Join the Labour Party and save your country!

1…116117119121122…515

Comments

  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 62,019
    Doubt I will do that...
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,660
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Joins Labour, votes Corbyn in, gets upset some TUs use their power for political ends.

    Great work Stevo.
    It was a pre-existing problem. I think you're clutching at straws here.

    If it was a pre-existing problem why vote Corbyn in who is on a ticket to help the TUs do this stuff?
    _
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 62,019
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Joins Labour, votes Corbyn in, gets upset some TUs use their power for political ends.

    Great work Stevo.
    It was a pre-existing problem. I think you're clutching at straws here.

    If it was a pre-existing problem why vote Corbyn in who is on a ticket to help the TUs do this stuff?
    He needs to be elected to meaningfully help them. But we all know he is unelectable. Main aim was to keep Labour out by getting Corbyn in: I'd say its been a success.

    Sorting out hard left unions is really just a tidying up exercise.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,660
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Joins Labour, votes Corbyn in, gets upset some TUs use their power for political ends.

    Great work Stevo.
    It was a pre-existing problem. I think you're clutching at straws here.

    If it was a pre-existing problem why vote Corbyn in who is on a ticket to help the TUs do this stuff?
    He needs to be elected to meaningfully help them. But we all know he is unelectable. Main aim was to keep Labour out by getting Corbyn in: I'd say its been a success.

    Sorting out hard left unions is really just a tidying up exercise.

    See this is why I think you're disingenuous.

    Beyond the literally pathetic original vote for Corbyn, you don't remotely fear the TUs and just have ideological hatred of the TUs and privately relish their militantism because it justifies your own hatred of them, and gives the govt a chance to hurt them more.

    You play up the fear and the pain to suit your own end rather than actually having it.

    You join a party with the express attempt to hurt it. It makes sense you're not honest about things related to that party too.
    _
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,660
    Your original concept of the thread - and the fact you actually did it - removes any chance of having the high ground on the debate remember.

    It's disingenuous, infantile and illustrates what I've often thought - you're not interested actually in the quality of the arguments, but merely partisan point scoring.

    Your defence of Osbourne vs Balls, only to see the current gov't enact the main thrusts of Balls policy without even a whimper from you shows how little your position is rooted in any actual feeling of what is good for society and instead highlights your tribalism.

    That you can't see the irony in your actions in cotijg for Corbyn and decrying the militants TU action just further illustrates how weak your position really is.
    _
  • mamba80
    mamba80 Posts: 5,032
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Your original concept of the thread - and the fact you actually did it - removes any chance of having the high ground on the debate remember.

    It's disingenuous, infantile and illustrates what I've often thought - you're not interested actually in the quality of the arguments, but merely partisan point scoring.

    Your defence of Osbourne vs Balls, only to see the current gov't enact the main thrusts of Balls policy without even a whimper from you shows how little your position is rooted in any actual feeling of what is good for society and instead highlights your tribalism.

    That you can't see the irony in your actions in cotijg for Corbyn and decrying the militants TU action just further illustrates how weak your position really is.

    this goes back to what i said earlier, a high level taxation accountant (on a brexit steering committee no less?) in Steve0's position, would a little more open minded and able to see just how absurd this course of action really is, infact they d not have done it in the first place.
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 62,019
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Your original concept of the thread - and the fact you actually did it - removes any chance of having the high ground on the debate remember.

    It's disingenuous, infantile and illustrates what I've often thought - you're not interested actually in the quality of the arguments, but merely partisan point scoring.

    Your defence of Osbourne vs Balls, only to see the current gov't enact the main thrusts of Balls policy without even a whimper from you shows how little your position is rooted in any actual feeling of what is good for society and instead highlights your tribalism.

    That you can't see the irony in your actions in cotijg for Corbyn and decrying the militants TU action just further illustrates how weak your position really is.
    Oh, you're so hurtful Rick.

    If you look back I said I originally started the thread for a bit of fun to see if I could get some thin skinned humourless lefties to bite. Have a look back at the first couple of pages and see who did :wink:

    This is the thread that keeps on giving :)
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,660
    Think that proves the point :P
    _
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 62,019
    mamba80 wrote:
    this goes back to what i said earlier, a high level taxation accountant (on a brexit steering committee no less?) in Steve0's position, would a little more open minded and able to see just how absurd this course of action really is, infact they d not have done it in the first place.
    Not the first time you've brought this one up so I suppose I should say something.

    My sincere apologies if I don't fit into your stereotypical image of a 'high level tax accountant' :roll: I'm not too fussed if you think I'm some sort Vtech style Walter Mitty character but trying to play the man not the ball shows how you've run out of arguments. Rick did the same thing above slightly less directly, because he's in the same position.

    A few people on here have met me and know what I do for a living. Doesn't go down that well at parties but hey, life is tough :wink:
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 62,019
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Think that proves the point :P
    18 months on and the same little fishies are still biting :wink:
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • meursault
    meursault Posts: 1,433
    Bloody hell missed this! Where are we with it? I could add some Marxist dialectics if required.
    Superstition sets the whole world in flames; philosophy quenches them.

    Voltaire
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 62,019
    meursault wrote:
    Bloody hell missed this! Where are we with it? I could add some Marxist dialectics if required.
    Tricky to answer, seems some people are trying to have a pop me for bringing up topical political issues because it doesn't fit in with their view of what should be debated. Or because I ask them to stick to the point - appears to be difficult for a lot on here. Boo boo.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • briantrumpet
    briantrumpet Posts: 20,971
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Think that proves the point :P
    18 months on and the same little fishies are still biting :wink:
    You seem to find it equally hard to resist a wriggling little worm too.
    https://www.facebook.com/unanglaisendiois
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 62,019
    briantrumpet wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Think that proves the point :P
    18 months on and the same little fishies are still biting :wink:
    You seem to find it equally hard to resist a wriggling little worm too.
    You do seem to pop up very regularly when I post :wink:
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • briantrumpet
    briantrumpet Posts: 20,971
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    briantrumpet wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Think that proves the point :P
    18 months on and the same little fishies are still biting :wink:
    You seem to find it equally hard to resist a wriggling little worm too.
    You do seem to pop up very regularly when I post :wink:
    Well, you don't seem to take very long to bite.
    https://www.facebook.com/unanglaisendiois
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 62,019
    Borrowed from another thread - bit of an indictment of unions:
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/08/secret-life-trade-union-employee-work-benefits-workers-rights

    No wonder membership is declining if they are as useless as this.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,923
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Borrowed from another thread - bit of an indictment of unions:
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/08/secret-life-trade-union-employee-work-benefits-workers-rights

    No wonder membership is declining if they are as useless as this.

    Of a union for sure. I think there are some very valid criticisms in that piece, some of which I also recognise from life in a small private business (wherever you go, some people are lazy and take advantage - who knew?) Bit of a stretch to extrapolate from one disillusioned employee that the whole idea is doomed.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • briantrumpet
    briantrumpet Posts: 20,971
    Stevo, I think you will need to join Unite now, as Len McCluskey says that Corbyn might not continue to get their support: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... nt-improve

    You'll have to do something to stop your plan unravelling, after all the efforts you've put in.
    https://www.facebook.com/unanglaisendiois
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 62,019
    The Fabian society seems to have lost hope for Labour. But the real bad news for JC is when Big Len weighs in...
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38490343
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • briantrumpet
    briantrumpet Posts: 20,971
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    The Fabian society seems to have lost hope for Labour. But the real bad news for JC is when Big Len weighs in...
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38490343
    See my post above - ditto. I think you should join Unite.
    https://www.facebook.com/unanglaisendiois
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,923
    briantrumpet wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    The Fabian society seems to have lost hope for Labour. But the real bad news for JC is when Big Len weighs in...
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38490343
    See my post above - ditto. I think you should join Unite.
    An interesting opinion piece here https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/06/jeremy-corbyn-symptom-labour-party

    There are some strong parallels between the current Labour party and the Conservatives in 1997. In summary, Corbyn's rise is a symptom (rather than a cause) of Labour not being able to work out why they lost in 2010. Remember Hague and IDS as Tory leaders?
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • meursault
    meursault Posts: 1,433
    rjsterry wrote:
    briantrumpet wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    The Fabian society seems to have lost hope for Labour. But the real bad news for JC is when Big Len weighs in...
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38490343
    See my post above - ditto. I think you should join Unite.
    An interesting opinion piece here https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/06/jeremy-corbyn-symptom-labour-party

    There are some strong parallels between the current Labour party and the Conservatives in 1997. In summary, Corbyn's rise is a symptom (rather than a cause) of Labour not being able to work out why they lost in 2010. Remember Hague and IDS as Tory leaders?

    Corbyn's rise is a result of the membership wanting to return to socialist representation rather than Blair's conservatism. The MSM are on the attack and are petrified of us workers organising again. The so called un-electable Corbyn keeps winning by landslides, and would would probably do so in a general election.
    Superstition sets the whole world in flames; philosophy quenches them.

    Voltaire
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,923
    meursault wrote:
    rjsterry wrote:
    briantrumpet wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    The Fabian society seems to have lost hope for Labour. But the real bad news for JC is when Big Len weighs in...
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38490343
    See my post above - ditto. I think you should join Unite.
    An interesting opinion piece here https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/06/jeremy-corbyn-symptom-labour-party

    There are some strong parallels between the current Labour party and the Conservatives in 1997. In summary, Corbyn's rise is a symptom (rather than a cause) of Labour not being able to work out why they lost in 2010. Remember Hague and IDS as Tory leaders?

    Corbyn's rise is a result of the membership wanting to return to socialist representation rather than Blair's conservatism. The MSM are on the attack and are petrified of us workers organising again. The so called un-electable Corbyn keeps winning by landslides, and would would probably do so in a general election.
    Aside from his own election as party leader, which landslides were those? Not sure if you've read the article as it is critical of the party as a whole rather than Corbyn.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • tangled_metal
    tangled_metal Posts: 4,021
    Winning? Landslide?

    What has he won? Labour leadership ballots. A system where they allowed anyone with a few quid to vote irrespective of true membership. No vetting of those new "members" so anyone from people previously kicked out of the party to Tory voters. But that's ok because it's getting people involved in politics.

    Truth is you can only really be considered a winner in politics if you win a General election. Corbyn hasn't so he's just the leader of the opposition without any significant success. If he wins in 2020 then it will truly be a very significant success. One that is against the trend of his leadership so far. Yet to win something of significance.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,923
    Just checked: 4 or 5 previously Labour seats held. No wins from another party unless you count Sadiq Khan, who is hardly a Corbyn loyalist.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • meursault
    meursault Posts: 1,433
    rjsterry wrote:
    meursault wrote:
    rjsterry wrote:
    briantrumpet wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    The Fabian society seems to have lost hope for Labour. But the real bad news for JC is when Big Len weighs in...
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38490343
    See my post above - ditto. I think you should join Unite.
    An interesting opinion piece here https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/06/jeremy-corbyn-symptom-labour-party

    There are some strong parallels between the current Labour party and the Conservatives in 1997. In summary, Corbyn's rise is a symptom (rather than a cause) of Labour not being able to work out why they lost in 2010. Remember Hague and IDS as Tory leaders?

    Corbyn's rise is a result of the membership wanting to return to socialist representation rather than Blair's conservatism. The MSM are on the attack and are petrified of us workers organising again. The so called un-electable Corbyn keeps winning by landslides, and would would probably do so in a general election.
    Aside from his own election as party leader, which landslides were those? Not sure if you've read the article as it is critical of the party as a whole rather than Corbyn.

    No, I didn't read it, but Guardian have recently been anti Corbyn. I don't read newspapers anymore.
    Superstition sets the whole world in flames; philosophy quenches them.

    Voltaire
  • meursault
    meursault Posts: 1,433
    Tangled Metal wrote:
    Winning? Landslide?

    What has he won? Labour leadership ballots. A system where they allowed anyone with a few quid to vote irrespective of true membership. No vetting of those new "members" so anyone from people previously kicked out of the party to Tory voters. But that's ok because it's getting people involved in politics.

    Truth is you can only really be considered a winner in politics if you win a General election. Corbyn hasn't so he's just the leader of the opposition without any significant success. If he wins in 2020 then it will truly be a very significant success. One that is against the trend of his leadership so far. Yet to win something of significance.

    What's your definition of true membership? You think ex tories are voting for Corbyn?

    Yes, it is OK people getting involved in politics, that's how we will represent ourselves. Winning in politics is being represented in parliament. MP's should be acting and fighting for the interests of their constituencies.
    Superstition sets the whole world in flames; philosophy quenches them.

    Voltaire
  • briantrumpet
    briantrumpet Posts: 20,971
    meursault wrote:
    You think ex tories are voting for Corbyn?
    It's even possible that current Tories voted for Corbyn...
    https://www.facebook.com/unanglaisendiois
  • tangled_metal
    tangled_metal Posts: 4,021
    Get real. MPs work for party, allies, votes or self interest. They do what they have to do to get voted in every 5 years. If that means pandering to a group of activists that represent a minority of their constituents but who can get their vote out they will. Politics of low engagement in general and other elections. If turnout is low then momentum could keep you in gravy at the Westminster talking shop.

    Hello BTW, Stevo started this thread to encourage voting Corbyn in the first leadership ballot for the low cost of a vote, what £3? Whilst not a Tory member, allegedly, he's certainly more Tory than Corbynista Labour voter but it seems he voted for Corbyn.

    BTW I believe winning in politics is being an MP of the party in government. That's the sort of position where you can actually get things done. Corbyn can only protest about what the Tories are doing if he remains representing a minority of the population. Whether good or bad it seems that most of western Europe has centrist parties in power. That's real success.
  • bompington
    bompington Posts: 7,674
    meursault wrote:
    The MSM are on the attack and are petrified of us workers organising again.
    Oh dear. You do know who votes for Labour these days, don't you? I'll give you a clue, it's not the working class - they're mostly voting for UKIP. The majority of Labour voters are the metropolitan elite and their trustafarian kids.
    meursault wrote:
    The so called un-electable Corbyn keeps winning by landslides, and would would probably do so in a general election.
    Oh dear oh dear. Have you seen the poll where May's approval rating was higher than Corbyn among Labour voters? I fear that your delusion may be teaching sectionable levels.

Categories