due to lack of focus or priorities. For what it's worth surveys said that it was the leadership more than Brexit.  

 

How do you separate the leadership from Brexit though. If people wanted to get Brexit done and the opposition were perceived as an obstacle from preventing Brexit being completed. The key difference from 2017 to 2019 was in 2017 Labour respected the outcome and didn't get caught up in the buildup to the election and throughout discussing Brexit - 2019 completely different. In other words you don't have the trust and get a fair hearing.

 

 

 

 

This video is good for a few reasons - ironically Nandy mentions that people wanted a functioning bus network not broadband but when Corbyn used to discuss this at PMQs the political commentators and hardcore remainers used to sneer why he isn't he talking about Brexit. 

[Bjornebye]

Corbyn wanted a functioning bus network. 
 

The Tories wanted a bus of lies to fool the people. 
 

Swinson just wanted a bus with her face on  it. 

[Bjornebye]

2 hours ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

No idea who this shark-jumping nobhead is, but she's quick to get the smears out.

Yep. I think it’s because Phillips didn’t like Corbyn so anyone who doesn’t like her is a Corbyn supporter and therefore anti-Semitic. Nice to see pretty much everyone call her out even members of the Jewish community for this. 
 

Anti-semitism is disgusting and abhorrently wrong just like racism. However using it as a “go to” when someone disagrees with you is also absolutely disgusting. 

It is stirring up far more hatred. 

 

[Dougie Do'ins]

Missed the Andrew Marr Show this morning. How did Starmer and Phillips come across ?