The I cant believe it’s not politics thread.

[walkerleeds]

7 hours ago, pmcla26 said:

The police are just the government's gang ran to trump all other organized crime - it's why they prioritise and penalise drug crime over other matters that are probably worse issues. 

 

Correct. The police are so severely corrupted "the war on drugs" can quite literally never be won unless drugs are legalised.  

Edited 27 July 2022 by walkerleeds

[The Horse's Mouth]

Christ alive 

[Dunge]

13 minutes ago, The Horse's Mouth said:

Christ alive 

Presumably sacked from the front bench (not the party) because Starmer warned internally that anyone who did that would have to go. In which case, what other choice did they have?

 

I appreciate people want Labour to be on the side of the unions and the workers, but I understand their fear that they could lose credibility among the swing voters if they join the picket lines. People could easily see them as not a serious party of government, which is what Starmer’s been trying to build up in his time as leader.

[Dames]

3 minutes ago, Dunge said:

Presumably sacked from the front bench (not the party) because Starmer warned internally that anyone who did that would have to go. In which case, what other choice did they have?

 

I appreciate people want Labour to be on the side of the unions and the workers, but I understand their fear that they could lose credibility among the swing voters if they join the picket lines. People could easily see them as not a serious party of government, which is what Starmer’s been trying to build up in his time as leader.

The problem is Starmers tactics are now a shameless and desperate appeal to a portion of the voter base that will never ever vote Labour. 
 

He might have had a chance with Johnson still in charge but now there will be a new PM most of the voters KS is targeting will see it as a fresh start and continue to back the cons.

[Dames]

3 hours ago, Fazzer 7 said:

Not just mine. It’s all there to see on sites such as YouTube. They were always light touch with the environmental protesters especially. 

I once uploaded a video of myself trying to light a fart to Youtube. All there is to say about how serious that site is.

[Dunge]

3 minutes ago, Dames said:

The problem is Starmers tactics are now a shameless and desperate appeal to a portion of the voter base that will never ever vote Labour. 
 

He might have had a chance with Johnson still in charge but now there will be a new PM most of the voters KS is targeting will see it as a fresh start and continue to back the cons.

Disagree. I speak directly for myself in the matter. There are a lot of reasons I don’t like the Conservatives or their policies right now and would vote Starmer easily, but I’m not voting for a bunch of activists.

[weller54]

13 minutes ago, Dames said:

The problem is Starmers tactics are now a shameless and desperate appeal to a portion of the voter base that will never ever vote Labour. 
 

He might have had a chance with Johnson still in charge but now there will be a new PM most of the voters KS is targeting will see it as a fresh start and continue to back the cons.

A fresh start it certainly isn't!!...

It'll be more of the same bs with either Sunak or Thicko Truss!!

[Leicester_Loyal]

10 minutes ago, Dunge said:

Disagree. I speak directly for myself in the matter. There are a lot of reasons I don’t like the Conservatives or their policies right now and would vote Starmer easily, but I’m not voting for a bunch of activists.

Yep.

 

I agree with the pickets and have a vested interest in them, but if Labour want to be elected then they should stay away, it'll just turn the swing voters against them IMO.

[Dunge]

Just now, Leicester_Loyal said:

Yep.

 

I agree with the pickets and have a vested interest in them, but if Labour want to be elected then they should stay away, it'll just turn the swing voters against them IMO.

Yeah, they can make the case through the “right” channels in parliament.

Represent them by all means, but don’t join them.

[FoxesDeb]

12 minutes ago, Dunge said:

Disagree. I speak directly for myself in the matter. There are a lot of reasons I don’t like the Conservatives or their policies right now and would vote Starmer easily, but I’m not voting for a bunch of activists.

I agree, I think Starmer will appeal to many traditional but now disillusioned Tories, probably more so than your average hard core Labour voter. But only if he stays near the very centre.

[Dames]

12 minutes ago, Dunge said:

Disagree. I speak directly for myself in the matter. There are a lot of reasons I don’t like the Conservatives or their policies right now and would vote Starmer easily, but I’m not voting for a bunch of activists.

Like their tactics or not, I don't think there's a single thing Mick Lynch has said that's wrong over the past few months. 

 

If the Conservatives had their way, nobody would fight for anything and the default response would be yes master, thank you master for their real terms pay decreases year on year. I don't get how a Country full of people as proud as ours have allowed themselves to accept a worse standard of living year on year based on a fantasy.

 

If it takes activism to sort that out, just like it has with every other issue in the past then that's what it takes. 

[Dames]

4 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

Yep.

 

I agree with the pickets and have a vested interest in them, but if Labour want to be elected then they should stay away, it'll just turn the swing voters against them IMO.

On the flip side it can be seen as politicians actually willing to stand with the working man to make their lives better rather than dictating from the Ivory Tower of Westminster.

 

The problem with todays politicians is that they are too worried about the front pages of the hate rags.

[Leicester_Loyal]

 

I love this bloke. 

[RobHawk]

8 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

 

I love this bloke. 

He talks so much sense in such a clear and understandable manner. 

 

He's the epitome of what we should see from our politicians. Id vote for him that's for sure.

[bovril]

[Dunge]

17 minutes ago, Dames said:

Like their tactics or not, I don't think there's a single thing Mick Lynch has said that's wrong over the past few months. 

 

If the Conservatives had their way, nobody would fight for anything and the default response would be yes master, thank you master for their real terms pay decreases year on year. I don't get how a Country full of people as proud as ours have allowed themselves to accept a worse standard of living year on year based on a fantasy.

 

If it takes activism to sort that out, just like it has with every other issue in the past then that's what it takes. 

I’m not criticising Mick Lynch here. I’m saying that Labour as a party of government should take a different tactic. Let Lynch do his thing while they do theirs. They can still aim for the same sort of result from different directions.

[The Horse's Mouth]

Mick Lynch existing makes our options for number 10 even more depressing 

[bovril]

Was really hoping this would be the year Labour stopped being shit

[Dames]

12 minutes ago, Dunge said:

I’m not criticising Mick Lynch here. I’m saying that Labour as a party of government should take a different tactic. Let Lynch do his thing while they do theirs. They can still aim for the same sort of result from different directions.

I don't think they should because the only tactic they seem to be taking is to try to avoid being on the front page of the Daily Mail. They will get bad press regardless but people will notice it a lot more in the long run if they stood shoulder to shoulder with the working man rather than just hiding away hoping the press don't go after them and that a few retirees vote for them.

 

At this rate they just end up being 'more of the same' and its playing into the Tory grand plan of disenfranchising the entire voting population.

[Finnegan]

59 minutes ago, Dunge said:

I’m not voting for a bunch of activists.

 

Trade Unions aren't "activists", they're just ordinary workers expressing their democratic rights and organising to combine their voices and bargain collectively. 

 

Everybody who isn't a million or billionaire should be actively in favour of that, whether they believe in a free market and limited government or a "larger" social democracy. 

 

I'd go further and say Trade Unions, theoretically, are fantastic for capitalism. They're an important part of the balance that should keep capitalism in check and actually make it work as a fair and honest system. If you're a fiscal conservative that believes governments should tax less and provide fewer public services and interfere less in the lives of citizens and businesses, then you want Trade Unions in order to keep the corporate sociopaths from putting our society out of balance to the extent it breaks. 

 

The only people who benefit from destroying Trade Unions are dishonest and greedy hoarders of wealth at the extreme top of the pyramid who, unchecked, accrue disproportionately more wealth than anyone can ever spend and leave our societies facing situations like now where inflation is at an all time high yet bizarrely so is corporate profit? 

[Fazzer 7]

1 hour ago, Dames said:

I once uploaded a video of myself trying to light a fart to Youtube. All there is to say about how serious that site is.

Each to their own. 

[Fox in the North]

 

[st albans fox]

1 hour ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

Yep.

 

I agree with the pickets and have a vested interest in them, but if Labour want to be elected then they should stay away, it'll just turn the swing voters against them IMO.

 

1 hour ago, Dunge said:

Disagree. I speak directly for myself in the matter. There are a lot of reasons I don’t like the Conservatives or their policies right now and would vote Starmer easily, but I’m not voting for a bunch of activists.

 

1 hour ago, FoxesDeb said:

I agree, I think Starmer will appeal to many traditional but now disillusioned Tories, probably more so than your average hard core Labour voter. But only if he stays near the very centre.

as ever, the next election will not be won by Labour or Tory voters - it will be won by those in the middle ground who are not committed to either party 

 

starmer understands this - the Labour activists (as usual) do not. Principles and dogma are more important than winning - missing the huge point that no one who wins ever sticks to their manifesto anyway. And actually being in power enables you to do stuff.  

Edited 27 July 2022 by st albans fox

[Dunge]

12 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

Trade Unions aren't "activists", they're just ordinary workers expressing their democratic rights and organising to combine their voices and bargain collectively. 

 

Everybody who isn't a million or billionaire should be actively in favour of that, whether they believe in a free market and limited government or a "larger" social democracy. 

 

I'd go further and say Trade Unions, theoretically, are fantastic for capitalism. They're an important part of the balance that should keep capitalism in check and actually make it work as a fair and honest system. If you're a fiscal conservative that believes governments should tax less and provide fewer public services and interfere less in the lives of citizens and businesses, then you want Trade Unions in order to keep the corporate sociopaths from putting our society out of balance to the extent it breaks. 

 

The only people who benefit from destroying Trade Unions are dishonest and greedy hoarders of wealth at the extreme top of the pyramid who, unchecked, accrue disproportionately more wealth than anyone can ever spend and leave our societies facing situations like now where inflation is at an all time high yet bizarrely so is corporate profit? 

I don’t disagree. But the point isn’t about responsible trade unions, and I agree those who say that Mick Lynch has conducted himself excellently. This is about joining picket lines, being part of public protest.

 

As a government, you can’t be on picket lines. You have to be the one conducting negotiations and balancing the books accordingly. You have to be on the tough end of negotiations. If Labour are a government-in-waiting - which is clearly Starmer’s message - then they have to be able to face potential picket lines, not join them. They have to be able to put the side of affordability, economics and tough decisions. Or at least they have to be able to explain how investment will lead to better pay or conditions in the future. That, for me, is why it’s important that they show themselves to be politicians, committed to a political solution, rather than joining the picket lines - which has been a place for activists in the past even if I’m being a bit flippant about the term.

[Finnegan]

2 minutes ago, Dunge said:

This is about joining picket lines, being part of public protest.

 

But this is exactly my point, you equate a picket line to - what - like, I don't know, XR fanatics gluing themselves to roads in rush hour or something? 

 

This is my point, to an extent, that's nonsense. It's mass media brainwashing. They're just expressing their right to industrial action. You can't on one hand praise Mick Lynch (because he's cool at the moment) and then on the other complain about picket linesn. Lynch has expressed quite clearly that he himself will be on the picket and has also raised an eyebrow at people begrudging him that by asking "what exactly do you think happens on a picket?" 

 

He's happy to challenge the mass media painting picket lines as some sort of crazy, unlawful, violent, fanatical protest. It isn't, its just workers taking industrial action. 

 

And Labour aren't in government, they're the opposition. They should be opposing. I have no problem with them literally opposing the government by lending their support to a well organised and democratic, legal picket. 

 

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm quite pro-Starmer and I was fairly openly anti-Corbyn/Momentum. I'm an idealist, sure, but I'm also a pragmatist and a realist. I understand that Labour need to court the middle ground and that pulling this country back left will be a slow and gradual process that begins with a marginal centre left, fiscally liberal government. 

 

But I don't think they need to entirely abandon their core beliefs in order to get elected. They should be challenging the government on the rail strikes and helping to combat the media bias, use the celebrity of Lynch to help push a counter message that they stand by working people and this Tory government has absolutely tanked the economy and that the only people benefitting are the wealthy corporations putting "gifts" in their pockets.