mrjonno wrote:

chairman bill wrote:Well done mrjonno - fuckwitted comment of the week

6000 years ago when god created the universe he created the invisible voter who only turned out when Labour put a Marxist in charge

No...it's still your previous comment, but nice try.

Scot Dutchy wrote:

ronmcd wrote:

Scot Dutchy wrote:

chairman bill wrote:Labour set to lurch to the left, shock, horror.

Why is it always a 'lurch' to the left? Why is a candidate garnering support from left wingers so terrible, but chasing Tory votes is just fine? I smell right-wing media being scared of the implications of a popular left-wing party leader.

Wish I could see it Bill but I cant. Maybe in the '60's not now as the electorate has completely changed. This idea of returning to principles will change everything is extremely naive.

The electorate hasn't necessarily changed, the offers available have changed (narrowed)

How many were home owners in the '60's? It was the time of the big council estates. A perfect environment for Labour.

The tory illusion is that a home owner is middle class therefore by definition a tory voter.

Owning a house does make you middle class, being middle class doesnt however make you a Labour voter unless Labour act that way.

Labour need to completely dissociate themselves with unions, the working classes, unemployed 5th generation coal miners,the whole lot and be rational pro middle class party. The only working class votes they should be going for are those working class who actually want to move up in the world and cease to be working class

Only compulsory voting can get anyway near to 95%. All other systems have about 20-30% non turn out.

Here when compulsory voting was scrapped in the 50's the turn out the first couple of times was 90% but that was due to habit.
Now we have roughly 80% but that is due in great part to the PR system. Every vote does count.

mrjonno wrote:

Scot Dutchy wrote:

ronmcd wrote:

Scot Dutchy wrote:

Wish I could see it Bill but I cant. Maybe in the '60's not now as the electorate has completely changed. This idea of returning to principles will change everything is extremely naive.

The electorate hasn't necessarily changed, the offers available have changed (narrowed)

How many were home owners in the '60's? It was the time of the big council estates. A perfect environment for Labour.

The tory illusion is that a home owner is middle class therefore by definition a tory voter.

Owning a house does make you middle class, being middle class doesnt however make you a Labour voter unless Labour act that way.

Labour need to completely dissociate themselves with unions, the working classes, unemployed 5th generation coal miners,the whole lot and be rational pro middle class party. The only working class votes they should be going for are those working class who actually want to move up in the world and cease to be working class

We already have a party which meets your ideological dribblings... they're called Tories.

mrjonno wrote:...couple of my colleagues at work who are arch conservatives(including the one who say he would never vote Labour as they are the party of the poor) have voted Corbyn, they consider their £3 to be a charitable donation to destroying the Labour party

How long have you been working with these people?

We already have a party which meets your ideological dribblings... they're called Tories.

The US manage to have two pro middle class parties, why cant' we?

The poor need to be left to charities and pressure groups, they are too much of a minority group to have a political party dedicated to (at least in a FPTP system which we are going to have for quite some time to come). A political party for the poor and disadvantage makes as much sense a political party for left handed people. Left handed people do have issues but at 10% they aren't worth chasing over

Briton wrote:

mrjonno wrote:...couple of my colleagues at work who are arch conservatives(including the one who say he would never vote Labour as they are the party of the poor) have voted Corbyn, they consider their £3 to be a charitable donation to destroying the Labour party

How long have you been working with these people?

About 5 years, one is ok (merely selfish which I don't hold against anyone) the other I try to keep a distance from as there has been a potential for violence

Briton wrote:

mrjonno wrote:...couple of my colleagues at work who are arch conservatives(including the one who say he would never vote Labour as they are the party of the poor) have voted Corbyn, they consider their £3 to be a charitable donation to destroying the Labour party

How long have you been working with these people?

mrjonno wrote:About 5 years...

Ah...that's a theory out the window.

mrjonno wrote:one is ok (merely selfish which I don't hold against anyone)

Is that the idiot who thinks Corbyn is going to make him poor again and make him go back to Liverpool?

mrjonno wrote:... the other I try to keep a distance from as there has been a potential for violence

Yes I imagine you have that effect on people.

mrjonno wrote:

We already have a party which meets your ideological dribblings... they're called Tories.

The US manage to have two pro middle class parties, why cant' we?

Eh, because some of us don't want to live in a fuck you society ?

So far, all I've heard against Corbyn is ad hominem attacks & general insults, being written off as a 'lefty' (as if that's an argument), and unevidenced claims that Labour can only win by moving to the so-called centre ground (which now seems to be somewhat further to the right than it was). The closest thing to an engagement with his policy proposals, is a argument-free dismissal of them as being nothing but nationalisation, with the implicit suggestion that that is a terrible thing. Pretty pathetic stuff.

mrjonno wrote:Labour need to completely dissociate themselves with unions, the working classes, unemployed 5th generation coal miners,the whole lot and be rational pro middle class party. The only working class votes they should be going for are those working class who actually want to move up in the world and cease to be working class

So you mean they should focus on aspirational middle englanders who want to move up by pushing things like free university education, and jobs for their kids through a healthy economy not strangled by austerity measures, and a safety net so that if things go temporarily bad through unemployment or illness they don't slide back into poverty. Maybe nationalise the railways to make them more affordable and improve job mobility, and give those middle englanders a stake in ownership of national assets instead of reserving that ownership for the mega-rich like Branson. I think you're right, now all Labour need to do is find a leader who believes in that sort of thing.

chairman bill wrote:So far, all I've heard against Corbyn is ad hominem attacks & general insults, being written off as a 'lefty' (as if that's an argument), and unevidenced claims that Labour can only win by moving to the so-called centre ground (which now seems to be somewhat further to the right than it was). The closest thing to an engagement with his policy proposals, is a argument-free dismissal of them as being nothing but nationalisation, with the implicit suggestion that that is a terrible thing. Pretty pathetic stuff.

Too right!

I'm at a loss as to how Corbyn is perceived by some like mrjonno to be middle-class poison. I'm as middle-class as you get: working class parents who saved like hell to put me through a good school, and support me through uni, got a degree and a good job, married a doctor, have three kids who will all go to private high schools as we don't like the local government school, own my own house, have a mortgage on a second house that's currently rented out, in line to inherit two more properties. And if lived in the UK, I'd not only vote for Labour if Corbyn were leader, I'd volunteer my time for campaigning. I'm sure there are people like me in the UK, not least because I know some.

I'd add that any putative Labour leader should also propose a National Investment Bank, focussed on lending to small to medium businesses & supporting an increase in our manufacturing base. Good for business, good for employers, good for employees, good for the economy overall. Now if only one of the leadership candidates was to suggest such a thing ...

Briton wrote:

mrjonno wrote:

We already have a party which meets your ideological dribblings... they're called Tories.

The US manage to have two pro middle class parties, why cant' we?

Eh, because some of us don't want to live in a fuck you society ?

We all want things we can't have

mrjonno wrote:

Briton wrote:

mrjonno wrote:

We already have a party which meets your ideological dribblings... they're called Tories.

The US manage to have two pro middle class parties, why cant' we?

Eh, because some of us don't want to live in a fuck you society ?

We all want things we can't have

Yeah? Well fuck you with that attitude. Oh wait ...

mrjonno wrote:

Briton wrote:

mrjonno wrote:

We already have a party which meets your ideological dribblings... they're called Tories.

The US manage to have two pro middle class parties, why cant' we?

Eh, because some of us don't want to live in a fuck you society ?

We all want things we can't have

I hope to fuck you don't get the things you want, what a scary fucking world.

I don't consider what I want or don't what has much relevance to what actually happens, nor most people desires

Scot Dutchy wrote:

ronmcd wrote:

Scot Dutchy wrote:

chairman bill wrote:Labour set to lurch to the left, shock, horror.

Why is it always a 'lurch' to the left? Why is a candidate garnering support from left wingers so terrible, but chasing Tory votes is just fine? I smell right-wing media being scared of the implications of a popular left-wing party leader.

Wish I could see it Bill but I cant. Maybe in the '60's not now as the electorate has completely changed. This idea of returning to principles will change everything is extremely naive.

The electorate hasn't necessarily changed, the offers available have changed (narrowed)

How many were home owners in the '60's? It was the time of the big council estates. A perfect environment for Labour.

The tory illusion is that a home owner is middle class therefore by definition a tory voter.

That might be a good argument if the last time Labour won was the 1960's, but Labour were electable in 1997 and for years after. It wasn't because they were left or right, or smack in the middle, it was initially because a) the people were fed up with the tories, b) Labour presented a competent *optimistic* vision in comparison.

Labour can be positive, optimistic, present a competent alternative to privatisation and austerity, refocus the story away from labour overspending (which wasnt true, but the 3 idiots have accepted as truth) and onto Tory unfairness and unnecessary & brutal cuts which will harm The Voters who voted Tory, and many more besides.

There's an assumption the Tories are all conquering and popular. They arent. They just need an opposition.

Labour can be positive, optimistic, present a competent alternative to privatisation and austerity

Most people don't care about privatisation or austerity, its up their with constitutional reform and global warming in important

How privatisation affects you isn't easy to judge, austerity primary affects those at the bottom of society who rely the most on public services, these are either going to vote Labour or blame foreigners for everything and blame UKIP

Briton wrote:

mrjonno wrote:

We already have a party which meets your ideological dribblings... they're called Tories.

The US manage to have two pro middle class parties, why cant' we?

Eh, because some of us don't want to live in a fuck you society ?

Have you had trouble locating an airport?