Topics about the Labour Party
:sunglasses: 73.7 % ❤ 1 % :thumbsup: 6.1 % 😯 1 % :grinning: 11.1 % 🧥 1 % 🙏 1 % 😟 1 % :cry: 1 % :shit: 3 %
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
#618479
Boiler wrote:
Fri Jul 24, 2020 11:50 am
but I now believe that's the earliest date Labour will possibly score a victory. This assumes that (a) there's still a Labour Party in 2034 and (b) we still have general elections.
If we’re playing crap shoot futurology why not in the year 2525, if man is still alive?
#618483
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Fri Jul 24, 2020 2:19 pm
We await Mr Forde's verdict, but the "they wanted to lose" stuff seemed like it might not be quite as strong as it sounded in isolation.
I suspect certain people see no difference between "wanting to lose", "wanting not to lose too badly, but expecting you will", "wanting to do as well as possible but expecting to lose" and "wanting to do as well as possible, but expecting to lose, and hoping if you do lose it at least causes a period of reflection as to whether the right choices are being made rather than allowing more overenthusiastic types to start proclaiming all that's needed for outright victory is doubling down".

Regrettably we got the latter, Corbyn doubled down, ran the 2019 campaign entirely with hand-picked staff and a strategy of only he and his chosen few doing media, picking policies, and deciding where to campaign strongest based on the candidate's loyalties rather than winnability of seats etc., and here we are (though it is, of course, all Starmer's fault for pushing for a brexit policy that in reality probably helped shored up enough votes to prevent complete annihilation)
oboogie, Timbo liked this
#618491
crabcakes_windermere wrote:
Fri Jul 24, 2020 4:23 pm

I suspect certain people see no difference between "wanting to lose", "wanting not to lose too badly, but expecting you will", "wanting to do as well as possible but expecting to lose" and "wanting to do as well as possible, but expecting to lose, and hoping if you do lose it at least causes a period of reflection as to whether the right choices are being made rather than allowing more overenthusiastic types to start proclaiming all that's needed for outright victory is doubling down".
This ^^^^. Abso-fecking-lutely this. The accusation that Labour Party staff were actively working to engineer defeat for the party at a general election was what I found THE most obscenely offensive thing of anything in that shameful leaked "report". As a former Labour staffer myself, and someone who has worked closely with Labour Party staff for most of my nearly 40 years in the party, I know that no Labour staffer, regardless of the degree of antipathy towards any poorly performing leader, would ever begin to countenance such a thing. Labour Party staffers work immensely hard, particularly during election campaigns - virtually round the clock in most cases. They want the party to win, so hard it hurts.

More than anything else, this, for me, is what gives the leaked "report" away as a fucking tissue of pathetic lies with the sole aim of getting Corbyn off a massive fucking hook.

Iain McNicol (one of the best Gen Secs the party has ever had, in my view) is right to sue.

I'm afraid the party must be purged by fire and libel settlements. and hopefully expulsions in due course. There's no other way.

Otherwise, the stench of Corbynite shite will linger all the way to 2024.
Last edited by Abernathy on Fri Jul 24, 2020 7:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
#618515
It now seems likely that both the Forde report on the leaked "report" and the EHCR report are likely both to report towards the end of this year. There seems to be a desire to publish both reports at the same time, which is understandable, since they both deal with the same subject matter. But it's going to be interesting, and could be pivotal for Labour's journey back to government.
#618661
Indeed. He's retweeting Rachael Swindon retweeting Dorset Eye.

Here's how serious Dorset Eye is.

https://dorseteye.com/formal-complaints ... abour-mps/
Miliband, in a recent interview with Andrew Marr, which was in regard to the dismissal of former Shadow Education Secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey, stated. “It was a false criticism of the state of Israel”. “The problem is that over the centuries when calamitous things have happened Jews have been blamed. And that’s why there was an antisemitism issue in relation to this”. Ed Miliband has conflated the state of Israel with Jewish people collectively. This is a clear breach of the final example of antisemitism in the IHRA definition of antisemitism: Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.
#618664
I do wish people would stop talking about throwing people under buses. As a political metaphor, it was never much good to begin with, but now it's a just a tired, over-used cliche.
 
By Boiler
Posts
#618694
Malcolm Armsteen wrote:
Sun Jul 26, 2020 9:33 pm
And it's not fair on the bus.

Unless, of course, it's more than one bus, which would spread the damage round a bit.
Borismasters?
  • 1
  • 100
  • 101
  • 102
  • 103
  • 104
Brexit Fuckwit Thread

Is he calling for high tariffs or low tariffs? I c[…]

US election 2020

I think Trump win- Ted Cruz won statewide in a ver[…]

Labour, Generally.

Potential HS2 commuters are discovering that they […]

The Tories, Generally

Nobody wants to be the only ones standing when the[…]