That would have the same issue? Wouldn't happen under the tories anyway. Dave was dead against online forms for union votes, so I'm sure he wouldn't be hypocritical and be in favour of them here.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
UK PoliGAF |OT2| - We Blue Ourselves
- Thread starter Jezbollah
- Start date
- Status
That would have the same issue? Wouldn't happen under the tories anyway. Dave was dead against online forms for union votes, so I'm sure he wouldn't be hypocritical and be in favour of them here.
It would make young people more likely to vote.
Cameron admits '70,000 fighters' figure made up of disparate groups
It at least took Blair's dodgy dossier a month to fall apart.
It at least took Blair's dodgy dossier a month to fall apart.
Take a few minutes to watch this.
Er, were you and I watching the same leadership contest?
Not that her coldness and general lack of humanity were the worst of the qualities she displayed, but "nice" and "charismatic" are not two adjectives I would ever pick to describe her.
It was always a nonsense statement. Even if you accept there's a decent amount of non radicalised non islamist forces in Syria, you'd almost certainly find them engaged in tooth and nail warfare with Assad's forces. ISIS took ground largely in a vacuum as most of the Assad military was engaged south west of the country fighting the anti Assad forces. This left swathes of the centre, north and east of the country lightly defended so ISIS were able to take over. Even if there are 70,000 fighters we could stomach in Syria almost all of them are still fighting a civil war.
War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
CyclopsRock
Member
Intereting read:
http://www.conservativehome.com/lef...entum-and-yes-its-all-about-deselections.html
Yes it's Mark Wallace (a Tory) and yes it's for ConHome but it's a report on a Momentum meeting - assuming all he reports is accurate (and he's a good egg so I should think it is) then a) McDonnell comes across actually very well and b) Momentum themselves believe them to be a vehicle for candidate reselection and basically a usurping element within the party in much the same way Militant were. It'll be interesting to see whether the Labour leadership quietly goes along with their activities or more actively stamps them out a la Kinnock?
http://www.conservativehome.com/lef...entum-and-yes-its-all-about-deselections.html
Yes it's Mark Wallace (a Tory) and yes it's for ConHome but it's a report on a Momentum meeting - assuming all he reports is accurate (and he's a good egg so I should think it is) then a) McDonnell comes across actually very well and b) Momentum themselves believe them to be a vehicle for candidate reselection and basically a usurping element within the party in much the same way Militant were. It'll be interesting to see whether the Labour leadership quietly goes along with their activities or more actively stamps them out a la Kinnock?
War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
Instinctively I'm not a huge fan of Corbyn, but when you see how the rival factions have behaved in the aftermath of their resounding defeat to him, it is hard to argue that many don't deserve to be purged.
That is not to suggest Corbyn and co have done a sterling job, but the open mutiny, leaking, etc is entirely deserving of purging.
That is not to suggest Corbyn and co have done a sterling job, but the open mutiny, leaking, etc is entirely deserving of purging.
Well, I mean, of course. Except this time it's the majority of the party membership in a lot of places, rather than some minor insurgency.
Up and down the country, Labour CLPs were moribund, getting by on a wing and a prayer and a few hardcore activists. The vast wave of sign ups pre and post Corbyn's victory give the Left the ability to control a vast number of the local party branches.
And everyone loves localism, right? Big Society, power to the people. Welcome to The New Politics, comrades.
I think that there are those of us who would actively disagree with that assessment.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
It depends how deselections are done. It was a shady affair in the '70s because the selection process was utterly unclear, controlled by key nominees who were often union representatives and outside of party control, unpublicized and with factional control to set dates so they'd sometimes be set on a Tuesday at 2 AM (no exaggeration) so nobody but the evangelical would attend, and so on. If you had a system where the Labour Party set a national date for selections for MP candidates (which is much easier given the Fixed Term Parliament Act), with well-published rules and a consistent set of controls on date, electorate, nomination and so on which favoured wide involvement, then I'm not really sure I'm so opposed to the whole thing - it's not so different to the American primary system or the French two-round system at that point. You just have to make sure that it is set up in such a way it can't be broken open by a sufficiently determined clique.
The upcoming
I can see people of the Momentum tendancy pushing for this to be a full nationwide re-selection process, so as not to be unfair to those who are affected by their constituency disappearing.
As for your last sentence, that's politics. A "Sufficiently determined clique" is as decent a descriptor of a political party as any.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Yes, I would also not be surprised by a national reselection for the Boundary Review. I think Momentum will be disappointed, though - I'd be surprised if many MPs were actually toppled. Most MPs don't have a large enough profile for people to be actively pissed off by them for left/right matters, they're remembered more for local deeds that escape left/right labelling than anything else. Only bigwigs are going to be at serious risk - Umunna and Hunt spring to mind.
And yes, politics is cliques, but I mean in the sense that the elections are fair, free, well-publicized, open nominations, etc.
http://order-order.com/2015/12/02/tory-mp-doctors-constituents-email-adding-death-threat/
A Tory MP added fabricated death threats to an email they received.
A Tory MP added fabricated death threats to an email they received.
JonathanEx
Member
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
This is like hearing someone drag nails down a chalkboard.
No. There's no way I'm watching that.
Jezbollah
Member
Oh wow. LOL.
War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
Never thought I'd see that
CyclopsRock
Member
Disagree with the assessment that Mark isn't a liar?
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
I won't tell the redhead if you don't.
CyclopsRock
Member
She actually got engaged recently, ffs. Her fiancé is this beautiful pilot too.
Is this life even real
uncleniccius
Member
Caroline Lucas stepped down from the Stop the War Coalition - The Economist had a super scathing article yesterday which felt like weird timing.
edit: I know that isn't the reason, but weird on a personal level.
edit: I know that isn't the reason, but weird on a personal level.
War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
Even though I'm broadly sympathetic to him, Owen Jones really is not persuasive at all. His entire presentation and means of communication is so... unlikeable.
Also, this 'xyz should not be politicised' is such an empty statement. It wouldn't be politicised if there was a simple solution to it.
After he loses his honours degree and Sturgeon removes him as a Scottish international business advisor, Donald Trump cites the UK's most respectable journalist to show many in the UK agree with him
It's Katie Hopkins
Jezbollah
Member
Not only that, but Danny Dyer has chimed in on all this. Full meta.
Heathrow decision delayed until next summer
This governing thing seems pretty easy. Just announce a commission to buy you a few years, then entirely ignore what they say and keep delaying until your candidate wins the London Mayoral elections next May. Delay, delay, delay.
This governing thing seems pretty easy. Just announce a commission to buy you a few years, then entirely ignore what they say and keep delaying until your candidate wins the London Mayoral elections next May. Delay, delay, delay.
Pathetic. Truly pathetic.
The NIMBYism of this government when it comes to these projects is incredibly frustrating. I guess it's a sign of the fact they only have a 12 seat majority in the commons, and last time were a coalition, but ffs just start the work. Give both airports the right to expand, we could do with the infrastructure spend.
CyclopsRock
Member
Tbf I think the last ~40 years of governments have been bad at "big" infrastructure. Labour had a bunch of key issues that they kicked into the long grass: power stations, an extra runway in the SE, defense review that replaced big pieces earlier, trident replacement etc. Everything's been extended beyond its original lifespan because it's (politically) a lot easier to band-aid it for another 5 years than make a tough decision that might have negative impacts on certain constituencies. That's the case for all governments I think.
Jezbollah
Member
^^ Saying that, the biggest infrastructure project in Europe (Crossrail) seems to be ticking along nicely, and we did a pretty good job fitting out the infrastructure (and overall transformation) for the Olympics. We can do big projects when we have the desire.
WRT the third runway, kicking the can until next summer might seem like an obvious thing to do with Boris still in the frame, but there are aspects of the situation that are also big factors against this going ahead - one being that BA have stated that they might move operations outside of the UK if passengers are charged more to pay for the expansion. It might not happen, but the prospect of a Heathrow without BA is unthinkable - they dominate the airport.
WRT the third runway, kicking the can until next summer might seem like an obvious thing to do with Boris still in the frame, but there are aspects of the situation that are also big factors against this going ahead - one being that BA have stated that they might move operations outside of the UK if passengers are charged more to pay for the expansion. It might not happen, but the prospect of a Heathrow without BA is unthinkable - they dominate the airport.
CyclopsRock
Member
On the one hand, it seems sensible to me that passengers bear the brunt of the cost - after all, they're the main beneficiaries. On the other, we already pay such insane tax and airport charges per flight compared to most other airports and countries.
War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
I think they've just reached peak telegraph http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/soc...tart-publicly-shaming-other-peoples-kids.html
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Probably the best article I've read at summing up exactly why the Blairites lost the faith of the party: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/dec/11/blair-frail-legacy-labour-corbynistas
It's not an attack piece, and nor is it a pro-Corbyn piece, but I think it does sum up the state of affairs that lead from Blair's three successive victories to the Blairite Kendall getting less than 5% well, and any genuine Labour centrist should read it understand how the centrists could possibly return to power.
It's not an attack piece, and nor is it a pro-Corbyn piece, but I think it does sum up the state of affairs that lead from Blair's three successive victories to the Blairite Kendall getting less than 5% well, and any genuine Labour centrist should read it understand how the centrists could possibly return to power.
Because the reason some people misbehave is because they haven't been shouted at enough.
CyclopsRock
Member
I think that's mostly accurate, but I think it perhaps doesn't quite acknowledge the difficulty that they'd have had in making the cases that he's suggesting they didn't make. Labour of the 70's had been so decisively beaten than even Major won an election - Labour under Blair weren't really in a position to push their luck when it came to "winning the arguments" I think. They had to work somewhat under the radar.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
No, but the point is that most people win arguments in office, rather than outside them. Campaign timidly, govern ferociously. New Labour just did everything timidly.
CyclopsRock
Member
They weren't too timid about bombing the fuck out of people tbf.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Dunno, seems to be a trend these days. All the cool kids.
They had majorities of over 170 twice. They certainly had the chance to push arguments.
CyclopsRock
Member
Maybe, but would they have got 170 the second time of they had?
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Against Hague, IDS, and Howard? Probably.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked