Let's Get Political!

[pauld]

The press will just lay into Corbyn's replacement as much as they have with Corbyn. A lot of the stuff on Corbyn is exaggerated or just plain false. They'll soon be able to fabricate some 'dirt' on his replacement.

Of course they will, they always have. But they don't have to make much up on Corbyn, he's his own (and Labour's) worst enemy. I'm well inured to ignoring smears from the right wing press, did so with Milliband, but I struggle to vote Labour if it puts Corbyn in power. And using the press as an excuse is a cop-out. The right wing press are biased against Labour, so what's new? Always have been, always will be. If Labour are using that as an excuse for how badly they're doing, that's just defeatist because that isn't going to change. But there is plenty that is within their power to change, starting with Corbyn.

[Reg Smeeton]

I didn't say that did I? This is half the problem. I'm someone who wants to vote against Johnson, I should be a willing customer for Labour. I've got something you want, my vote, but I have a problem with the Labour offer as it stands. I tell you what the problem is and instead of trying to solve it so I can vote for Labour, you come back and ask me what my alternative is? Fuck it, I've left the shop by that point. Do you want my vote or not?

There probably aren't many people who get exactly what they want in terms of policy or personalities from their vote, so in many ways it's usually the least bad option.

[pauld]

There probably aren't many people who get exactly what they want in terms of policy or personalities from their vote, so in many ways it's usually the least bad option.

Of course, it always is. and on that basis I may yet end up (very) reluctantly voting Labour. But when you're already fighting an uphill battle against a hostile press etc etc, it really doesn't help people make that compromise if you have the most unpopular and divisive leader in the history of your party. Voting Labour should be not so much an easy choice for me, as a default. The fact I'm struggling with it and I know plenty of others in my position should be worrying for people who want to see the party succeed in stopping Johnson. Instead I'm just seeing a lot of shoulder shrugging, "well who else do you want then?" whataboutery and a general failure to take it seriously quite how toxic Corbyn is to Labour. It might not look like that from inside the fold, but it sure as shit does outside.

[Flashheart]

But they don't have to make much up on Corbyn,

But they do. About 99% of what they say is fucking bollocks.

His biggest fault as far as I can tell is being indecisive on Brexit. Other than that it's cunts believing what other cunts have written in newspapers.

How much support would he have lost over the alledged antisemitism that we have been reminded of at every given opportunity? Quite possibly enough to make a considerable difference. And in the meantime, the current PM has literally called black people picanninies and said Muslim women look like letterboxes yet there's barely a mention.

Wankers.

[Flashheart]

When I see criticism of Corbyn on the internet, it rarely mentions his flaws. (And he does have flaws)

Instead, it's usually claims that he is a traitor, commie, terrorist sympathiser and what not. None of which are true.

[pauld]

How much support would he have lost over the alledged antisemitism that we have been reminded of at every given opportunity? Quite possibly enough to make a considerable difference. And in the meantime, the current PM has literally called black people picanninies and said Muslim women look like letterboxes yet there's barely a mention.

I don't think Corbyn's anti-semitic, but Labour definitely has a problem with anti-semitism, and it largely comes from his faction, even if some of them were originally motivated by being pro-Palestinian, they've long since forgotten they can't elide Israel with Jews generally. And he has signally failed to deal with it.

You're absolutely right that Johnson is personally loathsome on race, but if someone else was making that point in response to a point about Corbyn you'd (rightly) call them out for WhatAboutery. Just because Johnson is a shit, doesn't make Corbyn's inaction any more excusable

[Flashheart]

It is not whatabouttery.

Whatabouttery is excusing one person's bad deeds because another did the same. That is not what is happening here.

Calling bullshit is not whataboutery.
Comparing it to Johnson is merely pointing out the hypocrisy of the press - not whataboutery.

I know a tu quoque fallacy when I see one

[pauld]

Comparing it to Johnson is merely pointing out the hypocrisy of the press - not whataboutery.

Fair enough, I missed that was the point you were making. Woosh!

[BambooToTheFuture]

Like him or lump him, I think Keir Starmer has enough in the tank to lead the Labour Party but does he believe he has enough juice, himself?

With the Tories shifting further to the right every day and Labour shuffling even more to the left we have a huge gap between the main parties. We have no serious centrist party. The centre-ground has become very barren.

A nation's people can mostly compromise but we do like balance, or as close to equilibrium as is practicable. We don't have balance right now. If one of the aforementioned parties draws themselves and their policies back towards the centre a little then they will achieve power. The trouble is we have a very important "itch" in the way - Brexit.

Can the parliamentary divide continue to expand at this rate? What is the limit and cost to humanity that we as a public, are prepared to allow these parties to go to the extremities (and beyond) of the left and right?

[Batch]

exactly FH

[Nemo]

I know a tu quoque fallacy when I see one

Well that makes one of us.

[pauld]

https://twitter.com/OnlyTheBiff/status/1188786685678620673

[Reg Smeeton]

Like him or lump him, I think Keir Starmer has enough in the tank to lead the Labour Party but does he believe he has enough juice, himself?

With the Tories shifting further to the right every day and Labour shuffling even more to the left we have a huge gap between the main parties. We have no serious centrist party. The centre-ground has become very barren.

A nation's people can mostly compromise but we do like balance, or as close to equilibrium as is practicable. We don't have balance right now. If one of the aforementioned parties draws themselves and their policies back towards the centre a little then they will achieve power. The trouble is we have a very important "itch" in the way - Brexit.

Can the parliamentary divide continue to expand at this rate? What is the limit and cost to humanity that we as a public, are prepared to allow these parties to go to the extremities (and beyond) of the left and right?

When faced as we are with a climate emergency, then radical action will be necessary to try and avert it, or at least ameliorate the worst effects to tolerable.

At the party Conference last month Labour edged towards commiting to the New Green Deal, a road map for UK to become carbon neutral by 2030.... you may regard that as widely left wing, others would regard it as common sense. The centrist view is probably do nothing and hope for the best.

The right wing view is the market will sort it..... it's just that we've known most of this stuff for years and the market still gets on with environmental degradation.

The transition between the current growth and hang the consequences model of the economy, to somethiing more sustainable is not going to be easy.

[BambooToTheFuture]

When faced as we are with a climate emergency, then radical action will be necessary to try and avert it, or at least ameliorate the worst effects to tolerable.

At the party Conference last month Labour edged towards commiting to the New Green Deal, a road map for UK to become carbon neutral by 2030.... you may regard that as widely left wing, others would regard it as common sense. The centrist view is probably do nothing and hope for the best.

The right wing view is the market will sort it..... it's just that we've known most of this stuff for years and the market still gets on with environmental degradation.

The transition between the current growth and hang the consequences model of the economy, to something more sustainable is not going to be easy.

Indeed. I would gather your opinion of what is "left wing", "right wing" and "centrism may differ from that of someone else. Herein lays a problem of political stance on the whole. I would say I'm middle left leaning. A more liberal left (opposed to an authoritarian left) but still hold some sense of centrism. Yet someone else may view my values as far to the left as Gandhi or as authoritative as Stalin. Another may feel I'm too close to the centre and not "Gandhi enough".

We cannot combat opinion of course. We can try to get one to come round to another's way of thinking - the best at this can do it well. As stated above though, even those on the same side, per say, can have a wide ranging opinion.

Bottom note. I wouldn't say making moves to tackle climate change is "widely left wing", it is indeed common sense. I'm sure someone with opposing views to mine (what we may call a rightie or in my opinion authoritative right) would likely know this issue is common sense. We do know that there are those that don't agree with this.

The Southern Ocean absorbs around double the amount of CO2 than the Amazon so we would be fool to ignore an issues such as our rapidly melting continent in the Southern Hemisphere, as well as new research pertaining to the possibility of microplastics there too.

I don't agree with your opinion that a left of centre view would "...do nothing and hope for the best." about climate change.

The transition indeed is going to be difficult but not impossible. Who has the ability (in it's current state) to build sustainable growth. Currently - no one.

[mystical_goat]

I didn't say that did I? This is half the problem. I'm someone who wants to vote against Johnson, I should be a willing customer for Labour. I've got something you want, my vote, but I have a problem with the Labour offer as it stands. I tell you what the problem is and instead of trying to solve it so I can vote for Labour, you come back and ask me what my alternative is? Fuck it, I've left the shop by that point. Do you want my vote or not?

That is what you were saying - that you don't know about replacements but that Labour need to get rid. I asked for your alternative because you said he should go so I wondered who you would like to see there, who would get your vote.

Have you maybe made quite a jump from thinking "I don't like him/I don't think he can win an election" to saying "they should get rid of him/Corbyn is a liability who will prevent Labour from being elected"?