The UK Politics and EU Referendum thread - merged

[Woodsey]

surely we want them to listen and adapt in the face of good counter arguments ?

Actually we don't - we then berate them for 'broken promises'. Don't we all need to grow up and not see plans and policies as some kind of solemn promise.

True, but when you are joke party with a joke leader who very few can take seriously, what else are you left with but berating someone for changing their opinion to something you wanted in the first place anyway?

Really enjoyed the politics of the last few months, it's great to see labour being shown up as the numpties they are  

I know you're (mostly) just winding people up, but would you really like to see Britain reduced to a one party state with no effective opposition?

If it keeps our government centre right then yes I don't really care, plus I like a good clown show for entertainment purposes  

Don't feed the troll

No trolling here, just saying what I really think. Maybe you one of those people that call people a troll when you hear something you don't like? I suspect so.... 

Or maybe he is one who calls them a troll when they make an emoji waving their arse at them?

Trying to keep it light hearted that's all, they mostly do that quite nicely 

[TightEnd]

http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2015/11/its-all-over-for-the-decent-left-and-they-have-only-themselves-to-blame/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

crick was saying this afternoon that the shad cab was 25-5 in favour of the bombing vote and the PLP was 50-50%

[kukushkin88]

surely we want them to listen and adapt in the face of good counter arguments ?

Actually we don't - we then berate them for 'broken promises'. Don't we all need to grow up and not see plans and policies as some kind of solemn promise.

True, but when you are joke party with a joke leader who very few can take seriously, what else are you left with but berating someone for changing their opinion to something you wanted in the first place anyway?

Really enjoyed the politics of the last few months, it's great to see labour being shown up as the numpties they are  

I know you're (mostly) just winding people up, but would you really like to see Britain reduced to a one party state with no effective opposition?

If it keeps our government centre right then yes I don't really care, plus I like a good clown show for entertainment purposes  

Don't feed the troll

No trolling here, just saying what I really think. Maybe you one of those people that call people a troll when you hear something you don't like? I suspect so.... 

Just politically illiterate, whether you're a troll or not seems academic. It's incredible anybody ever responds to your posts on these threads.

[Woodsey]

surely we want them to listen and adapt in the face of good counter arguments ?

Actually we don't - we then berate them for 'broken promises'. Don't we all need to grow up and not see plans and policies as some kind of solemn promise.

True, but when you are joke party with a joke leader who very few can take seriously, what else are you left with but berating someone for changing their opinion to something you wanted in the first place anyway?

Really enjoyed the politics of the last few months, it's great to see labour being shown up as the numpties they are  

I know you're (mostly) just winding people up, but would you really like to see Britain reduced to a one party state with no effective opposition?

If it keeps our government centre right then yes I don't really care, plus I like a good clown show for entertainment purposes  

Don't feed the troll

No trolling here, just saying what I really think. Maybe you one of those people that call people a troll when you hear something you don't like? I suspect so....  

Just politically illiterate, whether you're a troll or not seems academic. It's incredible anybody ever responds to your posts on these threads.

GFY....

You're just pissed off the Tories are in and politics of the left you want was firmly REJECTED by the Btitish public. Suck it up and stop whining  

[DaveShoelace]

Question of the day

Theoretical situation. The next election is very close and the party you oppose is going to win. The party you support has the opportunity to cheat and rig the vote in their favour and you are the only person in the world who will ever know this. Do you want them to cheat?

Basically the question is, is getting the party you want in power more important to you than them getting in democratically? Does the end justify the means if you believe the country would be better off even though the majority disagree?

[TightEnd]

Click to see full-size image.

[TightEnd]

JC emailed labour party members last night



Allegra Stratton ‏@BBCAllegra now13 hours ago

Lab folk furious about tonight's Corbyn poll of members: "Cynical attempt to circumvent majority of the public who MPs actually represent."

Allegra Stratton ‏@BBCAllegra now13 hours ago

Another source says "this might be last straw". Feeling that Corbyn wants to run party from membership. RIP representative Labour democracy

Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh now13 hours ago

Note JC's email says "I do not believe the PM made a convincing case". In polling terms that wd be called a leading question. He's not naive

[TightEnd]

interesting

look at the different percentages labour voters and labour membership

[The Camel]

I quite understand the feeling "we've got to do something" against the vermin which call themselves IS.

But already MORE THAN 10 TIMES AS MANY SYRIAN CIVILIANS HAVE DIED FROM US, RUSSIAN AND US AIR STRIKES AS DIED IN PARIS LAST WEEK.

As well as morally that making the countries that bomb Syria just as bad the terrorists, it does not a genius to work out that this is an incredibly effective tool for winning support and recruiting new jihadists to the cause.

It is morally wrong, tactically wrong, it makes the UK more of a target for IS sympathisers and is a simple knee jerk reaction.

Just don't do it.

[titaniumbean]

JC emailed labour party members last night


Allegra Stratton ‏@BBCAllegra now13 hours ago

Lab folk furious about tonight's Corbyn poll of members: "Cynical attempt to circumvent majority of the public who MPs actually represent."

Allegra Stratton ‏@BBCAllegra now13 hours ago

Another source says "this might be last straw". Feeling that Corbyn wants to run party from membership. RIP representative Labour democracy

Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh now13 hours ago

Note JC's email says "I do not believe the PM made a convincing case". In polling terms that wd be called a leading question. He's not naive

I'm currently in Russia, so this is a rather interesting time to be here.

Has this tweeter i've highlighted been moaning about Cameron going against everything he was voted in for or 'just against Corbyn'?  The more I see the more his childish stubbornness annoys me but he has a very valid point in terms of us having absolutely no strategy other than to be copying our friends and seen to do something, anything regardless of how inept it is.

I saw the reaction to Livingstones comments, and again the reaction seemed disproportionate, he made a very very valid point about Iraq/Blair our stated goals and real intentions, and the fact we failed to achieve pretty much anything except for Western economic benefits whilst also creating ourselves an even greater problem and threat, and yet because he seems like a twat alot of the time we focus on that not on the point he makes.

I quite understand the feeling "we've got to do something" against the vermin which call themselves IS.

But already MORE THAN 10 TIMES AS MANY SYRIAN CIVILIANS HAVE DIED FROM US, RUSSIAN AND US AIR STRIKES AS DIED IN PARIS LAST WEEK.

As well as morally that making the countries that bomb Syria just as bad the terrorists, it does not a genius to work out that this is an incredibly effective tool for winning support and recruiting new jihadists to the cause.

It is morally wrong, tactically wrong, it makes the UK more of a target for IS sympathisers and is a simple knee jerk reaction.

Just don't do it.

I agree with this, however I think that all of the nations involved (not just us) need to come to the acceptance that they have no strategy beyond funding the international arms trade and inciting more violence. Why is it that we never seem to learn from our mistakes?

Thought this was an interesting graphic

Click to see full-size image.

Last night also the US fiasco of mass shootings continues, whilst they have a police officer on a murder charge for shooting a black youth 16 times (and subsequently the police supposedly deleting video evidence except for the video of them deleting the video lel  - link here -- https://twitter.com/deray/status/669567156649070592   +   http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/laquan-mcdonald-burger-king-video_5655c5abe4b072e9d1c1469b   )  and yet a white man can kill an officer and other people, not only is it not a terrorist act but he gets taken alive again......   why we align ourselves with such a scummy country is beyond me, oh wait no, it's because of money and power.... thanks goodness D Cam wants us to be hand in glove with these tossers.

[nirvana]

I quite understand the feeling "we've got to do something" against the vermin which call themselves IS.

But already MORE THAN 10 TIMES AS MANY SYRIAN CIVILIANS HAVE DIED FROM US, RUSSIAN AND US AIR STRIKES AS DIED IN PARIS LAST WEEK.

As well as morally that making the countries that bomb Syria just as bad the terrorists, it does not a genius to work out that this is an incredibly effective tool for winning support and recruiting new jihadists to the cause.

It is morally wrong, tactically wrong, it makes the UK more of a target for IS sympathisers and is a simple knee jerk reaction.

Just don't do it.

I'm pretty undecided about this whole thing but, on balance, I think we need to go further than just air strikes.

The bit in bold can surely never be a reason to not act, if acting is a decision that's made

[AlunB]

I saw the reaction to Livingstones comments, and again the reaction seemed disproportionate, he made a very very valid point about Iraq/Blair our stated goals and real intentions, and the fact we failed to achieve pretty much anything except for Western economic benefits whilst also creating ourselves an even greater problem and threat, and yet because he seems like a twat alot of the time we focus on that not on the point he makes.

If he chooses to use his platform to attack his enemies rather than make his point as clearly and coherently as possible then fair enough, he is entitled to do so if he wishes. But he can't then expect people to not notice.

I agree with the point he was trying to make, but I disagree fundamentally with the way in which he made it. I find him an objectionable **** and his approach is so divisive it, in my view, harms rather than helps the cause he is supposedly fighting for.

[titaniumbean]

I saw the reaction to Livingstones comments, and again the reaction seemed disproportionate, he made a very very valid point about Iraq/Blair our stated goals and real intentions, and the fact we failed to achieve pretty much anything except for Western economic benefits whilst also creating ourselves an even greater problem and threat, and yet because he seems like a twat alot of the time we focus on that not on the point he makes.

If he chooses to use his platform to attack his enemies rather than make his point as clearly and coherently as possible then fair enough, he is entitled to do so if he wishes. But he can't then expect people to not notice.

I agree with the point he was trying to make, but I disagree fundamentally with the way in which he made it. I find him an objectionable **** and his approach is so divisive it, in my view, harms rather than helps the cause he is supposedly fighting for.

fair point, I too think he's a twat and comes off as such! hence my annoyance that his valid point gets so lost.

It's a shameful fact, that our free press, do so little actual journalism, but are so quick to write articles denouncing the people never the points made.


As an addition to my last post above, in the other direction about what to do in Syria, whilst I don't support warfare for the sake of using our cool toys and killing foreigns we place no value on; those saying we must 'only' use political discourse don't seem to realise just how divisively fucked up the region is, and of course as usual, we are to blame for large aspects of that.


It seems facetious....

but why don't we bomb Belgium with drones and be derisive when told civilians are killed?

We also need to make monetary savings AND have to cut police budgets, so why don't we remove all of the around the clock armed police that Tony Blair has the privilege of on every single fucking one of the properties he owns if he made such just and legal and honorable decisions?

[AlunB]

Indeed. Moral relativism is an ugly beast. Is one way of life worth less than another?

I find it incredibly hard to hear a convincing argument on why bombing Syria makes British people or indeed any people more safe. Cameron seemed to be saying it was up to us to do "our bit" but our bit of what exactly? What is the end goal here?

That said you can't do nothing here. Or at least it feels like you can't or shouldn't. But what, exactly, do you do? I admit I have no idea, and I suspect neither does anyone else really.

[MintTrav]

After Iraq and Afghanistan, everyone agreed that we shouldn't get involved again unless there is a plan for what happens after the bombing.

Then we did it in Libya without a plan for afterwards and that is a mess.

So what's the plan for Syria after the bombing?

It would seem that Assad is to be kept in power, at least in the short term. Is he going to be supported in the long term? Is his power going to be controlled by Russia/US?

Who is going to take control of the areas currently controlled by Isil? Assad? Us/US? Russia? Local chiefs? Some other Muslim terror group?

Like with any decision, we shouldn't decide to take action unless we know what we want to achieve.