What Kind Of Fuckery Is This? - UK Politics General Discussion | Page 1040 | The Popjustice Forum

What Kind Of Fuckery Is This? - UK Politics General Discussion

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by Baby Clyde, Apr 8, 2010.

  1. LTG


    The Momentum process was a mess.
  2. I’m sorry but WHAT?!

    stuaw likes this.
    stuaw likes this.
  4. LTG


    She said she doesn’t want to change the law at all, she voted to introduce abortion in NI, but personally she doesn’t think people should have abortions after 24 weeks just because of disability.
    londonrain and Pineapple like this.
  5. LTG


    Also @IanDunt

  6. There’s a Labour leadership hustings near where I live on Saturday, but unfortunately I flopped at the random ticket ballot so can’t get in. It’s being live-streamed though so I’ll watch that.

    Apart from Kier I’m pretty open to all of them so...we’ll see?
  7. Oh no... oh... no
  8. Is supporting the candidate who’s already been branded ‘continuity Corbyn’ really such a great idea? After the last election?

    If we had a different electoral system, I wouldn’t care and go swan off and vote for the Greens, but Labour are the only alternative and...RLB ain’t winning any elections- it’s why she’s the candidate the tories want. Now I ain’t no Blairite and the party doesn’t need to swing to the centre at all, but the truth is Blair and Brown did more good in their first 4 days than Corbyn has done in 4 years because they actually had power.

    The tories will have been in power for 14 years at the time of the next election and could be there for the taking (admittedly unprecedented swings needed but we can dream), but I just don’t see RLB inspiring anyone outside of Labour members to go out and vote labour? She’ll just have the same shit thrown at her as Corbs. She’d be a really good transport secretary or something though kii. If her and Rayner switched I’d have been fucking delighted, but we are where we are and while Keir is also bland, he’s slightly less robotic and has an appeal outside of Momentum.

    The country needs a credible, electable Labour Party and out of the candidates who put themselves forward, I honestly think Starmer is the best option- I just hope other labour members look beyond their own membership and see what could work on the national level.
    Baby Clyde likes this.
  9. Sorry for double post but... electric chair for all of these people

  10. Here's a brick wall to bang your head against.

    You'll be needing it!

    sapnu puas and Eric Generic like this.
  11. To be honest, none of the candidates are.
    toby3000 and Eric Generic like this.
  12. Fight for your electable white man candidate if you want I suppose. “She’d be a great transport secretary or something” is just a grotesque statement and a hideous underwriting of her continued importance to current popular Labour policies and its future.
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2020
    Sam, Pineapple, K94 and 2 others like this.
  13. God forbid we have an electable Labour leader.

    Long-Bailey simply won't work as leader because she's too closely associated with the Corbyn leadership and all its failings, not least being that election result. She'd simply be seen as more of the same. (The policies may be popular, yes; not so much the leadership.)

    Apart from that, I don't think having Long-Bailey as leader would unite the party - quite the opposite, in fact - nor do I feel confident that a leadership team under her would effectively root out antisemitism in the party.
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2020
    Baby Clyde likes this.
  14. LTG


    Starmer is probably the most recognisable of the bunch to the geepee, who was in charge of the most contentious policy from the election. I’m not sure he’ll be as much of a break with the past as people imagine, even as they try to paint RLB as continuity Corbyn.
    beyoncésweave and Lost Boy like this.
  15. I'm a member of the Labour Party, and obviously take an unusual interest in politics, and while I'd vaguely heard of Long-Bailey I couldn't tell you anything about her. If someone hadn't just posted her picture I couldn't even tell you her hair colour. So I don't think she's closely associated with Corbyn in the minds of the 'General Public'.

    Of the candidates, Thornberry and Starmer are probably the most closely associated with the previous leadership in the public mind, just because they did so much more media work (or that's how it felt).

    That said, I'm not sure that that has any effect on voters in general.
    acl and londonrain like this.
  16. I actually also remember a news article from before the 2010 election that said an opposition leader has never won an election after leading the party for a full parliamentary term - basically the argument was that since the opposition can't actually do much the press get bored of you and then you sort of run out of momentum in the public eye. The fact that Cameron didn't win a majority despite very favourable conditions backs this up.

    So what I'm saying is we just need to change leader again in 3 years.
    Solenciennes likes this.
  17. I just can't dismiss the casual sexism that is inherently tied into the 'Continuity Corbyn' narrative, as though she can't possibly exist without the overarching man. It almost always comes with a dismissal as to her role. Then couple it with the "She just isn't electable" exclamations without much other than her personality or demeanor on trial, especially considering Starmer hasn't exactly moved the needle from the exact same policies.
  18. The British voters have seemingly forgotten that Johnson had a prominent role in May’s government ddd so maybe we’re giving them too much credit in thinking that they’ll link Long Bailey to Corbyn.
    joe_alouder, aniraz, aux and 5 others like this.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.