Around the world News

[RedNoodle]

I'd agree that everyone has an opinion, but not that everyone is a hypocrite or points the finger elsewhere. Most/an increasing number of people may be one or both of those things, but there still are a few of us who like dealing in truths even if that means accepting some painful truths about ourselves and our communities/sections of society.

The trouble is that people don't want to hear the truth because it shows them and/or their sections of society in a bad light, so they instead constantly try to shift the blame elsewhere effectively brushing said issue under the carpet where it can lay unchecked, festering over time to a point where it's too big to be dealt with.

[redebreck]

Im not an economist or a politician but the Tories are the party who 9 years ago at the start of their austerity (which targeted vulnerable people (fit to work!), education and pretty much every service working class people and below rely on etc )said the defecit would be gone by 2020. Its tripled.
Their budget for education has been rediced year on year. If a govt isnt going to invest in its education what chance is there?

Typical politicians, make promises and fail to deliver.
It looks at the moment as though tories will win the general election. Five more years of those selfish twots destroying the parts of the UK they don't agree with.
God help us all.

[eggy81]

Wow labour decimated. What does this mean for you guys going forward.

[fagin]

Wow labour decimated. What does this mean for you guys going forward.

Except for such a Labour stronghold as is Liverpool.....unfortunately it has been this way of thinking that has kept Liverpool as being one of the most depressed cities in the UK for at least the last 50+ years

[redebreck]

Wow labour decimated. What does this mean for you guys going forward.

I genuinely think Labour lost because of their leadership, Corbyn and Abbott. Corbyn has resigned, if Abbott does likewise then Labour with new leadership should do well. The party needs to listen to its membership and voters. Labour would, I believe, have won this GE if it had good eadership.
Tory press didn't help obviously. I didn't vote Labour because of their apparent support of terrorism.

[stevie harkness]

New Labour
Education Education Education
Strong and Stable
Brexit
Get Brexit Done (being extorted, anagram)

It seems that all the great British people really want is a good brand name, slogan or mantra to get behind. It doesn't even have to be good.

[fiordearg]

Imagine voting people who, in general, dislike you. A victory for nationalism in England, Scotland and the six counties.
It is a mandate for Brexit to be completed but also it is one for populism.
On a good note Farage is irrelevant

[CCTV]

New Labour
Education Education Education
Strong and Stable
Brexit
Get Brexit Done (being extorted, anagram)

It seems that all the great British people really want is a good brand name, slogan or mantra to get behind. It doesn't even have to be good.

The depth of conversation I saw rose above discussion about the respective slogans.

Then again I hear trump is going trans for 2020 so he can use the 'I'm with her' slogan. If so perhaps time will tell

[stevie harkness]

The depth of conversation I saw rose above discussion about the respective slogans.

Then again I hear trump is going trans for 2020 so he can use the 'I'm with her' slogan. If so perhaps time will tell

I agree with you on the depth of conversation of course, not sure about your second point.

Mine was simply an observation that the winning side has the gimmick or slogan, be it Blair, Boris or your dear Trump, I can't recall Corbyn or Clinton having a slogan. As with Brexit the winning side is the most media savvy.

Apparently brands and slogans work on the majority of people which is why advertisers spend so much money on them.

[CCTV]

I agree with you on the depth of conversation of course, not sure about your second point.

Mine was simply an observation that the winning side has the gimmick or slogan, be it Blair, Boris or your dear Trump, I can't recall Corbyn or Clinton having a slogan. As with Brexit the winning side is the most media savvy.

Apparently brands and slogans work on the majority of people which is why advertisers spend so much money on them.

Clinton's slogan was 'I'm with her' v his MAGA.
Corbyns was 'time for a real change' v 'Get Brexit done'.

[Balinkay]

Tbf I don't think either of those was nearly as central or popular during their respective election.

[CCTV]

Tbf I don't think either of those was nearly as central or popular during their respective election.

The 'I'm with her' was I'd argue, agree on the labour one though. It wasnt centrestage but then they were a clusterfook of a side imo.

[Nineteenx]

I genuinely think Labour lost because of their leadership, Corbyn and Abbott. Corbyn has resigned, if Abbott does likewise then Labour with new leadership should do well. The party needs to listen to its membership and voters. Labour would, I believe, have won this GE if it had good eadership.
Tory press didn't help obviously. I didn't vote Labour because of their apparent support of terrorism.

They didn't, they lost because 10-15% of people in their Leave seats who normally vote Labour were desperate to have their Brexit, I watched the whole evening as it transpired, the media are misreporting it as you would expect. In the vast majority of the seats Labour lost Tories gained, BUT, it wasn't because they had a massive increase in their vote, in the vast majoirty of all those seats there wasn't the huge Labour/Tory swing the media are reporting, they voted mostly for the Brexit party who took 7-12% out of Labours majority, Tories only had an actual 1-5% swing in most of their gains, Brexit party did the damage.

To be perfectly honest, whoever was leader wouldn't have changed that, they really wanted Brexit and 10-15% of them voting for it when most of your majorities are 4-11% is going to do for you

Labour's policies are very popular, they have huge support among 18-40 year olds, rather than do anything drastic they need to keep building their socialist movement, get a teflon leader, have great policies, but not too many of them, don't overdo it and get rid of some of the divisive elements like JLM.

JLM was reformed specifically to try and bring down Corbyn with an AS smear campaign, the history is as follows:

October 2014 Ed Miliband has a HOC vote to recognise Palestine state

All hell breaks loose and Jewish donors & some members label the party toxic and leave in their droves, press label it 'Labour's Palestine problem;

Corbyn elected leader - JLM reformed - Palestine problem suddenly falsely labelled antisemitism

The IHRA definition of antisemitism does not support JLM accusations that recognising a Palestine state and/or criticising Israeli Gov atrocities against it is antisemitic, it very patently isn't, if you google it you get lots of info from credible neutral sources that Israeli Gov is pushing this false narrative in the politics of several nations to avoid more nations recognising a Palestine state and to try and avoid just criticism for their atrocities against it

There are some limited instances that could be classed as antisemitism, that are more a need for education, in which people have been guilty of repeating language used by Jewish people disputing the issue between one another, which was considered antisemitic, as we're all aware in all minorities there is language used between one another that it is unacceptable for a person not of that minority to use in relation to them - that's about it

The terrorism thing is a lie, but a lie too many people believe, which is why the next socialist leader needs to be teflon, because the media will come after them as they did Corbyn and try to smear them, so it's important no amount of shit slung at them can stick, I'd probably like it to be Rebecca Long-Bailey with Angela Rayner as Deputy

To briefly explain the terrorism thing, during the Northern Ireland conflict and IRA attacks, Corbyn insisted that dialogue was the way to end it and find peace and spoke regularly to both sides to try and achieve that, years later because he'd built that dialogue playing a key role in the peace process and Goof Friday agreement. Thatcher was UK PM at the time and always stated publicly "We do not negotiate with terrorists" which is why Corbyn was labelled a terrorist sympathiser, just 3 weeks ago a document subject to the 30 year rule was released that showed Thatcher had also been trying to negotiate all the time in secret despite what she said publicly

[redebreck]

19X, I certainly recognise, now, that Brexit was a major factor, looking at the results.
Please clarify JLM and HOC if you will.
As you mention, Thatcher was trying to negotiate in secret while Corbyn was doing it openly and thereby appearing to be supportive of the terrorists. I don't feel that Corbyn explained his actions sufficiently, which would have changed people's perceptions.
Diane Abbott hasn't I believe condemned ISIS or the return of naive British nationals who joined ISIS.
I certainly agree with your comments regarding teflon.
From a personal point of view I would like to see the Labour party addressing homelesness, food banks and communities.
I look forward to a better run, teflon Labour party competing in the next General Election.

[CCTV]

Obviously I'm delighted with the result and that in the main established parties the only one who respected the referendum result won the day.

Bojos big win came courtesy of his opposition.
They said the eu wouldnt renegotiate, he wouldnt get a deal, that he was lying and not to be trusted as he wasnt even trying to get a deal.
Then he delivered, moved the immovable EU, got a deal for the withdrawal act, showed he was trying and succeeding where others cried impossible and liar.
Thereafter who else could you chose to lead Britain forward? He had achieved the impossible made gigantic in the media by those who bemoaned and smeared him.
The lazy oaf made them look silly and full of shit.
#Epic opposition fail.

On top of this boris is tougher on crime - which many people support, he's not particularly arsed about the pc brigade/thought-police though every politician for the most part has to be wary of them and talks about britain as though he has a different view of the nation than an ISIS recruiter.

Corbyn i had high hope's for and he gets some pity from me, but not much tbf, he was like a man held hostage by the labour parliamentary party and front benches. They forced him into an awful Brexit position and he was in the end a weak leader. Wagged by the tail.

An ardent opponent of the eu and its fascistic roots, a populist and a man who laughed at the idea of a second lisbon referendum. Forced into giving a remain v remain second referendum - whereby the labour party would negotiate a deal they wanted to defeat. Proper gangsta politics imo by labour.
You want your door fixed, well we wont fix your door and if you really want the door fixed we'll fix it so that you would wish we had not fixed your door. Now you can trust me pal.


As a result of this Corbyn was left to be seen as an inauthentic & hollow man. Undermined by his MPs and forced onto the same sides he'd naturally oppose.
When putting the letwin amendment through the hoC he made a hollow dig about the unelected hoL who everyone knew was on the same side as him then.

They took the 'working class champion' millionaire socialist and put him on the same side as the hoL, city of london, big multinationals and banking sector/forecasts that would ultimately mock his economic plan as a greater threat than no deal Brexit. His plans for reducing inequality went too far over to Marxism, or to put it more plainly taking property/shares. Reducing inequality doesnt require such gigantic changes and generally people are more happy to see future income taxed rather than existing or inherited wealth. After all why would you save in the future if you found it would be taken by the state after you paid your taxes already.
Most people today will live pay cheque to pay cheque. Whether you earn 200, 400 or 600 pound many people will spend it all most weeks. This phenomena imo is actually about our consumer society and often tags in poverty as an insincere consideration. I've gone off point

By doing this they put him against 4-5 million brexit labour voters, the working class who overwhelmingly voted for Brexit and in the end against democracy itself.
Imo he was undermined by the labour party and a big bunch of fuckwits within the party and its wider membership.

I wouldn't be as confident about the post-Corbyn era. He resonated with a section of labour voters that I'm not so sure labour will attract without him. They might be stuck with labour as their only option but not arsed voting - disaffected and not represented working class. It will be interesting to see if the 2017 shift by class is extended again in 2019. The problems for the labour party imo are all still in place and unaddressed.

In the end it is my Firm belief that had he led authentically he'd have won this election. He could have been on the side of democracy and respecting the vote whilst bashing May. In doing so he could actually implement his plans outside the eu and he would have been able to bash those who in the end he was on their side: Protecting material tack over democratic freedom and rule of law.