That article doesn't prove that at all? Do you even bother checking the links you post?
General Election 2019
- Thread starter colognehornet
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
- Status
That article doesn't prove that at all? Do you even bother checking the links you post?
Are you accusing a Labour shadow minister of lying when he admits the Labour Party has lost 100,000 members and is in financial trouble?.
No, I'm accusing you of lying when you said the young have abandoned Labour. You've made several attempts to prove it and you've failed miserably. If it's true then there should be loads of evidence?
This is an example of a party failing
You must log in or register to see media
And the John Crace article about it
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...n-relax-as-johnson-redeploys-the-art-of-lying
No, I'm accusing you of lying when you said the young have abandoned Labour. You've made several attempts to prove it and you've failed miserably. If it's true then there should be loads of evidence?
This is an example of a party failing
You must log in or register to see media
And the John Crace article about it
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...n-relax-as-johnson-redeploys-the-art-of-lying
Well, if you cannot believe shadow cabinet members and the Guardian there is not much hope for Labour.
I thought that you didn't lay any importance on party membership figures SH
I am interested when Labour's loss of 100,000 results in financial hardship for the party. My membership of the Conservatives has helped boost its membership by 30%.
Thankfully you seem to be cured of PPMR (political party membership repetition)
I know what you wish for SH, but despite all the forecasts in the 2017 election of a large Tory majority that you were so happy about, I also remember so well your one word reaction on the day that the actual results were announced. Over the next few weeks there will be lots of disinformation given out, and while party members on all sides will be happy to gobble it up, they represent a tiny minority of those who will actually vote. We have seen today all of the newspapers in the north of England calling for change in the way that that part of the country is treated, not surprising when they have seen their traditional industries laid bare by Tory governments. Oop north there have been promises made, yet nothing has happened to improve matters. No one can believe what government says anymore, unless of course you happen to be living in the Home Counties.
Well, if you cannot believe shadow cabinet members and the Guardian there is not much hope for Labour.
It doesn't say that in the article you posted. Nice try though
The only opposition to the Tories in the North, the Labour Party, has severely damaged its electoral chances by not respecting the referendum result. Todays announcement by a former Labour minister to 'not trust Cobyn and vote for Boris' will only increase the likelihood of major Tory gains in the area. Johnson's plans for major infrastructure in the area will also be welcome. Labour really is in a mess at the moment.
''My membership of the Conservatives has helped boost its membership by 30%''I am interested when Labour's loss of 100,000 results in financial hardship for the party. My membership of the Conservatives has helped boost its membership by 30%.
Thankfully you seem to be cured of PPMR (political party membership repetition)
I can well believe that - does that mean there were 2 and there are now 3, or is it 3 and 4 ? As far as I know the Tories had a membership figure of under a hundred thousand but this has been swelled by entryists like yourself to about 160,000. Labour started from a much higher base ie. over 500,000 yet it is, apparently, they who now have financial hardships ? Despite the Tories low figures on this they still manage to spend more on elections than the other parties combined - would you like to tell us where this comes from ? Obviously not from membership fees. In fact the party is cap in hand to sponsors and executes their policies as a result - from the financial data released it appears that membership fees only make up about 5% of the Tories war chest.
It doesn't say that in the article you posted. Nice try though
How about the recent poll showing Boris had more appeal than Corbyn amongst the 18-24 age group. Who does like Comrade Corbyn apart from Putin, the IRA, Hamas and the Venezuela despot?
At least it is good to see that Javid has admitted that the past ten years of austerity hasn't worked, and now wishes to throw out the financial rules on borrowing. It is beginning to look like which party promises that they will borrow the most.
Would you like to actually substantiate this by providing the source of this imaginary poll ?
''My membership of the Conservatives has helped boost its membership by 30%''
It was a shadow cabinet member, as quoted by the Guardian, who claimed the substantial loss of Labour Party members was resulting in party financial hardship.
The Tories are a well oiled machine for fund raising, it is not difficult to find sponsors who are appalled by the prospect of a marxist Labour government that would financially bankrupt the country.
It is precisely because the sensible policies as commissioned by a fiscally responsible Tory government have worked, it will allow some relaxation of policies. Unlike France the UK's policy is not to pass on so much debt to future generations.
I think you should read what he is actually saying before jumping in with the prepared script.
Quite possibly, and there will be rogue voters too, but I find it an interesting split.
I think you are reading too much into the flock of young people firstly going to Labour and then leaving again SH. I have been a Green Party member here for 10 years and was a Labour Party member for 12 years in the UK. Political party membership is not for the young ! This is unfortunate, but true. Go to a typical regional meeting of any party and you are going to be surrounded by a group of middle aged, and older, men who have been doing things their way for years and are not open to the ideas of a 21 year old who has only just joined the party. Sadly 21 year olds get pissed off with this very quickly and leave - not surprising - when I was 21 I didn't want to go to stuffy meetings lasting several hours with old men either. Young people often get a rush of enthusiasm but then realize that 99% of political life is boring, dry and is spent in stuffy, unventilated rooms going over the same ideas again and again, and mostly concerned only with local matters such as the last council meeting. The turnover in political parties amongst the young is very high, due to disenchantment. Interesting to note that the Royal society for the protection of birds has more members than all Britain's parties combined ! And the National Trust has 4 million members. So it's not as if young people are not interested in current themes of importance - just that political party life is not for them. Most young people are idealists who are looking for something which fulfils all their expectations and a political party is not cut out to provide that.
Very recent poll showing Labour on 40.8% and the Tories on 23.7% - another one showing Labour on 38.9%.
- Status