|
|
Post by thomas on Dec 28, 2022 15:35:34 GMT
The real sad thing about so called yookay politics is how a man and party (thats starmer and new new labour) who have been completely and utterly ineffectual for 20 months have somehow managed to get themselves a 36 point lead by doing nothing and sitting on their hands.
If this doesnt send warning signs and show how bad so called democracy is in these islands , i dont know what will.
They have done a reasonable job of exposing the actual government's weaknesses, while Labour have plenty of time to sell themselves to the electorate. Perhaps in the meantime you should Google and see what Starmer stands for, then you could at least debate from an informed position. perhaps in your delusional world , but not in the real world of yookay politics.
Its going to be interesting as i keep saying when starmer finally has to try and limply sell some hardcore policy in a manifesto in the next general election campaign. We really will be sorting the wheat from the chaff then instead of him sitting hoping the tories implode while offering nothing.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Dec 28, 2022 15:37:30 GMT
The real sad thing about so called yookay politics is how a man and party (thats starmer and new new labour) who have been completely and utterly ineffectual for 20 months have somehow managed to get themselves a 36 point lead by doing nothing and sitting on their hands.
If this doesnt send warning signs and show how bad so called democracy is in these islands , i dont know what will.
Perhaps in the meantime you should Google and see what Starmer stands for, then you could at least debate from an informed position. i have many times , and so far , all i get is his labour leadership election broken promises and then radio silence.
Why dont you tell the forum what new new labour stand for and what they propose? Tell us why we should offer you our hard earned vote (without saying tory bad) ?
|
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Dec 28, 2022 15:51:59 GMT
that puerile excuse could be used for every election anyone has ever lost.
They bottled out of democracy in 2015 , and cameron took advantage of the brexit ref promise , while even the liberals mocked new labour.
Meanwhile , corbyns attempt at old labour won a higher vote share than any new labour party in any election apart from blairs 97 victory.
The facts are chiels that winnae ding.
Im so looking forward to watching starmer wriggle on the hook in the run up to the next election. I suspect new labour wont win anything like the vote share predicted , but if they do its going to be hilarious watching the low watt light bulbs in that party grapple with the problems of the modern world.
i suspect the voting public wont find it funny though .....
2. Ed Miliband was owned in 2015 by Mc Cluskey and the Unite Union. So not NL. 3. Circumstances determine the turn out at elections, result is the only fact that counts. 4. ? 5. An interesting opinion, lets see what happens. Personally I will be surprised if he is the next the PM. But I will be interested in what he gets up to. 6. -------------- Is it OK again to say that the meltdown was no secret to people in the know and that they and top politicians hid the facts from the peoples of the world? |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Dec 28, 2022 16:02:24 GMT
They have certainly not been there since Ed Miliband was elected as leader of Labour in 2010, gaining that position by a large vote from the leader of the Unite union who owned his arse thereafter. New Labour ceased to exist in 2010. I think by any margin anyone with an ounce of political nous would regard labour since potentially kinnocks reforms in the late 8`s onwards , with the exception of the corbyn years , as more or less new labour.
Everytime the new new labour lose , its everyones fault from gordon brown to ed milliband , for not being new labour enough.
The one time labour did try to revert back to the old labour style , funnily enough they came within a whisker of taking power in 2017 , with mass party membership and one of the highest vote shares in modern uk history.
i mean you couldnt even call this a poor attempt at sophistry . Are you seriosuly trying to tell the forum keir starmer and blairite new labour havent been in charge of labour these past 20months?
My mate srb steve , former labour member on this very forum , who resigned membership beacuse the blairites took back control , would beg to disagree.
1. Yes, Kinnock did help to lay the foundations of NL by moving away from the left. To get some indication of New Labour try reading Brown's speech to the Trade Union Congress in in 2000. 2. That's just yourself trying to sell your opinions to others. 3. Again, it is the current political climate that sets the turn out at an election. But it is only the result that counts. 4. No, I was clarifying your mistake about New Labour being there after for years after 2010. 5. Perhaps he would. Nevertheless, 20 months is not years, it's still early days for Starmer. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Dec 28, 2022 16:10:50 GMT
1. Nothing puerile about the International Financial Meltdown and the mess it threw Western economies into, a mess still being addressed by austerity until 2019.
2. Ed Miliband was owned in 2015 by Mc Cluskey and the Unite Union. So not NL. 3. Circumstances determine the turn out at elections, result is the only fact that counts. 4. ? 5. An interesting opinion, lets see what happens. Personally I will be surprised if he is the next the PM. But I will be interested in what he gets up to. 6. -------------- Is it OK again to say that the meltdown was no secret to people in the know and that they and top politicians hid the facts from the peoples of the world? Apart from some of those working in the head office of some of the Banks who might have got a whiff of what was going on, I would say it was nothing like general knowledge at the top, but even then only when it was too late to do anything about it. That is IMO, because I believe that if there was any understanding of what was happening there would have been a whistle blower about somewhere. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Dec 28, 2022 16:21:09 GMT
I think by any margin anyone with an ounce of political nous would regard labour since potentially kinnocks reforms in the late 8`s onwards , with the exception of the corbyn years , as more or less new labour.
Everytime the new new labour lose , its everyones fault from gordon brown to ed milliband , for not being new labour enough.
The one time labour did try to revert back to the old labour style , funnily enough they came within a whisker of taking power in 2017 , with mass party membership and one of the highest vote shares in modern uk history.
i mean you couldnt even call this a poor attempt at sophistry . Are you seriosuly trying to tell the forum keir starmer and blairite new labour havent been in charge of labour these past 20months?
My mate srb steve , former labour member on this very forum , who resigned membership beacuse the blairites took back control , would beg to disagree.
1. Yes, Kinnock did help to lay the foundations of NL by moving away from the left. To get some indication of New Labour try reading Brown's speech to the Trade Union Congress in in 2000. ok so you agree new labour began sometime in the late eighties and tony blair took up the reigns ,which proves my earlier point of how poor new labours record is compared to old labour?
AH! back to the old argument you oft dredge up in posts that im doing something you arent?
So are you old boy.! Perhaps though you could elaborate on which opinion you specifically disagree?
where have i disagreed? This is exactly my point about regurgitating blairism earlier . This isnt 1997 , left wing voters have elshwere to go , and starmer is facing many elephants i n the room.
lets see how it ends up. If he does win , im choking to see how and where he first falls flat on his arse...
There isnt any mistake. New labour lost in 2010 , were extremely poor under millibands leadership and of course in scotland under arch blairite jim purphy , who lost labour 40 of 41 seats , and im still struggling to see how anyone could say starmer isnt blairite new labour.
You do realise corbyn isnt in charge anymore and hasnt been for over two years?
his record in both local devolved and by elections is woefull so far.
|
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Dec 28, 2022 16:25:48 GMT
Perhaps in the meantime you should Google and see what Starmer stands for, then you could at least debate from an informed position. i have many times , and so far , all i get is his labour leadership election broken promises and then radio silence.
Why dont you tell the forum what new new labour stand for and what they propose? Tell us why we should offer you our hard earned vote (without saying tory bad) ?
Just Googled it, and it seems that Labour's manifesto is not yet written which is in line with my opinion that there is time for Labour to influence the electorate to vote for Labour. Here is what I found. www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/may/16/keir-starmer-vows-all-new-labour-manifesto-and-economic-offer |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Dec 28, 2022 16:29:16 GMT
Is it OK again to say that the meltdown was no secret to people in the know and that they and top politicians hid the facts from the peoples of the world? Apart from some of those working in the head office of some of the Banks who might have got a whiff of what was going on, I would say it was nothing like general knowledge at the top, but even then only when it was too late to do anything about it. That is IMO, because I believe that if there was any understanding of what was happening there would have been a whistle blower about somewhere. The new labour government knew fine well bankers were taking massive risks long before the crash , and many economists like roubani keen and pettifor predicted the crash would happen.
In his latter memoirs gordon brown was accused of re writing the history of the financial crash and those who had raised concerns to the then new labour government of the vulnerabilities of the uk banking system .
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Dec 28, 2022 16:31:31 GMT
i have many times , and so far , all i get is his labour leadership election broken promises and then radio silence.
Why dont you tell the forum what new new labour stand for and what they propose? Tell us why we should offer you our hard earned vote (without saying tory bad) ?
Just Googled it, and it seems that Labour's manifesto is not yet written which is in line with my opinion that there is time for Labour to influence the electorate to vote for Labour. Here is what I found. www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/may/16/keir-starmer-vows-all-new-labour-manifesto-and-economic-offerwhere? In the first two paragraphs of that old article , he has already backtrackled for example on renationalisation?
Any left wing voter believeing that tripe , and uncosted , unaccountable hogwash needs their heads examined.
like i said , be interesting to see his plans properly costed and accounted for in an election manifesto instead of fairy tales to the gullible in the guardian.
|
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Dec 28, 2022 16:41:49 GMT
1. Yes, Kinnock did help to lay the foundations of NL by moving away from the left. To get some indication of New Labour try reading Brown's speech to the Trade Union Congress in in 2000. ok so you agree new labour began sometime in the late eighties and tony blair took up the reigns ,which proves my earlier point of how poor new labours record is compared to old labour?
AH! back to the old argument you oft dredge up in posts that im doing something you arent?
So are you old boy.! Perhaps though you could elaborate on which opinion you specifically disagree?
where have i disagreed? This is exactly my point about regurgitating blairism earlier . This isnt 1997 , left wing voters have elshwere to go , and starmer is facing many elephants i n the room.
lets see how it ends up. If he does win , im choking to see how and where he first falls flat on his arse...
There isnt any mistake. New labour lost in 2010 , were extremely poor under millibands leadership and of course in scotland under arch blairite jim purphy , who lost labour 40 of 41 seats , and im still struggling to see how anyone could say starmer isnt blairite new labour.
You do realise corbyn isnt in charge anymore and hasnt been for over two years?
his record in both local devolved and by elections is woefull so far.
Maybe if I shout you will actually read and understand the points I've made. 1. NO, I AGREED THAT A MOVE AWAY FROM THE LEFT LAID A FOUNDATION UPON WHICH TO BUILD NEW LABOUR. It certainly did not exist in the late 1980s. 2. Debate is not just about undeclared opinions. IMO, opinions are stepping stones to a greater understanding. 3. NL DID NOT EXIST UNDER TRADE UNION OWNED ED MILIBAND. That would be a contradiction in political terms. 4. Has he lost his position as a member of the opposition? Lets see what happens when he unfolds his new Manifesto. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Dec 28, 2022 16:59:14 GMT
Apart from some of those working in the head office of some of the Banks who might have got a whiff of what was going on, I would say it was nothing like general knowledge at the top, but even then only when it was too late to do anything about it. That is IMO, because I believe that if there was any understanding of what was happening there would have been a whistle blower about somewhere. The new labour government knew fine well bankers were taking massive risks long before the crash , and many economists like roubani keen and pettifor predicted the crash would happen.
In his latter memoirs gordon brown was accused of re writing the history of the financial crash and those who had raised concerns to the then new labour government of the vulnerabilities of the uk banking system .
Proof of your "The new labour government knew fine well bankers were taking massive risks long before the crash". New Labour were hit with a problem they did not fully understand in 2007 when Brown said, "this is a Banking problem, let them sort it out" proving that he had no knowledge of just how bad the situation was. NO ONE PREDICTED THE INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL MELTDOWN. Nouriel Roubini did not forecast the crash. In his preamble to his speech he made it clear that he was not making a forecast, he was making the case for what was possible to happen. If the American's had rescued their Banks from the mess of Sub Prime mortgages in 2006 then it is likely that no one would have heard of Mr. Roubini. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Dec 28, 2022 17:03:43 GMT
ok so you agree new labour began sometime in the late eighties and tony blair took up the reigns ,which proves my earlier point of how poor new labours record is compared to old labour?
AH! back to the old argument you oft dredge up in posts that im doing something you arent?
So are you old boy.! Perhaps though you could elaborate on which opinion you specifically disagree?
where have i disagreed? This is exactly my point about regurgitating blairism earlier . This isnt 1997 , left wing voters have elshwere to go , and starmer is facing many elephants i n the room.
lets see how it ends up. If he does win , im choking to see how and where he first falls flat on his arse...
There isnt any mistake. New labour lost in 2010 , were extremely poor under millibands leadership and of course in scotland under arch blairite jim purphy , who lost labour 40 of 41 seats , and im still struggling to see how anyone could say starmer isnt blairite new labour.
You do realise corbyn isnt in charge anymore and hasnt been for over two years?
his record in both local devolved and by elections is woefull so far.
Maybe if I shout you will actually read and understand the points I've made. 1. NO, I AGREED THAT A MOVE AWAY FROM THE LEFT LAID A FOUNDATION UPON WHICH TO BUILD NEW LABOUR. It certainly did not exist in the late 1980s. you arent arguing that new labour didnt exist in the late eighties. By yet again posting semantics , ie you talk about a move away fro mthe old left , you are agreeing with me as most other do the new labour project in reality began in kinnocks modernisations as they now call it between 1987 and 1992 .
The point of course being that new labour had many failures before its luck changed in 1997 , and its record is demonstrably worse than old labours.
please stop waffling. Im offering opnion oft backed up by fact.
once we all reach that greater understanding , then new labour will be toast forever. Until then , you rely on bullshit , innuendo and complete historical re writing to lie your way into power.
milliband was surrounded by the so called blairite babes like kendal and cooper , and his branch manager in scotland was jim murphy , and out and out blairite. If it walks like a duck and all that.
You are now in the realms of outright delusion. Of course it must be expected talking to a blairite supporter.
Who?
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Dec 28, 2022 17:06:17 GMT
The new labour government knew fine well bankers were taking massive risks long before the crash , and many economists like roubani keen and pettifor predicted the crash would happen.
In his latter memoirs gordon brown was accused of re writing the history of the financial crash and those who had raised concerns to the then new labour government of the vulnerabilities of the uk banking system .
Proof of your "The new labour government knew fine well bankers were taking massive risks long before the crash". New Labour were hit with a problem they did not fully understand in 2007 when Brown said, "this is a Banking problem, let them sort it out" proving that he had no knowledge of just how bad the situation was. NO ONE PREDICTED THE INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL MELTDOWN. Nouriel Roubini did not forecast the crash. In his preamble to his speech he made it clear that he was not making a forecast, he was making the case for what was possible to happen. If the American's had rescued their Banks from the mess of Sub Prime mortgages in 2006 then it is likely that no one would have heard of Mr. Roubini. a quick google gives you this..
6 economists who predicted the global financial crisis
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Dec 28, 2022 17:08:46 GMT
The new labour government knew fine well bankers were taking massive risks long before the crash , and many economists like roubani keen and pettifor predicted the crash would happen.
In his latter memoirs gordon brown was accused of re writing the history of the financial crash and those who had raised concerns to the then new labour government of the vulnerabilities of the uk banking system .
Proof of your "The new labour government knew fine well bankers were taking massive risks long before the crash".
www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/oct/15/gordonbrown-banking
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Dec 28, 2022 17:17:57 GMT
|
|
