Off Topic Politics Thread

Was house of cards not a documentary You mean the Ian Richardson British version? It was as close to reality as Yes (Prime) Minister. The media are happy for it to stay that way. They like to report on this bubble soap opera. They aren't interested in what happens out in the country. They are so focused on the bubble and its intrigue and who did what to who and why and who has put the knife in.

Do you think the papers discovered Whittingdale's misdemeanor just before the referendum campaign or they were slipped a note? The papers didn't report it because it would hurt their cause. The Beeb didn't because they didn't want to upset the man who was about to announce a report on their future. This is the establishment stitch up people are complaining about. Left and Right, media, business they are all in it together working for each other, off each other. That is why people are so angry not just here but across the globe.

 

My eldest brother has quite bad arthritis, which he constantly moans about, because of the relatively damp climate of the UK. He took a short holiday a couple of years ago in Portugal. His arthritis stopped being painful on day 3 and didn't return until the day after he got back to Blighty. He could retire to the Med, but he says they drive on the right, they don't speak English, and I'm too old to learn a language, although he's currently learning Italian on Duo-Lingo.

Now, I call that an excuse. I think he rather likes a good moan, because he'd have no excuse in Portugal. It doesn't even get too cold there in the winter.

 

My father in law is the Portuguese version of your brother. He has diabetes that he could get treated for free here, he has other problems too that he could get treated for free (he has to pay his health insurance.) He refuses to move here where his 3 children are and refuses to learn the language. He says he had to learn Portuguese when he moved to Portugal. He is from Cape Verde where they speak a little Portuguese but mostly creole and then went to Angola for a few years and then to Portugal. He was staying here along with my wife's Mum for 2 months holiday until the beginning of June. Kept his jacket on inside the house all day. lol.

the international language of hand signals is alive and well though I only know a few words of Portuguese but hand signals work well too.

 

Yes, as I said before, the left wing of the Conservative party and the right wing of the Labour party are closer to each other than they are to the more "extreme" wings of their own parties.

The Labour members I know aren't the same as the members Corbyn has (and tend to be from London) but judging by my Facebook feed they're going to be recruiting as well. They're going to be trying to recruit more moderate, generally less passionate people than Corbyn's side so I have my doubts whether they'll be able to get as many members signed up as Corbyn's team but this will be - has to be - a full scale campaign because they know what's at stake just as well as Corbyn's side.

Eagle is sort of a stalking horse candidate, but she has a slightly better chance of winning than most stalking horses. If Corbyn wins again then the party pretty much has to split and if Labour and the new party run candidates against each other then anything could happen in the next election.

 

I think they have more chance of holding off UKIP at the next election with Corbyn and they have more chance of survival to reach electable status that way. They are stuck until they can get the Blairites out. The Blairites won't win another election but a "Blairite free" Labour party under a different leader after Corbyn loses the next election has a better starting base.

Blairites can only win metropolitan areas since Blair was found out. That is the long term best for the Labour party. Worrying about Corbyn and the next election is very short term because it doesn't matter who the next leader is if the party is in the grip of the Blairite faction and the leader has to give that much ground to them all the time on policy.

Outside of the metropolitan areas the Labour brand free of the Blairites will beat their spin off party.

 

A little behind us but backing up what we are saying.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...itting-party-in-two-new-liberal-a7109551.html

 

Nope like I said Tom Watson has put her out as sacrifice. If she wins she will have put off a lot of people.

There is a huge difference between the traditional Labour voter and new class that has appeared in the past 20 years in between the working class and middle class. Students aren't all metro types. Student activists and the Student Union are behind Corbyn. Northern seats are for Corbyn BUT anti EU. Not all London seats are metro types. Diane Abbott and Corbyn are both London MPs as are Emily Thornberry, Kate Osamor, John McDonnell, Kate Hoey and Barry Gardiner.

http://www.thecanary.co/2016/06/29/...eavy-price-ignoring-voters-calls-back-corbyn/

People talk about coalitions but parties of this size like the Tories and Labour are coalitions. They can have several different factions all vying for things to go towards their policies and making deals with each other to form policy.

When a party tries to cast the net too wide and move too far from their starting point (as both parties do) it stretches things too much. You get more factions in your new area and of because you are now moving further from that starting point it becomes harder to keep each faction happy until something gives.

Blair moved to the centre, Cameron moved to the centre. Labour's problem is that before Blair came to power he filled those constituencies that they didn't already have seats for with this new centrist faction. They of course got in and so were now the largest faction. As other MPs retired, left or died he filled them as well. So now Labour have a dominant faction that is the furthest faction in the Labour party from what Labour are recognised as representing. The fact that Blairism is a toxic brand now means that they were going to have a problem at some point and it was a question of how long would it be.

The Tories on the other hand have this split over Europe but they are much more sturdy. Cameron has been unable to fill many of these new seats with his Blairites because the Tory factions are much closer together and he didn't win that massive majority like Blair did and so there were fewer new seats. The Tory party are different too in their candidate selection. Cameron did manage to get a few in. The Tory party will be fine after their leadership election. They will look very healthy.

Fun and games though. something to follow now England are out and Saints are on break.

 

That's pretty much the definition of a stalking horse candidate, but she has more chance of winning than a normal stalking horse candidate. A normal stalking horse candidate is one that has very little chance of winning and is effectively running as a proxy for a third party. The idea is that when the stalking horse loses they get protected (as much as possible) by the "bigger beast" behind their run. If she does okay then you might see another candidate challenge him, as happened in the late 80s with Thatcher. She has something of a chance though, certainly more chance than the guy who ran against Thatcher in 1989!

 

This is different. Corbyn's side are not completely free of guilt here. Even before he won that mandate and became leader some voices from his camp were taunting the PLP that there would be a Blairite Purge. There will be at some point anyway. I think you will see them split off very quickly if she loses. I think they will end up with the Lib Dems eventually but I would be surprised if they can get away with joining the Lib Dems straight away.

After they have split then I agree with you. Watson is the union man. The Blair assasin. Maybe the Unions have warned him off, waiting for the split because the unions are after all, the power in that side of the party. Maybe after the split lose the election then Watson makes his move.

I found this open letter the other day. The comments on this and the reply to it are interesting and reveal just how much they hate each other with this comment (in the comments section of the reply) being very on the money in terms of what the Left wing side thought about the whole New Labour era. Remember Labour voters in the North absolutely detest Thatcher and they would never vote Tory. The same people that are being conned by UKIP are the ones that were conned by Blair:

What is power? Labour for the past 30 years has accepted the neoliberal/freemarket doctrine. That doctrine belongs to a sect within the Tory party that gained control over that party. Accepting that doctrine may put labour in government but not in power. That is why Maggie said that Tony Blair was her biggest success because it meant that when the Tories lost an election they stayed in power.

The open letter + comments:
https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourki...ithout-each-other-open-letter-to-blairite-mps

And the reply + comments:
https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourki...emy-gilbert-nothing-is-possible-without-power

 

According to The Times, a senior Labour MP commented "Angela Eagle??? She's not even the best politician in her own family!".

 

A snippet from an article written today on a Conservative website talking about analysis of the reasons for Brexit and what they must do:

Whether Boris Johnson or someone else becomes the next Prime Minister, the need will be for “a real leader of modernisation”, who ensures the creation of new industries with skilled jobs: the programme on which George Osborne was tentatively attempting, with his Northern Powerhouse, to embark.

The London commentariat is transfixed by the question of what kind of a deal we can do with Brussels. But this uprising was also against the domination of London, and the neglect of millions of low-paid, low-skilled workers in the provinces, left to compete against immigrants who undercut them.

That neglect, after the precipitate decline of heavy industry, is why Labour collapsed in Scotland, and elsewhere has been hollowed out. It has taken its traditional supporters for granted for too long.

So the success of this revolution will depend as much on economics as on politics – a point appreciated, as it happens, in the Harvard Business Review.

The most urgent task of Johnson, or whoever becomes the next Tory leader, will be to bring prosperity to the Brexit-voting classes. Unless that can be done, the referendum will not be the last of our revolutions, and the Conservative Party will soon go the way of Labour.

 

Corbyn would be better off leading the husk of the Lib Dems, rather than his adversaries defecting. Instead of Labour dying a slow death, let them get on with and trying to claw back Tory votes; and head the Libs Dems as pro-brexit, social reformist party. Or, maybe the summer transfer window is getting the better of me.

 

The PLP moderates (Blairites) are the Pro EU ones. Corbyn was forced to say he was for stay as otherwise he would look like he didn't represent his party.

So the PLP Blairites would be better going with the Pro EU Libs and Corbyn remaining as leader of Labour until he eventually loases and is replaced. The membership and Unions are behind Corbyn so it would be a bit silly t'other way around. Its all a big mess. Been reading lots of Labour sites tonight. They really do hate each other these 2 groups in their party. I knew they weren't that close but it is a hatred that is akin to that of miners to Thatcher.

 

Anyone see the Economist projections for the next two years? It isn't pretty...entering recession in 2017, debt rising above 5% of GDP again, debt-to-GDP passing 100% by 2018. And that's if things stabilize in short order.

 

Tories might be fine but will the country? Looking for a PM of the right quality is similar to the England's football team's search for a manager. Quite frankly the quality of candidate is terrible. I have posted this before ... Tories would be better advised looking elsewhere for their new leader. I would love to see Rajoy invited to take the job. He is very resolute, consistent, a true conservative, supports little and big business and would definitely secure the best deal for the UK as it exits the EU. He has all that experience that no Tory candidate has. He could stand in the by-election in Cameron's seat. Sadly, the Tories are unable to see the bigger picture so the country is going to be stuck with a very inadequate PM (May, Johnson, Crabb or AN Other) Surely the British public deserve better!!!

 

Michael Gove says he will stand for the leadership because he has no faith in Boris, but says he didn't really want to be Prime Minister.

And so, it begins...

 

I don't have faith in either of them.

 

There is an article in/on the Spectator this week about Spain and it asking if they have found someone that can steady Spain's ship. I shall read what they say but I think the idea of an "outsider" coming in to any party and being immediately fast tracked is not a weakness within political parties. It is just the way things are. The Spanish wouldn't accept a Brit being headhunted and installed and vice versa.

 

So continues the Blairites then. An anti EU Blairite but Gove is very popular. I suspect he had no choice because May is beating Boris in terms of popularity within the members internal polling and she would be a disaster. She makes great statements but never brings these things through. Disappointed Gove is standing. His wife's "mistake" obviously didn't result in the right messages coming from the Boris camp and no other viable bidders.

That slip up was not a mistake but a "Who wants me" leak to try and encourage "new bidders" for his backing.