Politics - Page 1151 - NFL UK Forums
NFL UK Mobile Logo
Go Back   NFL UK Forums > Miscellaneous > Off-Topic - Entertainment/News

  #11501  
Old 27.09.2016, 09:26 AM
LesterHayes's Avatar
LesterHayes LesterHayes is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 21.08.2012
Posts: 3,179
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Smograider View Post
You may well be right about the Einstein quote, it probably is a misattribution. A bit like Winston Churchill being credited with coining the phrase 'The Iron Curtain' which he didn't.

Anyway, to your questions.

(a) Yes I do think Corbyn could win an election. Not saying he definitely will, but he could.
(b) Yes I do think he would be a good PM. He certainly couldn't be any worse than Cameron or May (the latter, lest we forget, never won an election either).

Now we turn to the old 'elections are always won in the centre ground' cliché. This is what the right wing media and upper middle class establishment want us all to believe, sure. Is it true though? The reality is, this is a massive over-simplification.

Between 1950 to 2010 you will see there were ten general elections at which Labour had shifted right: the party gained against the Tories in five of them and lost ground in five too. When Labour were in opposition, they shuffled their manifestos four times each way: twice they gained while swinging left, and three times – one being 1997 – while galloping right.

The 1974 election is particularly interesting. In February 1974, Wilson launched Labour dramatically leftwards with a proudly socialist manifesto and hobbled to the headship with a four seat plurality.

In 1979, Thatcher marched her party rightwards and strode to victory with seventy more MPs than Callaghan. In 1997, Labour did swing right, and Blair swept to Westminster on a landslide. In 2010, both parties barely shifted, each moving rightwards if at all; but it was enough for more than ninety seats to change hands and for the Tories to add two million to their vote.

More recently, the 2015 election poses one big problem for this cliché. Cameron won after shifting his party further to the right. He was viewed generally, as being as far right wing as Milliband was left wing.

Furthermore, the two parties that were far away from the centre ground - The Greens (left) and UKIP (right) increased their percentage of the vote.

The party that stayed firmly in the centre ground - The Liberal Democrats, were destroyed. So go and tell them the centre ground always wins elections.

So as you see from the above, this cliché is just that - a cliché. It flies in the face of election history and reality.

I'm curious as to what makes you think you know what the average man in the street thinks of Corbyn? From where do you glean this omniscience regarding the ordinary man? An 'untidy socialist wacko' is your own biased opinion. You do not speak for every man and women on the street. Quite frankly, it is astounding arrogance to think you do.

You also seem to be under the misapprehension that the 180,000 people that joined Labour in 24 hrs for example, are all old 'deluded' Socialists as you again arrogantly claim them to be. You are clearly unaware of the number of young people that have joined in support of Corbyn. Many of these people think Marx was the name of those funny blokes in old black and white films. My brother in law is just one example. He informed me recently he had no idea who Karl Marx was, and did not know what the 'Bourgeoise' meant. He joined Labour to vote for Corbyn.

You see, many of the policies Corbyn speaks of (Tackling Tax avoidance, Saving the NHS, re-nationalising transport, raising the upper band of Tax etc) are actually very popular with the British public.

Let's not forget that many people go to France or Germany for example, and see with their own eyes, efficient and cheap services run and owned by the state. Which is very much the point you made. The ordinary man, and I quote you

'wants a train he can sit on to turn up on time, get him where he wants to go and pay a fair price for the ticket'

He more and more sees that he does not get this, with the private run mess we have over here. He is being ripped off, whilst Branson for example, is making billions whist not paying any personal or corporation tax in this country.

I have more faith in the British public than you and others on here it seems (so yes, I think there is a chance). You and your cohorts seem to view the public as mindless simpletons.
What I was trying to do was illustrate, in my view , where Mr C will struggle. I can't be bothered to trawl through 55 years of election press to establish whether some of your points are right or not but will say that where a political party stands is a matter of perspective. So I, for example wouldn't agree with your assertion that Blaire swung right in 1997. I'd say he took over the centre ground (albeit by taking a more right wing stance than a traditional Labour leader) but you and your socialist friends might well view his position as further right than that. I also wouldn't say that Cameron went far right in 2015 either (Hitler might be far right but not David Cameron?) but I agree that it probably depends on your world view and the papers you read. Anyway what I said was "Depressing I know but general elections are generally won from the centre, by appealing to the most people, by being popular."

Where is this mythical "centre" anyway? The Oxford Englisf Dictionary offers up this:

"A point or part that is equally distant from all sides, ends, or surfaces of something"

Now I don't know if your history of general elections in England is correct or not as you provide no source for your claims but do not write as though it is purely your opinion (although if it is all just your opinion forgive my misunderstanding) but I think that where a party stands at any given point is in relation to other factors no? The Lib Dems for example didn't get wiped out for being centrist, they got wiped out for going into a coalition.

For the record I also think that what Corbyn has done in galvanising grass roots support is commendable but I do not think it is symptomatic of the wider voting population. I do not "view the public as mindless simpletons" but I do think the average man in the street is not anywhere near as engaged as the 180,000 people (I never said how old they were?) who signed up to the Labour Party recently. What JC needs to do is get 13 million people to agree with him, not 180,000 as that is the number of votes he would need to win and have any chance of implementing any of his noble ideas.

Is it "deluded" to think otherwise? That 200,000 supporters will do it? Or 2 million? Yes, I think it is.

Last edited by LesterHayes; 27.09.2016 at 03:17 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #11502  
Old 27.09.2016, 12:05 PM
BoatmanReturns BoatmanReturns is offline
Pro
 
Join Date: 09.09.2016
Posts: 65
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by davidjones178@hotmail.co.uk View Post
I don't think the victims in question are primarily bothered by what the policemen who are likely to fatally shoot them look like. It's the getting shot to death that bothers them.

It's not even about racism, really. But black people are understandably upset that they seem to be shot to death by police at a much higher rate than everybody else. More than twice as often, per capita, as white people.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...oung-black-men
The current research seem to contradict this

http://www.nber.org/papers/w22399.pdf

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-surprise-you/
Reply With Quote
  #11503  
Old 27.09.2016, 01:12 PM
JensonF's Avatar
JensonF JensonF is offline
MVP
 
Join Date: 03.09.2009
Posts: 6,554
Default

Nasty Nutters On Purpose

J. McDonnell, who is being overpaid as Labour's shadow chancellor, is having a laugh. Knowing that he will never be required to put it into effect, he trotted out the daftest menu of looney left spending imaginable for the Labour party conference. And the wonder of it all is that people actually bothered to take him a bit seriously instead of giving him a polite smile for a feeble joke.

Of course, there's also an element of political strategy involved in that the nastier and crazier his acolytes are, the nicer and saner, and less like a garden gnome, the leader, J. Corbyn, seems in contrast. Funny old business, politics.
Reply With Quote
  #11504  
Old 27.09.2016, 01:17 PM
JensonF's Avatar
JensonF JensonF is offline
MVP
 
Join Date: 03.09.2009
Posts: 6,554
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BoatmanReturns View Post
That Washington Post article seems to be stating what ought to be obvious, namely that if the cops shoot a white guy, there won't be a mob burning down the neighbourhood and looting all the shops. Unless, of course, he has a criminal record as long as an arm and a couple of legs.
Maybe a White Lives Matter campaign is needed, too.
Reply With Quote
  #11505  
Old 27.09.2016, 02:07 PM
Stu_T's Avatar
Stu_T Stu_T is offline
MVP
 
Join Date: 25.08.2014
Posts: 9,260
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JensonF View Post
That Washington Post article seems to be stating what ought to be obvious, namely that if the cops shoot a white guy, there won't be a mob burning down the neighbourhood and looting all the shops. Unless, of course, he has a criminal record as long as an arm and a couple of legs.
Maybe a White Lives Matter campaign is needed, too.
That is such a crock. no there probably wouldn't be riots if one is one guy killed but maybe if hundreds were or you know maybe if Joe Paterno was fired or their hockey team wins the stanley cup.
Reply With Quote
  #11506  
Old 27.09.2016, 02:40 PM
Woolley_Man's Avatar
Woolley_Man Woolley_Man is offline
MVP
 
Join Date: 04.09.2003
Posts: 7,862
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BoatmanReturns View Post
That washington post article is a complete load of bull. That's great that in a computer simulation world unarmed white people are more likely to be shot. Sadly in the real world that is not the case.
Reply With Quote
  #11507  
Old 27.09.2016, 02:41 PM
Mark_Duper's Avatar
Mark_Duper Mark_Duper is offline
MVP
 
Join Date: 18.09.2006
Posts: 5,147
Default

I have to agree with Lester, no way was Cameron far right, not even far right centre, just same old tory sensible, dull and elitist and out of touch with the common man.

The only mould for conservatism he broke was gay marriage, and that was just being more in touch with the times, it became his main defining purpose.

Tories got slagged off for austerity, they simply restabilised the economy, the mess Labour had created.

Labour created the biggest modern issue we have today, house prices.

I agree house prices before the boom had been fairly static/steady and maybe they needed a boost slightly. I saw house prices for terraced houses in my area go from an average £30-40K to 50-60K very quickly within 18 months and then continued rapidly to nearly 80-90K just a few years later, just for a flaming terraced house.

That was a quick short term financial boost with disastrous long term implications, Labour created a complete mess. Typical of them really, disastrous lets spend our way out of trouble, boost spending with little thought to long term effects.

The Tories have done the best they could to sort out the economic mess we found ourselves in.

I'm amazed at the criticism for austerity and cuts, yet somehow people still expect money to grow on trees.

Fact is a lot of people have destroyed the economic stability together of this country, it's not all on the government shoulders. What is to blame.

1) Benefits culture.
2) Ambulance chasers, council & hospital suing culture.
3) Black market, fake goods.
4) Cash in hand types & tax dodgers
5) Foreign Aid/Human Rights Assistance
6) Think tanks, opinion polls & fake research studies.
7) Quango groups/overlords/government bodies
8) EU
9) Insurance Scams/Holiday Insurance Scams/Fake Crash Scams
10) Drug & Alcohol Rehabilitation/Prisoner Reforms/Community Orders/Court Costs
11) Fraud
12) Crime

A ton of that cost above is avoidable if people could stop cheating, lying, stealing, exaggerating injuries or their own culpability and defrauding each other and the government. If people could regain some morality and accept that their actions whether they take way too many drugs or drink too much is not helping or they simply had an accident that could be impossible to forsee or even avoided had they paid attention.

And simply each and everytime we decide to say f**k it , stuff the government, they do it why should I not pay tax, stuff you all I'm putting a false claim in, it comes at a cost when multiplied together. All in the cesspit together, all get each others crap.

So many good folk get dragged down by this and many of us all know people who act this way too, even friends and family, yet we turn the other cheek. Everyone has to take some blame at some level, however small or insignificant, we can't always blame corrupt governments.

Last edited by Mark_Duper; 27.09.2016 at 02:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #11508  
Old 27.09.2016, 02:58 PM
BoatmanReturns BoatmanReturns is offline
Pro
 
Join Date: 09.09.2016
Posts: 65
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Woolley_Man View Post
That washington post article is a complete load of bull. That's great that in a computer simulation world unarmed white people are more likely to be shot. Sadly in the real world that is not the case.
Did you read the other link? Its a separate study using 'real world' data.

Last edited by BoatmanReturns; 27.09.2016 at 03:01 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #11509  
Old 27.09.2016, 03:13 PM
Woolley_Man's Avatar
Woolley_Man Woolley_Man is offline
MVP
 
Join Date: 04.09.2003
Posts: 7,862
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BoatmanReturns View Post
Did you read the other link? Its a separate study using 'real world' data.
Nope. Don't exactly have time to read/study a 63 page report.

What is your thoughts on this? You think there is no problem with race in America?
Reply With Quote
  #11510  
Old 27.09.2016, 04:11 PM
RockyBalboa's Avatar
RockyBalboa RockyBalboa is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 15.11.2015
Posts: 1,522
Default

How do SNP MP's sort out travel to westminster?.

They have by far the biggest claims.

Apologies for the terrible meme but:

Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +0. The time now is 12:34 AM.