Join the Labour Party and save your country!

Stevo_666

Rolf F wrote:

bompington wrote:

So you're going to vote Labour in the hope that they don't enact any of their policies? What could possibly go wrong?!

However dismal Corbyn might be as PM, given the Tories gave us Brexit it is hard to see how the Tories have any credibility left at least in terms of economics. It would be pretty much impossible for Corbyn to do as much damage to the country and peoples happiness as Cameron has done and for such a long period. I find myself in the unexpected position of tending towards intending to vote Labour despite feeling that Corbyn would be a poor PM. But maybe I'm wrong. Maybe he would be OK; there is some uncertainty; we know TM is a terrible PM.

It's a reasonable bet that a full term of a Labour govt with policies as proposed will have the UK well on the way to bankruptcy. I don't see that making many people happy.

If you recall, the last time we had a Labour govt with similarly left wing policies in the 1970's, the UK had to go to the IMF for funding. A bit like Greece now but without the sunshine.

As I said before, be careful what you wish for.

rolf_f

bompington wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

It would be pretty much impossible for Corbyn to do as much damage to the country and peoples happiness as Cameron has done and for such a long period. I find myself in the unexpected position of tending towards intending to vote Labour despite feeling that Corbyn would be a poor PM. But maybe I'm wrong. Maybe he would be OK; there is some uncertainty; we know TM is a terrible PM.

You're not wrong about May: for a bit it looked like she might be somewhere about poor-average on the all time PM competency league table, but it's not looking as good as that right now, is it?

But I wish I could share your optimism about Corbyn. I was young then, but I remember the seventies - and the governments then were more pragmatic and less ideological than Corbyn.
And don't even get me started on JC's unerring ability to find himself in favour of anyone who hates this country, from the IRA and Black September to his sterling work for state propaganda outlets Press TV and RT.

I'm not optimistic about Corbyn. I don't buy any of this stuff about what a nice bloke he is etc etc. I think he is, really, just more of the same who has just spun his image a bit differently than most. But, in the unlikely event he managed to get into power it would surely be a weak power that would force him to compromise.

My ideal outcome would probably be for TMs snap election to become a personal disaster for her (as it seems to be heading towards) - Labour do much less badly than expected (a viable opposition is essential) but Corbyn does get forced out (because, after all, this election should be Labours for the taking). Whether it would be good to get May forced out as well I don't know. I still think there is a chance she is being far less imbecilic than she likes to make out.

rolf_f

Stevo 666 wrote:

If you recall, the last time we had a Labour govt with similarly left wing policies in the 1970's, the UK had to go to the IMF for funding. A bit like Greece now but without the sunshine.
.

If you recall, the last time we had a Conservative govt, they took us out of Europe. A bit like Greece now but they had more sense.

Stevo_666

Rolf F wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

If you recall, the last time we had a Labour govt with similarly left wing policies in the 1970's, the UK had to go to the IMF for funding. A bit like Greece now but without the sunshine.
.

If you recall, the last time we had a Conservative govt, they took us out of Europe. A bit like Greece now but they had more sense.

There's a difference between leaving the EU and bankrupting the country despite what some might claim (where is Joel these days?). The world does not need another real life demonstration of how socialism doesn't work, we've already had enough of those.

rolf_f

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

If you recall, the last time we had a Labour govt with similarly left wing policies in the 1970's, the UK had to go to the IMF for funding. A bit like Greece now but without the sunshine.
.

If you recall, the last time we had a Conservative govt, they took us out of Europe. A bit like Greece now but they had more sense.

There's a difference between leaving the EU and bankrupting the country despite what some might claim (where is Joel these days?). The world does not need another real life demonstration of how socialism doesn't work, we've already had enough of those.

I'm surprised you are taking that comment seriously! The big difference of course is that the Tories have taken us out of the EU and Corbyn hasn't (yet) bankrupted us. We have one definite ongoing deliberate catastrophe vs one possible future one.

coopster_the_1st

Rolf F wrote:

However dismal Corbyn might be as PM, given the Tories gave us Brexit it is hard to see how the Tories have any credibility left at least in terms of economics. It would be pretty much impossible for Corbyn to do as much damage to the country and peoples happiness as Cameron has done and for such a long period. I find myself in the unexpected position of tending towards intending to vote Labour despite feeling that Corbyn would be a poor PM. But maybe I'm wrong. Maybe he would be OK; there is some uncertainty; we know TM is a terrible PM.

The Tories delivering Brexit is based on a democratic decision made by the electorate. You would have a point if the Tories were doing this without the referendum or implementing the opposite of the referendum result. If you want to blame them for giving the electorate the chance to make a decision on EU membership, fine, that means you are in favour of dictatorship over democracy.

It's OK for you to dislike the Tories but to put the blame on them for following democracy over dictatorship demonstrates there is something wrong with you. Unless you favour dictatorship over democracy!

rolf_f

Coopster the 1st wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

However dismal Corbyn might be as PM, given the Tories gave us Brexit it is hard to see how the Tories have any credibility left at least in terms of economics. It would be pretty much impossible for Corbyn to do as much damage to the country and peoples happiness as Cameron has done and for such a long period. I find myself in the unexpected position of tending towards intending to vote Labour despite feeling that Corbyn would be a poor PM. But maybe I'm wrong. Maybe he would be OK; there is some uncertainty; we know TM is a terrible PM.

The Tories delivering Brexit is based on a democratic decision made by the electorate. You would have a point if the Tories were doing this without the referendum or implementing the opposite of the referendum result. If you want to blame them for giving the electorate the chance to make a decision on EU membership, fine, that means you are in favour of dictatorship over democracy.

It's OK for you to dislike the Tories but to put the blame on them for following democracy over dictatorship demonstrates there is something wrong with you. Unless you favour dictatorship over democracy!

Probably not really worth replying to this as you never seem to understand anything that anyone says to you no matter how clearly spelled out but - who was it who offered a referendum in the first place? Was it a) Jeremy Corbyn or was it b) David Cameron? I'll give you a clue - it was Davey. And he didn't have to do it.

mamba80

Coopster the 1st wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

However dismal Corbyn might be as PM, given the Tories gave us Brexit it is hard to see how the Tories have any credibility left at least in terms of economics. It would be pretty much impossible for Corbyn to do as much damage to the country and peoples happiness as Cameron has done and for such a long period. I find myself in the unexpected position of tending towards intending to vote Labour despite feeling that Corbyn would be a poor PM. But maybe I'm wrong. Maybe he would be OK; there is some uncertainty; we know TM is a terrible PM.

The Tories delivering Brexit is based on a democratic decision made by the electorate. You would have a point if the Tories were doing this without the referendum or implementing the opposite of the referendum result. If you want to blame them for giving the electorate the chance to make a decision on EU membership, fine, that means you are in favour of dictatorship over democracy.

It's OK for you to dislike the Tories but to put the blame on them for following democracy over dictatorship demonstrates there is something wrong with you. Unless you favour dictatorship over democracy!

They didnt follow democracy, they choose to have a vote, not one on NATO, Trident, death penalty or HS2,

Regardless of whether we had this EU vote or not, we are a million miles from a dictatorship, even if DC hadnt given a vote, you people could have voted UKIP in 2020 and kicked him out, you do realise you cant get rid of a dictator through a free and fair election dont you?

We on the other hand cannot overturn this decision in any future election, at least for a generation or 4, so its actually you who favours dictatorship over democracy.

coopster_the_1st

Rolf F wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

However dismal Corbyn might be as PM, given the Tories gave us Brexit it is hard to see how the Tories have any credibility left at least in terms of economics. It would be pretty much impossible for Corbyn to do as much damage to the country and peoples happiness as Cameron has done and for such a long period. I find myself in the unexpected position of tending towards intending to vote Labour despite feeling that Corbyn would be a poor PM. But maybe I'm wrong. Maybe he would be OK; there is some uncertainty; we know TM is a terrible PM.

The Tories delivering Brexit is based on a democratic decision made by the electorate. You would have a point if the Tories were doing this without the referendum or implementing the opposite of the referendum result. If you want to blame them for giving the electorate the chance to make a decision on EU membership, fine, that means you are in favour of dictatorship over democracy.

It's OK for you to dislike the Tories but to put the blame on them for following democracy over dictatorship demonstrates there is something wrong with you. Unless you favour dictatorship over democracy!

Probably not really worth replying to this as you never seem to understand anything that anyone says to you no matter how clearly spelled out but - who was it who offered a referendum in the first place? Was it a) Jeremy Corbyn or was it b) David Cameron? I'll give you a clue - it was Davey. And he didn't have to do it.

So you advocate not asking the question if you don't like the answer? I trust this is how you live your life?!?

The result of the referendum proved that the question needed asking. I'm glad it was done this way rather than some other way like having UKIP as part of a coalition govt.

surrey_commuter

So in terms of economic competence who thinks that 5 years of JC would do more harm than a lifetime of being outside the EU?
I know that Brexit is not TM's doing but her approach to it does back up the thought that she is economically and business illiterate.
Whatever happens next week I think the men in grey suits will be coming for her and at the very least demanding a change to her inner circle and decision making process

surrey_commuter

Coopster the 1st wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

However dismal Corbyn might be as PM, given the Tories gave us Brexit it is hard to see how the Tories have any credibility left at least in terms of economics. It would be pretty much impossible for Corbyn to do as much damage to the country and peoples happiness as Cameron has done and for such a long period. I find myself in the unexpected position of tending towards intending to vote Labour despite feeling that Corbyn would be a poor PM. But maybe I'm wrong. Maybe he would be OK; there is some uncertainty; we know TM is a terrible PM.

The Tories delivering Brexit is based on a democratic decision made by the electorate. You would have a point if the Tories were doing this without the referendum or implementing the opposite of the referendum result. If you want to blame them for giving the electorate the chance to make a decision on EU membership, fine, that means you are in favour of dictatorship over democracy.

It's OK for you to dislike the Tories but to put the blame on them for following democracy over dictatorship demonstrates there is something wrong with you. Unless you favour dictatorship over democracy!

Probably not really worth replying to this as you never seem to understand anything that anyone says to you no matter how clearly spelled out but - who was it who offered a referendum in the first place? Was it a) Jeremy Corbyn or was it b) David Cameron? I'll give you a clue - it was Davey. And he didn't have to do it.

So you advocate not asking the question if you don't like the answer? I trust this is how you live your life?!?

The result of the referendum proved that the question needed asking. I'm glad it was done this way rather than some other way like having UKIP as part of a coalition govt.

It is actually a wider debate about whether we elect leaders to lead in our best interests or whether we elect them to do the exactly what we want.

The referendum proves many things - none of which you and I will agree upon

coopster_the_1st

mamba80 wrote:

We on the other hand cannot overturn this decision in any future election, at least for a generation or 4, so its actually you who favours dictatorship over democracy.

This decision can easily be overturned in future elections. A party only has to run 're-joining the EU' as the major policy in their manifesto. Please tell me you are not having another 'Fujistu' moment?

What you don't like, and this is because of democracy, is that a party promising this going forward would not get enough votes to make any difference. This election result will show how strongly people really feel about being a member of the EU. You only have to see how quiet Gina Miller has gone to see how strong the 'remain' feeling really is

That is democracy. Delivering the result of a referendum is democracy. Ignoring the referendum result is dictatorship.

I'm sure Google can provide further clarification if you are still struggling with the above...

surrey_commuter

Coopster the 1st wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

We on the other hand cannot overturn this decision in any future election, at least for a generation or 4, so its actually you who favours dictatorship over democracy.

This decision can easily be overturned in future elections. A party only has to run 're-joining the EU' as the major policy in their manifesto. Please tell me you are not having another 'Fujistu' moment?

What you don't like, and this is because of democracy, is that a party promising this going forward would not get enough votes to make any difference. This election result will show how strongly people really feel about being a member of the EU. You only have to see how quiet Gina Miller has gone to see how strong the 'remain' feeling really is

That is democracy. Delivering the result of a referendum is democracy. Ignoring the referendum result is dictatorship.

I'm sure Google can provide further clarification if you are still struggling with the above...

Dictatorship is a form of government where a country or a group of countries is ruled by one person (a dictator) or political entity, and exercised through various mechanisms to ensure that the entity's power remains strong.

Please post a link where it says that Dictatorship = ignoring the result of a referendum

bompington

Surrey Commuter wrote:

The referendum proves many things - none of which you and I will agree upon

I think maybe you need to go to a dictionary and look up what prove means.

coopster_the_1st

Surrey Commuter wrote:

So in terms of economic competence who thinks that 5 years of JC would do more harm than a lifetime of being outside the EU?
I know that Brexit is not TM's doing but her approach to it does back up the thought that she is economically and business illiterate.
Whatever happens next week I think the men in grey suits will be coming for her and at the very least demanding a change to her inner circle and decision making process

Yes, I think 5 years of a JC lead coalition will do more damage than leaving the EU.

How much damage did the last labour govt do (which was way more central than JC is in policy terms) with their policies of spending more than they raised? (Here's a hint with a couple of your favourites: tax credits, Scottish devolution)

Being that Labour has been in existence for over a decade it should be easy to point to one labour govt that has left the economy in a better state at the end of its tenure than at the start?

surrey_commuter

bompington wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

The referendum proves many things - none of which you and I will agree upon

I think maybe you need to go to a dictionary and look up what prove means.

demonstrate the truth or existence of (something) by evidence or argument.

you will have to help me out by spelling out your point

surrey_commuter

Coopster the 1st wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

So in terms of economic competence who thinks that 5 years of JC would do more harm than a lifetime of being outside the EU?
I know that Brexit is not TM's doing but her approach to it does back up the thought that she is economically and business illiterate.
Whatever happens next week I think the men in grey suits will be coming for her and at the very least demanding a change to her inner circle and decision making process

Yes, I think 5 years of a JC lead coalition will do more damage than leaving the EU.

How much damage did the last labour govt do (which was way more central than JC is in policy terms) with their policies of spending more than they raised? (Here's a hint with a couple of your favourites: tax credits, Scottish devolution)

Being that Labour has been in existence for over a decade it should be easy to point to one labour govt that has left the economy in a better state at the end of its tenure than at the start?

1997 - 2001
do I get bonus points for naming two? in which case 2001-2005

A JC led coalition would get little done so would be relatively benign and the effects could be reversed by the following Tory Govt

Jez mon

Ah but Labour simply inherited a blossoming economy in 1997, and then caused the global financial crisis in 2008, which the tories have been trying to help us out of, out of the good of their little hearts, for the last two govts.

surrey_commuter

Jez mon wrote:

Ah but Labour simply inherited a blossoming economy in 1997, and then caused the global financial crisis in 2008, which the tories have been trying to help us out of, out of the good of their little hearts, for the last two govts.

Sorry I do not know what I was (not) thinking

what is the messaging for 2001-5?

rick_chasey

Jez mon wrote:

Ah but Labour simply inherited a blossoming economy in 1997, and then caused the global financial crisis in 2008, which the tories have been trying to help us out of, out of the good of their little hearts, for the last two govts.

This was presumably after the self inflicted recession of black Wednesday?

bendertherobot

Coopster the 1st wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

So in terms of economic competence who thinks that 5 years of JC would do more harm than a lifetime of being outside the EU?
I know that Brexit is not TM's doing but her approach to it does back up the thought that she is economically and business illiterate.
Whatever happens next week I think the men in grey suits will be coming for her and at the very least demanding a change to her inner circle and decision making process

Yes, I think 5 years of a JC lead coalition will do more damage than leaving the EU.

How much damage did the last labour govt do (which was way more central than JC is in policy terms) with their policies of spending more than they raised? (Here's a hint with a couple of your favourites: tax credits, Scottish devolution)

Being that Labour has been in existence for over a decade it should be easy to point to one labour govt that has left the economy in a better state at the end of its tenure than at the start?

We're leaving the EU. It's going to be pretty difficult to quantify who's caused which bit of damage.

Jez mon

Rick Chasey wrote:

Jez mon wrote:

Ah but Labour simply inherited a blossoming economy in 1997, and then caused the global financial crisis in 2008, which the tories have been trying to help us out of, out of the good of their little hearts, for the last two govts.

This was presumably after the self inflicted recession of black Wednesday?

Well that's all ancient history now you see...

mamba80

Coopster the 1st wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

We on the other hand cannot overturn this decision in any future election, at least for a generation or 4, so its actually you who favours dictatorship over democracy.

This decision can easily be overturned in future elections. A party only has to run 're-joining the EU' as the major policy in their manifesto. Please tell me you are not having another 'Fujistu' moment?

It doesnt matter what any future party promises or not in future GE's, the EU wont have us back, do you really think if a party won in 2022 promising to re join the EU, we suddenly would? no opt outs, euro etc etc etc or do you think we can just hop in or out? not to mention all those trade deals we d have to rescind.

no, thanks to you and other below avg intelligence voters (proven stat by the way), we are out for good, unless of course Corbyn gets in and who knows what might happen then eh? after all its only democracy lol!

coopster_the_1st

mamba80 wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

We on the other hand cannot overturn this decision in any future election, at least for a generation or 4, so its actually you who favours dictatorship over democracy.

This decision can easily be overturned in future elections. A party only has to run 're-joining the EU' as the major policy in their manifesto. Please tell me you are not having another 'Fujistu' moment?

It doesnt matter what any future party promises or not in future GE's, the EU wont have us back, do you really think if a party won in 2022 promising to re join the EU, we suddenly would? no opt outs, euro etc etc etc or do you think we can just hop in or out? not to mention all those trade deals we d have to rescind.

no, thanks to you and other below avg intelligence voters (proven stat by the way), we are out for good, unless of course Corbyn gets in and who knows what might happen then eh? after all its only democracy lol!

Based on what you post and that you voted remain proves how useful many statistics are

If Corbyn gets in, yes I do believe A50 will be cancelled. There will also be an IndyRef2. What we don't know is what other f*ck witter will take place. Except it will be spend, spend, spend and expect the future generations, funnily enough many of those who will vote labour this time, to pay it back.

The reality is that the 'silent' labour voters will not bother to vote. They won't vote Tory and they don't think JC is worth their vote. This is what the polls are missing this time.

However, every Conservative voter will vote to make sure JC does not get in and these people are motivated voters. This despite them being annoyed at the so-called 'dementia tax'. When they think about it they will know they are still going to be better of under TM than JC.

I wait to find out what post election stat you will bring out after June 9th as to why Labour lost this election by a large margin. I'm sure it will provide further entertainment

Stevo_666

Rolf F wrote:

[The big difference of course is that the Tories have taken us out of the EU and Corbyn hasn't (yet) bankrupted us. We have one definite ongoing deliberate catastrophe vs one possible future one.

You hope that one is a catastrophe so you can say 'I told you so' You admitted a while back you wanted it to happen so that we might consider rejoining the EU in future.

However in the absence of a crystal ball you are just guessing as we have never Brexited before. And as pointed out above, there is historical precedent of the damage a hard left Labour government can do, so it's not unreasonable to assume Corbyn's lot would do the same. Enough evidence no to risk it.

pblakeney

Coopster the 1st wrote:

If Corbyn gets in, yes I do believe A50 will be cancelled. There will also be an IndyRef2.

Not happening.
A50 is the excuse for Indyref2. Won't get one without the other.

coopster_the_1st

PBlakeney wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

If Corbyn gets in, yes I do believe A50 will be cancelled. There will also be an IndyRef2.

Not happening.
A50 is the excuse for Indyref2. Won't get one without the other.

I agree about JC getting in is not going to happen .

But the concession JC will give to the Lib Dems to get support for his manifesto will be cancelling of A50
In the same way, I believe the concession to the SNP for their support will be giving them Indyref2. I can see where you are coming from on this but I see it as the one concession that will allow full support of the labour manifesto

pblakeney

Coopster the 1st wrote:

PBlakeney wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

If Corbyn gets in, yes I do believe A50 will be cancelled. There will also be an IndyRef2.

Not happening.
A50 is the excuse for Indyref2. Won't get one without the other.

I agree about JC getting in is not going to happen .

But the concession JC will give to the Lib Dems to get support for his manifesto will be cancelling of A50
In the same way, the concession to the SNP for their support will be giving them Indyref2.

But the SNP cannot sell Indyref2 without A50.
Quid pro quo.

coopster_the_1st

PBlakeney wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

PBlakeney wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

If Corbyn gets in, yes I do believe A50 will be cancelled. There will also be an IndyRef2.

Not happening.
A50 is the excuse for Indyref2. Won't get one without the other.

I agree about JC getting in is not going to happen .

But the concession JC will give to the Lib Dems to get support for his manifesto will be cancelling of A50
In the same way, the concession to the SNP for their support will be giving them Indyref2.

But the SNP cannot sell Indyref2 without A50.
Quid pro quo.

That is the way the SNP have positioned themselves post the referendum result. All the SNP supporters want is Indyref2 and a remain result one year ago would have just meant them having a different position for Indyref2

Stevo_666

They were quite happy to have Indyref 1 well before Brexit was even a prospect. The SNP will try to have Indyref 2 regardless of what happens on Brexit.