Politics - Page 1156 - NFL UK Forums
NFL UK Mobile Logo
Go Back   NFL UK Forums > Miscellaneous > Off-Topic - Entertainment/News

  #11551  
Old 30.09.2016, 06:48 PM
davidjones178@hotmail.co.uk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JensonF View Post
You have to put the Leave Pledges in the same box as the stuff we've been hearing at the Labour conference, like borrowing all the money in the world to go on a vast spending spree, taxing the rich into poverty, the Universal Personal Credit to be doled out to everyone from the big suitcase of cash under the chancellor's bed, ect., ect.
As our hero Tony B. Liar would put it, they're all "aspirations" and not necessarily deliverables.
But whose aspirations?

Either the Leave pledges were part and parcel of the referendum and we accept that the referendum result encompasses them and validates them - in which case they should be implemented, NHS money transfer and all.

Or they are not, in which case the Government has no mandate to make any changes to freedom of movement or the single market. Both of which can be retained while leaving the EU (in some outer economic orbit).

On what basis is anyone entitled to pick and choose which Leave pledges they think the referendum result validated (despite not addressing them on the ballot paper)?
Reply With Quote
  #11552  
Old 30.09.2016, 09:53 PM
European Bob's Avatar
European Bob European Bob is offline
MVP
 
Join Date: 11.01.2012
Posts: 8,299
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetupandgo View Post
The problem is the British public shouldn't be trusted with anything. From an in/out referendum, through voting on reality shows to choosing elected representatives and a government. What's the alternative though?

You have one vote every five years where you get just the one vote to cover health, education, economy, foreign affairs, policing among many other areas that govern our lives, including Europe. Can you really be expected to give your mandate to one MP for all these things to cover all eventualities with that one vote? Especially when that MP will rarely have 50% of their constituents vote for them. They often don't even get 50% of the total votes cast. Major single topic issues like Brexit have to be decided by referendums.
Totally disagree with this. In fact I think the exact opposite: there should be no referenda in a representative democracy. Life is complicated and politics is complicated, and the trouble with referenda is they view each matter in isolation and answer in very basic terms. As has been said before, what does a vote for Brexit mean? All it means is leaving the EU. It doesn't explain how, or when, or to what extent (common market, freedom of movement) or at what cost or what money spent on the EU should be spent on instead or whether institutions who got money from the EU should still receive it from the UK government instead. None of that is covered. There are a million permutations amidst all that lot.

You also misunderstand representative democracy. An MP is not elected to vote as per what his or her constituents think. Maybe they want to burn immigrants or bring back hanging. In fact you probably don't know what they think because all you have is a general election result to go on. We vote for MPs to represent us, and you choose the one in your area who you think will do the best job of representing you. Which is not the same thing as will always act on your wishes.
Reply With Quote
  #11553  
Old 30.09.2016, 10:00 PM
European Bob's Avatar
European Bob European Bob is offline
MVP
 
Join Date: 11.01.2012
Posts: 8,299
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RockyBalboa View Post
Why would anyone think we would send the entire EU contribution to our health service? It isn't hard
Well they did think that. That's the reality. In fact more than the entire EU contribution, the £350m figure being a total exaggeration in the first place.

As for media coverage, and in particular print media, there was very little neutral coverage to be had. The BBC obsesses about giving each side identical levels of coverage lest it get screamed at by angry print media who themselves devoted around 95% of their coverage to pro-Leave articles.
Reply With Quote
  #11554  
Old 01.10.2016, 10:51 AM
ljstevens's Avatar
ljstevens ljstevens is offline
Team Captain
 
Join Date: 05.02.2008
Posts: 432
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.
Is this the same British public that voted in majority to exit the E.U?
Reply With Quote
  #11555  
Old 01.10.2016, 03:41 PM
European Bob's Avatar
European Bob European Bob is offline
MVP
 
Join Date: 11.01.2012
Posts: 8,299
Default

Corbyn has no chance. These policies that are supposedly popular with the public were also policies that Miliband ran with and got nowhere. People in Nuneaton, Harlow and other towns that you need to win to win an election will take Teresa May over Corbyn every time, I guarantee it. And the Scots don't seem ready to abandon SNP and go back to Labour either - that EU result and his lacklustre campaign will sting north of the border. Labour needs Corbyn to fight and lose an election because until then Momentum types will not accept that their viewpoint doesn't represent that of the majority of voters. Perhaps a routing might make them realise. Unfortunately for Labour, the Tories seem keen on seeing out their 5-year term and not holding another election until 2020.

I voted Labour in 2015. I shan't be voting Labour next time.
Reply With Quote
  #11556  
Old 03.10.2016, 02:49 AM
Smograider's Avatar
Smograider Smograider is offline
MVP
 
Join Date: 22.08.2009
Posts: 5,821
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by European Bob View Post
Corbyn has no chance. These policies that are supposedly popular with the public were also policies that Miliband ran with and got nowhere.
Miliband didn't lose because of the policies though, did he? He lost because he was not deemed to be honest, competent and trustworthy by the electorate. He was not viewed as a strong leader.

I'm not surprised you will not be voting Labour next time around. With all due respect, you do not belong with Labour. That's not intended as an insult, I hasten to add. It's just from your posts on here, you seem to be a Liberal Democrat.

For better or worse, Labour is returning to labour.
Reply With Quote
  #11557  
Old 03.10.2016, 03:22 AM
goodkarma84's Avatar
goodkarma84 goodkarma84 is offline
GOAT
 
Join Date: 15.09.2008
Posts: 27,926
Default

May could at least have the decency to call an election and seeing if some sort of opposition could step up to get us out of Daves mess.

i dont think anyone will be able to put the right campaign forward.

i still think the referendum was beyond flawed as it was a vote to leave but a vote to get what?
the best case scenario seems to be things staying as they are but we lose our voice.

it just shows how cocky Dave was that he didnt even feel the need to put a leaving deal in place as an actual alternative.
Reply With Quote
  #11558  
Old 03.10.2016, 11:32 AM
RockyBalboa's Avatar
RockyBalboa RockyBalboa is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 15.11.2015
Posts: 1,522
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by European Bob View Post
Corbyn has no chance. These policies that are supposedly popular with the public were also policies that Miliband ran with and got nowhere. People in Nuneaton, Harlow and other towns that you need to win to win an election will take Teresa May over Corbyn every time, I guarantee it. And the Scots don't seem ready to abandon SNP and go back to Labour either - that EU result and his lacklustre campaign will sting north of the border. Labour needs Corbyn to fight and lose an election because until then Momentum types will not accept that their viewpoint doesn't represent that of the majority of voters. Perhaps a routing might make them realise. Unfortunately for Labour, the Tories seem keen on seeing out their 5-year term and not holding another election until 2020.

I voted Labour in 2015. I shan't be voting Labour next time.
The claim a vote for Corbyn is a vote for fairness won't wash with the majority.

It is not a vote for welfare the UK as a whole. Free spending is selfish, as the inevitable consequences will come. And they know it. Corbyn would put at risk long term stability for short term power.

The JC, JM combo literally said they are wholly socialist and still people flock to say he would make a good PM.

Voters say Corbyn is such a good man..... but hopefully someone actually questions him on the idea of socialism in a country so heavily reliant on financial services and business.

Exiting a union is a huge risk. What on earth would a Corbyn PM be?.

The whole "Socialist" speech by John Mcdonwal or whoever is an attempt to create a cult of personality. It is not a speech that is trying to even attempt to win an election.

The UK is not a socialist country.
Reply With Quote
  #11559  
Old 03.10.2016, 12:26 PM
Smograider's Avatar
Smograider Smograider is offline
MVP
 
Join Date: 22.08.2009
Posts: 5,821
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RockyBalboa View Post
The claim a vote for Corbyn is a vote for fairness won't wash with the majority.

It is not a vote for welfare the UK as a whole. Free spending is selfish, as the inevitable consequences will come. And they know it. Corbyn would put at risk long term stability for short term power.

The JC, JM combo literally said they are wholly socialist and still people flock to say he would make a good PM.

Voters say Corbyn is such a good man..... but hopefully someone actually questions him on the idea of socialism in a country so heavily reliant on financial services and business.

Exiting a union is a huge risk. What on earth would a Corbyn PM be?.

The whole "Socialist" speech by John Mcdonwal or whoever is an attempt to create a cult of personality. It is not a speech that is trying to even attempt to win an election.

The UK is not a socialist country.
Right apart from, the NHS, social housing, free education, free school meals, limited working hours, holiday pay, sick pay, maternity pay, unemployment benefit, no child labour, public libraries, the right to vote, public roads, the postal service, refuse collection, the Police, the Fire Service. What has Socialism ever done for us?
Reply With Quote
  #11560  
Old 03.10.2016, 01:35 PM
LesterHayes's Avatar
LesterHayes LesterHayes is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 21.08.2012
Posts: 3,179
Default

You forgot strikes, the three day week, power cuts, rioting, donkey jackets and the Gulags.
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 03:08 AM.