Off Topic Politics Thread

  • 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
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Jabbo

I think Starmer is the most experienced and professional of the candidates but my fear is that he will try to make the party more electable by dragging it back to a centralist, Blairite position. It is debatable whether Johnson will remain unscathed after the CV outbreak. I have a feeling that he will get ousted but, assuming he remains in place, there is no need for Labour to select a middle-of-the road politician. Labour should have been braver. People in the parry should have had more guts and backed RLB. It was a disappointment that Starmer did not step aside to allow an all female candidacy. Regardless of this, I think Labour would still win the next election with a progressive manifesto. The election in 2016 showed that this was popular with voters. I just think that Starmer's election shows a lack of balls amongst Labour Party members - many of whom forgetting the principles they probably stood for when they first joined. For me, RBL would have been a good choice and offered a more "human" alternative, not only to Boris, but also to Nicola Sturgeon whose bubble needs to be burst to secure a healthy Labour majority.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kaito
Ian Thumwood said:
Jabbo

I think Starmer is the most experienced and professional of the candidates but my fear is that he will try to make the party more electable by dragging it back to a centralist, Blairite position. It is debatable whether Johnson will remain unscathed after the CV outbreak. I have a feeling that he will get ousted but, assuming he remains in place, there is no need for Labour to select a middle-of-the road politician. Labour should have been braver. People in the parry should have had more guts and backed RLB. It was a disappointment that Starmer did not step aside to allow an all female candidacy. Regardless of this, I think Labour would still win the next election with a progressive manifesto. The election in 2016 showed that this was popular with voters. I just think that Starmer's election shows a lack of balls amongst Labour Party members - many of whom forgetting the principles they probably stood for when they first joined. For me, RBL would have been a good choice and offered a more "human" alternative, not only to Boris, but also to Nicola Sturgeon whose bubble needs to be burst to secure a healthy Labour majority.
Click to expand...

Understood Ian, I agree the knives will be out for spaffer, he served his purpose. If replaced, as looks likely, by Rishi Sunak the Tories may be heading for the center. The next election is a long way off. We'll have to adapt to the issues of the time post CV. Could be the tories will be adopting much of the Labour manifesto. Anyway enough of the button bashing, comfy sofa and a glass of red calls.
 
Last edited:
StJabbo1 said:
Understood Ian, I agree the knives will be out for spaffer, he served his purpose. If replaced, as looks likely, by Rishi Sunak the Tories may be heading for the center. The next election is a long way off. We'll have to adopt to the issues of the time post CV. Could be the tories will be adopting much of the Labour manifesto. Anyway enough of the button bashing, comfy sofa and a glass of red calls.
Click to expand...

What a splendid idea. Cheers!
 
  • Like
Reactions: StJabbo1
Ian Thumwood said:
Jabbo

I think Starmer is the most experienced and professional of the candidates but my fear is that he will try to make the party more electable by dragging it back to a centralist, Blairite position. It is debatable whether Johnson will remain unscathed after the CV outbreak. I have a feeling that he will get ousted but, assuming he remains in place, there is no need for Labour to select a middle-of-the road politician. Labour should have been braver. People in the parry should have had more guts and backed RLB. It was a disappointment that Starmer did not step aside to allow an all female candidacy. Regardless of this, I think Labour would still win the next election with a progressive manifesto. The election in 2016 showed that this was popular with voters. I just think that Starmer's election shows a lack of balls amongst Labour Party members - many of whom forgetting the principles they probably stood for when they first joined. For me, RBL would have been a good choice and offered a more "human" alternative, not only to Boris, but also to Nicola Sturgeon whose bubble needs to be burst to secure a healthy Labour majority.
Click to expand...

If this current crisis has proved anything, it has shown that money is/was available to carry out most of Labour’s last manifesto, so staying on that track should be easier, as the public are now seeing what can be done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StJabbo1 and ChilcoSaint
Ian Thumwood said:
Jabbo

I think Starmer is the most experienced and professional of the candidates but my fear is that he will try to make the party more electable by dragging it back to a centralist, Blairite position. It is debatable whether Johnson will remain unscathed after the CV outbreak. I have a feeling that he will get ousted but, assuming he remains in place, there is no need for Labour to select a middle-of-the road politician. Labour should have been braver. People in the parry should have had more guts and backed RLB. It was a disappointment that Starmer did not step aside to allow an all female candidacy. Regardless of this, I think Labour would still win the next election with a progressive manifesto. The election in 2016 showed that this was popular with voters. I just think that Starmer's election shows a lack of balls amongst Labour Party members - many of whom forgetting the principles they probably stood for when they first joined. For me, RBL would have been a good choice and offered a more "human" alternative, not only to Boris, but also to Nicola Sturgeon whose bubble needs to be burst to secure a healthy Labour majority.
Click to expand...
What is wrong with Nicola Sturgeon? Labour needs to focus its attention on devising progressive policies and hammering the Tories. It would be prudent to make an unwritten alliance with the SNP. being the dominant forcé in Scotland for the forseeable future
 
The Ides of March said:
What is wrong with Nicola Sturgeon? Labour needs to focus its attention on devising progressive policies and hammering the Tories. It would be prudent to make an unwritten alliance with the SNP. being the dominant forcé in Scotland for the forseeable future
Click to expand...


She’s a Nationalist. Nationalism is a ******ed philosophy.
 
Nicola is my choice too, the most capable politician of the current crop. Archer's I did indeed fear the coronation of RLB. Immensely pleased that the membership resisted another suicide attempt. As for Burgon...don't get me started. Now Keir needs to defenestrate the anti Semites.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tiggermaster
ChilcoSaint said:
She is a social nationalist. Other examples of that ideology include Nelson Mandela and the Catalan independence movement. It’s a far cry from the English Defence League.
Click to expand...
The Catalanist independence movement straddles parties from the centre-right to the far left. The difference between the Catalán oñe and the SNP is that Catalunya is the most prosperous part of Spain, Scotland arguably the least prosperous part of the UK
 
ChilcoSaint said:
She is a social nationalist. Other examples of that ideology include Nelson Mandela and the Catalan independence movement. It’s a far cry from the English Defence League.
Click to expand...

Agreed. She's a self-determinist rather than a cheerleader for Das Volk. Her nationalism is a very soft version...pluralistic, and ensconced within a community of nations. There are worse national identities to pursue.
 
The Ides of March said:
There is positive nationslism, as with the SNP, Plaid C, as both parties see a future within the EU, which is to be applauded, and negative nationalism as we can see with Fatty and co, as displayed in their aloofness and arrogance.
Click to expand...


The SNP in their current incarnation may be relatively progressive, but they are still Nationalists. Which means they adhere to a world view which is insular, backwards looking, tribalist, and by definition xenophobic if not racist.
 
The Ides of March said:
The Catalanist independence movement straddles parties from the centre-right to the far left. The difference between the Catalán oñe and the SNP is that Catalunya is the most prosperous part of Spain, Scotland arguably the least prosperous part of the UK
Click to expand...


Scotland is one of the most prosperous regions of the UK. GDP per capita is higher than the UK average.
 
I have to disagree fully there. Part of the reason Scotland wants to remain in the EU is that their economic future depends on immigration. It's hard to see that as tribalist, much less xenophobic.
 
Archers Road said:
The SNP in their current incarnation may be relatively progressive, but they are still Nationalists. Which means they adhere to a world view which is insular, backwards looking, tribalist, and by definition xenophobic if not racist.
Click to expand...
You could argue that Labour in not opposing Brexit belonged in the same boat as the SNP in your definition. That aside, we should support parties that want to destroy the Tories. It is not in the interests of Scotland or the UK for Labour and the SNP to be doing battle with each other. The aim has to be to beat the Tories.
 
St Godders said:
She wants Scotland to be a part of the EU which is a positive view to hold. It is Brexiteers who are the ******s.
Click to expand...


Brexit is indeed a ******ed project; that doesn’t make Scottish Nationalism any less so.

Though I do have some sympathy with Scots who resent having a Conservative government in Westminster forced upon them by perfidious Albion, a retreat into a political ideology of the 19th century is no solution to anything imo.
 
The Ides of March said:
You could argue that Labour in not opposing Brexit belonged in the same boat as the SNP in your definition. That aside, we should support parties that want to destroy the Tories. It is not in the interests of Scotland or the UK for Labour and the SNP to be doing battle with each other. The aim has to be to beat the Tories.
Click to expand...


If the extent of Labour’s ambition is to form a government of “anyone but the Tories”, then yes. If the aim is a return to the Social Democratic consensus that drove a period of unprecedented peace and prosperity throughout Western Europe, there isnt much room for Nationalism of any sort, however seemingly benign.

It remains to be seen if there is any hope for the resurrection of the Labour Party in Scotland. I have no idea if that is a realistic ambition or not; I hope it is.
 
Archers Road said:
The SNP in their current incarnation may be relatively progressive, but they are still Nationalists. Which means they adhere to a world view which is insular, backwards looking, tribalist, and by definition xenophobic if not racist.
Click to expand...
That’s ridiculous, when you consider Scotland have pledged to rejoin the EU. Moreover, the SNP believe in equality, boosting the economy through immigration, and social progress. Pretty much the opposite of what you say.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back