The New Leader of the Labour Party

[Numero Veinticinco]

Just now, Jairzinho said:

Do people in marginals in the Midlands want thoughtful and intelligent?

Do thoughtful and intelligent people want the Midlands?

[Red Phoenix]

Don't worry all, George will be here with his new party soon to lead us to the promised land.

 

[aRdja]

She’s finished I reckon.

[Numero Veinticinco]

She is, but not because of that. 

[Bjornebye]

21 minutes ago, viRdjil said:

She’s finished I reckon.

Yep she can't be saying things like that and offending people despite everything she has said being 100% spot on. 

 

She has also said she won't block a second Scottish referendum. She's fucked. 

[Bjornebye]

Of course she is being called anti-semitic now on twitter. Wow. Fucking hate this world. 

[moof]

Hope she wins

[Rico1304]

Don’t worry, even if she loses it won’t be her fault. 
 

 

[Numero Veinticinco]

10 hours ago, moof said:

Hope she wins

Like I was saying earlier, I don’t mind - and actually quite like - a lot of the things she has put forward. The issue is, like Miliband and Corbyn, I just think she is not going to resonate with voters, her messages are all mistimed and tactically going to do her more harm than good in the leadership election and if she can’t even beat the tepid competition in that, how the fuck is she going to win a general election. If she can’t do that, what’s the point in her? I mean, if the answer is - as it has been on here before - winning the election is secondary to having a palatable policy base, then convincing people to vote for those policies rather than starting with electable, then why vote Labour at all. They don’t really represent anything close to your perfect policy base anyway. 

 

The only reason most of those on the left give a fuck what Labour do is because they’re the only other party that can win. They don’t represent our views as well as several other parties. So if you’re not in it to win it, then why Labour at all? You alluded to that the other day if Starmer wins, saying that you’d focus on other things. So if it’s not winning, I don’t even think Labour are that good a match for you. I’d my sooner vote Green. 
 

This electoral system is beyond fucking fucked. Like you, mate. I’m fucking sick of the entire thing. Being under the Tories is fucking horrible. I just want somebody in Labour who can fucking win. No matter what people think of him, Starmer is no Tory and nowhere even close to it. If he has a better shot of winning, then he should be the guy. 
 

argh. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

Sorry for the incoherent rambling 

[aRdja]

Now he’s at it too. It’s almost as if they haven’t learnt anything.

 

 

[Red Phoenix]

RLB has mentioned abolishing the house of lords, has defended Palestine last night and is talking about open selection so those furthest on the right in Labour will already be gunning for her. And that's the whole problem : she should be at home in Labour saying those things and supported, not facing a load of crap from fucking idiots who'd be better in another party. That's clearly not the case though so if the right wingers are celebrating wrestling the party back with Starmer, even if he isn't to the right himself or anywhere near as bad as some of them, then they might find that they're in trouble before long as a load of left wingers get sick of it all and leave.

[SasaS]

44 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Like I was saying earlier, I don’t mind - and actually quite like - a lot of the things she has put forward. The issue is, like Miliband and Corbyn, I just think she is not going to resonate with voters, her messages are all mistimed and tactically going to do her more harm than good in the leadership election and if she can’t even beat the tepid competition in that, how the fuck is she going to win a general election. If she can’t do that, what’s the point in her? I mean, if the answer is - as it has been on here before - winning the election is secondary to having a palatable policy base, then convincing people to vote for those policies rather than starting with electable, then why vote Labour at all. They don’t really represent anything close to your perfect policy base anyway. 

 

The only reason most of those on the left give a fuck what Labour do is because they’re the only other party that can win. They don’t represent our views as well as several other parties. So if you’re not in it to win it, then why Labour at all? You alluded to that the other day if Starmer wins, saying that you’d focus on other things. So if it’s not winning, I don’t even think Labour are that good a match for you. I’d my sooner vote Green. 
 

This electoral system is beyond fucking fucked. Like you, mate. I’m fucking sick of the entire thing. Being under the Tories is fucking horrible. I just want somebody in Labour who can fucking win. No matter what people think of him, Starmer is no Tory and nowhere even close to it. If he has a better shot of winning, then he should be the guy. 
 

argh. 

 

A bit harsh on moof.

[Bjornebye]

30 minutes ago, viRdjil said:

Now he’s at it too. It’s almost as if they haven’t learnt anything.

 

 

Oh the replies further down. Fucking shitbags. 

[Strontium]

1 hour ago, viRdjil said:

Now he’s at it too. It’s almost as if they haven’t learnt anything.

 

 

 

It's really getting pretty tiresome hearing you claim that Labour are dicing with death by advocating for Palestinian rights. Nobody but nobody has an issue with that, and indeed it would be odd if a socialist party didn't stand up for repressed people, wherever they may be.

[Bjornebye]

12 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

It's really getting pretty tiresome hearing you claim that Labour are dicing with death by advocating for Palestinian rights. Nobody but nobody has an issue with that, and indeed it would be odd if a socialist party didn't stand up for repressed people, wherever they may be.

What is getting tiresome is hearing anti-semitic shouts at anyone who does stand up for the Palestinian people (Im talking about the people not Hamas etc). 

 

See that 'nobody but nobody' ? SD you only have to read the comments on RBL and Steimers tweets to see how out of touch that comment is. Take Gnasher Jew. Have a look at that particular timeline. Then choose any of thousands of Pro-Israel accounts who call pretty much any questioning of Israeli policy "anti-semitic". 

 

I mean its not like we have just seen Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour party absolutely destroyed in the media over anti-semtisim 'claims'. Im not disputing that anti-semitism exists within political parties including Labour. 

 

I suspect it is becoming 'threesome' now because so many people are waking up to the realities of Israeli policy, the worlds refusal to condemn and also the wrongful use of 'you are anti-Semitic' which is overshadowing actual anti-semitism. 

 

 

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

Nationalising train networks and signing deals with a tech company which is for all intents and purposes owned/ran by the Chinese communist state. 

 

Maybe Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson could become the new leader of the Labour Party? 

[Bjornebye]

On 29/01/2020 at 13:06, Bjornebye said:

What is getting tiresome is hearing anti-semitic shouts at anyone who does stand up for the Palestinian people (Im talking about the people not Hamas etc). 

 

See that 'nobody but nobody' ? SD you only have to read the comments on RBL and Steimers tweets to see how out of touch that comment is. Take Gnasher Jew. Have a look at that particular timeline. Then choose any of thousands of Pro-Israel accounts who call pretty much any questioning of Israeli policy "anti-semitic". 

 

I mean its not like we have just seen Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour party absolutely destroyed in the media over anti-semtisim 'claims'. Im not disputing that anti-semitism exists within political parties including Labour. 

 

I suspect it is becoming 'threesome' now because so many people are waking up to the realities of Israeli policy, the worlds refusal to condemn and also the wrongful use of 'you are anti-Semitic' which is overshadowing actual anti-semitism. 

 

 

Threesome Stig yeah? Kinky. 

[Jairzinho]

My missus is always up for a tiresome.

[Sugar Ape]

A lot of nominations tonight, including one CLP who had a draw between Starmer and RLB so recommended nobody to be leader of the Labour Party. 
 

 

 

 

[Megadrive Man]

On 28/01/2020 at 16:03, Jairzinho said:

Do people in marginals in the Midlands want thoughtful and intelligent?

No they mainly want shouty and racist.

[Numero Veinticinco]

Judging by the look of that map posted by Rapey, they want Starmer. 

[Neil G]

On 31/01/2020 at 00:41, Numero Veinticinco said:

Judging by the look of that map posted by Rapey, they want Starmer. 

Number of CLP nominations received isn’t necessarily reflective of the percentage of party members that support each candidate. At this stage in proceedings the vote of a CLP in a safe Tory seat in the shires, which might have at most a few hundred members, carries the same weight as one in an urban Labour seat with a membership of thousands. Plus the nominations are only made by those members that attend the meeting, which is only ever a minority of the total membership of the CLP - this is particularity a factor in large rural constituencies as it’s harder for members to get to meetings, meaning the nomination can be decided by a relatively small number of people.
 

I haven’t cross-checked the list of nominating CLPs with those that likely have large memberships, but if you want to have a look the New Statesman are keeping a running update here: 

 

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2020/02/which-clps-are-nominating-whom-2020-labour-leadership-race

[Mudface]

2 hours ago, Neil G said:

Number of CLP nominations received isn’t necessarily reflective of the percentage of party members that support each candidate. At this stage in proceedings the vote of a CLP in a safe Tory seat in the shires, which might have at most a few hundred members, carries the same weight as one in an urban Labour seat with a membership of thousands. Plus the nominations are only made by those members that attend the meeting, which is only ever a minority of the total membership of the CLP - this is particularity a factor in large rural constituencies as it’s harder for members to get to meetings, meaning the nomination can be decided by a relatively small number of people.
 

I haven’t cross-checked the list of nominating CLPs with those that likely have large memberships, but if you want to have a look the New Statesman are keeping a running update here: 

 

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2020/02/which-clps-are-nominating-whom-2020-labour-leadership-race

Yep, our vote in 2010 for an East Riding constituency was decided by maybe a dozen members. I voted for Burnham despite being told not to by the chairman beforehand* but the vote went narrowly for Milliband in the end. I'd imagine there are quite a few constituencies that are the same.

 

*- he was a practising Catholic and had a theory that a Catholic would never be allowed to be PM, basing this on the way Blair never officially announced his Catholicism until he left office, that Duncan-Smith was rapidly replaced as Tory leader in the early 2000s once it became apparent he was a Catholic (more likely because he was utter dogshit), and some constitutional stuff involving the Queen and the CoE. I had a think, decided he was talking bollocks and decided to vote for Burnham regardless. I had a sort of Sliding Doors/ butterfly flapping its wings moment that my vote would tip the CLP to Burnham, and result in a narrow win for him amongst all CLPs and overall. Wish it had, to be honest, he's wasted as a metro mayor.

[sir roger]

Starmer going along with the taxes on above £80k earnings. That intelligent chap on QT isn't going to like that.