Monday 11'th 2015

[yahyah]

IIRC HappyChickie was the simpering sycophant that used to follow Rusty around making "Oh you're so clever Mr rustinpeace" inanities. No surprise that it followed him over here to have a good gloat.

Classy...

Odd how their writing style (if one can call it that) is so similar......

There are too many trolls over there who are actually the same person. We know this. It's very tedious.

Still, they'll have a bit of fun trying to wind us up. It won't work.

Most amusing how you are all still in denial. You have convinced yourself for so long that Labour is your saviour.
I'm really looking forward to those deep swinging welfare cuts. You could always get a job delivering Labour leaflets. Just saying eh?

Have a fantastic day. I'm enjoying my immensely reading your inane rubbish. You've all seem to have lost the plot over Labour's complete and utter demise



As you were...

Complete and utter demise ? Shows just how delusional a twat you are.

& if you find people sharing their feelings inane, it shows even more what a sad little individual you actually are.

[ohsocynical]

Written by someone who voted UKIP. Something for Labour to think about.

Note to Blair, Prescott, Mandleson and any of the other architects of the New Labour experiment.
We want TRUE Labour not New Labour. You sold millions of working class people out for your quest for power.
Your careerist, professional politicians have no understanding of the Working Class.
We want to believe, we want to value and support a movement that cares for the vast majority of folk in our country, those law abiding, honest people who just want a fair deal.
My own message to Labour is don't lurch back to an experiment that made you loose your heart, your identity and your soul. Be true to your values, be honest and hold out a protective hand to the working classes of our country

But I don't see how Ed Miliband's plans didn't meet those criteria. What didn't he do?

Edited

Crieria. Dear God . . . .

Thanked.

Given that we're in Europe I don't see how much further Ed could have gone on Imigration.
Stopping employers hiring direct from abroad would have helped a lot. As would getting rid of ZH.
Building massive numbers of council or HA houses would solve the bad feelings about council houses being taken by imigrants and single mothers. Would also have created a lot of unskilled jobs.

I'm working class and housing and job losses to imigrants can and does cause ill feeling. I hear it all the time.
Pandering to them won't make them faithful voters though.
I swear it'll only be those two things that made them vote UKIP, because everything else Farage came up with would work against them if they thought about it.
If they had a decency gene in their body they'd not have voted UKIP in the first place. They're spiteful, mean spirited and vengeful. Where once you'd only get a hint of their bigotry, since the rise of UKIP, they're in your face with it.
I know a few and these days try to avoid them if possible. Many would be BNP if they had the nerve. As it is, UKIP is the perfect home for them because [especially thanks to the BBC] UKIP is a tad more socially acceptable.

I can guarantee they haven't given a thought to what happens if we come out of the EU. And they'd never have been happy with the length of time taken to get the housing etc off the ground.

Farage gave them a voice. That's all......

And to add to my post. They're racist. They shouldn't be given a voice or listened to.

[yahyah]

Sorry, I shouldn't have fed the troll.

[yahyah]

Deleted post.

[AnatolyKasparov]

I think you are being a tad unfair, tbh - you and Tem should really find time for some

[thatchersorphan]

http://www.leftfutures.org/2015/05/blai ... -nonsense/

So what would the Blairites have done? Their strident argument on the economy was that big cuts needed to be made to pay off the deficit, but that New Labour would ease the pain by cutting ‘less far, less fast’. This is the worst of all worlds. It implies that Labour accepts the Tory framing of the election that Labour caused an almightly economic mess, that the deficit is now the central issue and that deep cuts in pay, benefits and public services were the right way to deal with the deficit.

This.

[ohsocynical]

Sorry, I shouldn't have fed the troll.

Tempting isn't it.

I am going to be very crude here, so anyone who's sensitive or thinks old ladies shouldn't know better, had better scroll on quickly.

I reckon they've had a woody ever since the exit polls came out. Imagining that helps no end.

[TechnicalEphemera]

I think you are being a tad unfair, tbh - you and Tem should really find time for some

Tem might have an issue with Labour, but I am sure his comments were posted with the intention to be helpful.

[ohsocynical]

BTW. Is Dan all right? Or have I missed if he's posted in the last few days?

Also wondering how Ernst is doing.

[StephenDolan]

http://www.leftfutures.org/2015/05/blai ... -nonsense/

So what would the Blairites have done? Their strident argument on the economy was that big cuts needed to be made to pay off the deficit, but that New Labour would ease the pain by cutting ‘less far, less fast’. This is the worst of all worlds. It implies that Labour accepts the Tory framing of the election that Labour caused an almightly economic mess, that the deficit is now the central issue and that deep cuts in pay, benefits and public services were the right way to deal with the deficit.

This.

Absolutely. I'd love to know what policies the Blairites feel should have been in the manifesto to appeal to the marginals. SH fancy playing Devils Advocate?

[Temulkar]

They're sick pf proffesional politicians, which they dont see the Fuhrage as. Labours best bet is that the grandees get down on their hands and knees and beg Dan Jarvis to stand and throw everything the party has behind him. Because he is the only one you have who will coonnect with those voters. Give him anything and everything he needs to do the job.

I like Hunt (he's hopefully reviewing my book) but him Umana, Eagle and the rest will turn off the voters you need back.

Hi Tem, I couldn't agree more on Jarvis.

Err, I sniff a whiff of insincerity.

Since when should we take advice from someone who makes it plain he hates the Labour party & has personally insulted some of it's supporters here ?

Probably wants Jarvis so all those Greens can go shouting about the military, and baby killers.

Grow up yahyah. I spent 10 years and more as a labour member and activist and a lifetime voting for them before leaving reluctantly for the greens. You voted for Nick Clegg in 2010; what do you know about the movement or its values.

[yahyah]

Ed didn't lose us votes.
Just listened (well a while ago) to Olli Grenda (SP?) on the radio, LibDems have already done their analysis (fewer voter base to look at) and conclude the last ditch letter sent on the day before polling to all marginal seats (not sure if she meant just LibDem marginals, that needs investigating) clinched it for the torys. In it he pleaded that the SNP would have such a hold over Labour that (virtually) the whole world would collapse. They have already made voter contact and that letter was the over whelming reason given by those voters (who had already committed to vote LibDem during the campaign) changing at the last minute was fear of the SNP.
Perhaps Labour should contact the LibDem and pool inquest enquires. We need to know if that letter went out to all marginals.
We were expecting a dirty last ditch dirt throwing, but didn't expect it to land such a direct hit on marginal seats.
Two more tory voters I've spoken to both said they couldn't risk the SNP holding power over Labour. So that's three I've spoken to. I don't know any more to ask.

Do you get a sense those people didn't want the SNP holding power because they may have used it to further the break up of the Union or because they were perceived as being too leftist/awkward to deal with ?

As I've posted on the outreach thread, my neighbour's been shocked to find how many of her old friends veered to the right on the basis of the Tory fear campaign, but some were anxious about what they saw as a left wing bloc causing trouble. & these were people she had never thought of as right wing in their thinking...she wouldn't have been friends with them if they were, she's that type of person.

I am asking that question because...if, as is tempting, we want Labour to move to the left what is its future in getting those voters back ?
Is it Scots/Welsh nationalism they dislike or the policies the SNP/Greens/Plaid were putting forward that made voters fearful ?

Also have a feeling that the anti-austerity Axis women, during the debates, snapping at Ed, would have put a lot of people off going for Labour.

[yahyah]

..

[onebuttonmonkey]

Fuck.

We're screwed.

Yeah, I agree with this. The Labour right shouting 'you can't blame the press or the voters' is delusional bullshit. Whoever is in charge, a Labour party that wants to change anything will be shat on over and over again, and the fact is the only time Labour win is when Murdoch wants them to.

One of the things I teach, around horror movies, is that the real horror doesn't lie in the monsters, it lies in their victims and in what that tells us about what life is like - people want to be zombies. I already know a dozen people at work who know that the tories call teachers 'the enemies of promise', that we get in the way of the aspiration of children and of conservative politicians who want to do better for them, that we are the blob, but they voted for the people who insult them because the other guy looked funny.

Things I'm no longer interested in include

1. Being interested in things
2. Caring
3. Trying

The tories will either fuck it up so monumentally in the style of the early to mid 90s whilst Labour charge to the right and the press allow them to have a turn, or the tories will win whilst a Labour party that wants to change anything is heaped with scorn and derision, whoever is in charge, because change can't happen and they have to be stopped. And people are sheep and will decide they can't vote for the funny looking guy.

I will try to do a bit better in the day to day with the stuff I do anyway and just give up on anything else - there is no point.

Yep. I agree with all of this.

Here I am, looking down the next five years... five years that will include the abolition of Human Rights, the fudging of the boundaries to try and guarantee more than five years will follow these ones, something that looks like the end of the Union and a squabble over Europe before we even get to the cuts and the sell-offs and all the grisly, casual currency of suffering and blame that we elected to power. I'm angry and upset and I want to do something about that. I want to - like many now, although like fewer later - get involved again.

But can I join Labour? Can I reconcile myself with Alan Sugar and Peter Mandelson and the papers and the embedded Blairites and the rest of them going "Too far to the left! Labour's too far to the left!"? Can I really face being a casualty again in this futile battle being fought with narrative rather than evidence, one that will again end with an already not-left-enough party getting more rightwing?

I want to join something that can have a voice and be the alternative we need, not a differently branded photocopy of the same problem with the cruellest edges slightly sanded down. I can't join the inescapable Blairite spectre that is a party so trapped by right wing narrative it is too scared to actually be as radical as it's accused of being.

A still pro-austerity neo-liberal Labour (who just increased their share of the vote in an election where it was conclusively proven we don't need or have space for three parties on the general right claiming to be in the centre) isn't too far to the left. But people in the press and the party who don't know what the Left means keep saying Labour have moved too far to the left all the same. Oh, they believe it, but it doesn't mean it's true. If Labour had moved too far to the left, I'd've been delighted - all I did was stand still and I'm now referred to as a Trotsky by people who don't even know what it means.

There are many, many things Labour needs to do - listen to some different voices, for one; dismiss some overfamiliar ones is another. But it didn't lose the election because of genuinely left wing content; it did by failing to make an argument for what the left is for. And you know what, the reason it couldn't do that was because it was too far to the fucking right already to live up to any leftist argument it might have tried to make.

So. Should I do a deal with the political devil and try, locally, to be the voice of change I want to see? Even if that means joining a party I don't think can accommodate that change? That's one of the things I'm so angry about. Or what? Is there an alternative? I'll be trying to go to the anti-austerity demo in June, for example. But I'm already sick of the defeat being followed by a bombardment of narrative that can only, as Adam says, lead to more self-defeat, even if a new New Labour win in five years.

[yahyah]

BTW. Is Dan all right? Or have I missed if he's posted in the last few days?

Also wondering how Ernst is doing.

PF's been in touch with Ernst.

[Eric_WLothian]

Do you get a sense those people didn't want the SNP holding power because they may have used it to further the break up of the Union or because they were perceived as being too leftist/awkward to deal with ?

As I've posted on the outreach thread, my neighbour's been shocked to find how many of her old friends veered to the right on the basis of the Tory fear campaign, but some were anxious about what they saw as a left wing bloc causing trouble. & these were people she had never thought of as right wing in their thinking...she wouldn't have been friends with them if they were, she's that type of person.

I am asking that question because...if, as is tempting, we want Labour to move to the left what is its future in getting those voters back ?
Is it Scots/Welsh nationalism they dislike or the policies the SNP/Greens/Plaid were putting forward that made voters fearful ?

Also have a feeling that the anti-austerity Axis women, during the debates, snapping at Ed, would have put a lot of people off going for Labour.

The SNP manifesto was pretty much a copy of the Labour one - it had to be, to attract Labour voters. The main difference was to scrap Trident - which wasn't really a priority election issue. That's why Ed was right to refuse any agreements - they couldn't vote against Labour without tearing up their manifesto.

Break up the union? Yes.
Awkward to deal with? Yes - but it wouldn't have mattered.

[Temulkar]

Err, I sniff a whiff of insincerity.

Since when should we take advice from someone who makes it plain he hates the Labour party & has personally insulted some of it's supporters here ?

Probably wants Jarvis so all those Greens can go shouting about the military, and baby killers.

Grow up yahyah. I spent 10 years and more as a labour member and activist and a lifetime voting for them before leaving reluctantly for the greens. You voted for Nick Clegg in 2010; what do you know about the movement or its values.

Wrong again, I did not vote Lib Dem in 2010. I nearly voted Lib Dem in 2010...you see the difference ?

& according to your pal, I'm just a Labour tribalist

& shouldn't we be talking about why the Greens got knocked out in Brighton as well ?

Funny Im sure I remember different, but hey ho faculties go as you age.

Losing Brighton council? Well the labour party voting with the Tory party has a large deal to do with that. We won the seat though. Gosh a bit like the referendum and Scotland. more pandas up there than Labour members of parliament.

So, how do you think the strategy of insulting and attacking anyone who questioned labour pay off them. I guess you think it was a success since you are carrying on with it. So much for a more welcoming FTN and a grand alliance.

[yahyah]

Do you get a sense those people didn't want the SNP holding power because they may have used it to further the break up of the Union or because they were perceived as being too leftist/awkward to deal with ?

As I've posted on the outreach thread, my neighbour's been shocked to find how many of her old friends veered to the right on the basis of the Tory fear campaign, but some were anxious about what they saw as a left wing bloc causing trouble. & these were people she had never thought of as right wing in their thinking...she wouldn't have been friends with them if they were, she's that type of person.

I am asking that question because...if, as is tempting, we want Labour to move to the left what is its future in getting those voters back ?
Is it Scots/Welsh nationalism they dislike or the policies the SNP/Greens/Plaid were putting forward that made voters fearful ?

Also have a feeling that the anti-austerity Axis women, during the debates, snapping at Ed, would have put a lot of people off going for Labour.

The SNP manifesto was pretty much a copy of the Labour one - it had to be, to attract Labour voters. The main difference was to scrap Trident - which wasn't really a priority election issue. That's why Ed was right to refuse any agreements - they couldn't vote against Labour without tearing up their manifesto.

Break up the union? Yes.
Awkward to deal with? Yes - but it wouldn't have mattered.

How did people perceive the SNP, and the other parties though ?
The media gave the idea they were well to the left.

[ohsocynical]

Ed didn't lose us votes.
Just listened (well a while ago) to Olli Grenda (SP?) on the radio, LibDems have already done their analysis (fewer voter base to look at) and conclude the last ditch letter sent on the day before polling to all marginal seats (not sure if she meant just LibDem marginals, that needs investigating) clinched it for the torys. In it he pleaded that the SNP would have such a hold over Labour that (virtually) the whole world would collapse. They have already made voter contact and that letter was the over whelming reason given by those voters (who had already committed to vote LibDem during the campaign) changing at the last minute was fear of the SNP.
Perhaps Labour should contact the LibDem and pool inquest enquires. We need to know if that letter went out to all marginals.
We were expecting a dirty last ditch dirt throwing, but didn't expect it to land such a direct hit on marginal seats.
Two more tory voters I've spoken to both said they couldn't risk the SNP holding power over Labour. So that's three I've spoken to. I don't know any more to ask.

Do you get a sense those people didn't want the SNP holding power because they may have used it to further the break up of the Union or because they were perceived as being too leftist/awkward to deal with ?

As I've posted on the outreach thread, my neighbour's been shocked to find how many of her old friends veered to the right on the basis of the Tory fear campaign, but some were anxious about what they saw as a left wing bloc causing trouble. & these were people she had never thought of as right wing in their thinking...she wouldn't have been friends with them if they were, she's that type of person.

I am asking that question because...if, as is tempting, we want Labour to move to the left what is its future in getting those voters back ?
Is it Scots/Welsh nationalism they dislike or the policies the SNP/Greens/Plaid were putting forward that made voters fearful ?

Also have a feeling that the anti-austerity Axis women, during the debates, snapping at Ed, would have put a lot of people off going for Labour.

I watched the debate with the three women and Ed. Sturgeon came across like she was patting Ed on the head, promising she'd make him behave and do the right thing. It was demeaning. At the same time she wouldn't rule out a demand for Independence. It made me feel very, very uncomforable. Not to mention the other two hags.
It didn't change how I intended to vote, but I can see why people who were undecided might have second thoughts. No point voting for a party that's going to be another parties lap dog. We had that with the LibDems.

I know without a shadow of doubt she'd have put conditions on every policy Ed tried to get through. Ed knew it which was why he was so adamant there'd be no deals with them and so did the Tories and they were on it like a dog returning to its vomit.

She has a lot to answer for.

[yahyah]

Deleted post, as it hampered cross party co-operation

[Tubby Isaacs]

Ha ha ha ha.

Last month.

“The debate in Scotland is about how to get the maximum power for Scotland as soon as possible to counter Westminster’s continued austerity and cuts programme — which both Labour and Tories have signed up to for the next parliament,” said Angus Robertson, the SNP’s leader in Westminster. 10 March 2015

Today

Using far more cautious language than seen from the SNP during the election campaign, Robertson linked last year’s referendum defeat with the need to take a slow and realistic approach to new powers.

“I want to see maximum decision-making in Scotland as soon we possibly can,” Robertson told BBC Radio Scotland, as the SNP’s new group of 56 MPs travelled to Westminster to take up their posts on Monday morning.

“Unfortunately, the most important thing to be aware of and to recognise and respect is that Scotland voted no in the referendum last year, which means we can’t realistically have all the powers we want to have as quickly as possible.

“It’s going to be a matter which is subject to discussion between the Scottish government and the UK government.”

See also the "brilliant" Sturgeon.

This is quite spectacularly cynical, riding the wave of self-delusion, accusing opponents of running down Scotland, and once the votes are in the bag changing tack, because the "unionist parties" were right all along.

[utopiandreams]

Things have not gone entirely to plan for Fat Dave. He is due to lead a rousing chorus of Jerusalem before today's appointments are finalised at a celebratory gala this evening. Heather Wheeler raised hopes in opposition circles when news broke that she would not be backing him.

[ohsocynical]

I only percieve SNP as wanting Independence and if they couldn't get it with a referendum they'd get it some other way.
On Ed and the Labour parties back was another chance for them and I have little doubt they'll do deals with the Tories to get what they want.
The only bright spot is the Tories are the biggest bunch of liars and double dealing crooks you could ever hope to find. I shall get some comfort if they screw her and the SNP right to the wall.

[onebuttonmonkey]

Oh, and by the way - much as I don't like this or agree with the reasons why - Ed did cost some votes. Around here, where a LibDem held his seat, Ed Balls lost his and so forth, I've heard a lot of people saying they didn't like him. People who say they're not party-affiliated found a reason not to vote in Ed. A handful of those were (a) people who told me they voted Labour last time but not this time and (b) in Ed Balls' constituency. A majority of a handful says that matters.

I'm not saying it's him that lost the election, and I, personally, think he was an asset. But it's no point pretending the party didn't have a personality problem as well as a policy one. The fact that those who already liked him still like him doesn't mean plenty of people didn't. And if the party had answers to some of the other issues then maybe it would've been different. But regardless of Sturgeon and Cameron, it's as sad as it is true that Ed was not a vote winner where he was needed to be one. I think that's a sad reflection of how much spin has poisoned people's views, but I've no evidence for that.

[onebuttonmonkey]

Meanwhile, in farce corner:

Nigel Farage withdraws his resignation as Ukip leader after members demand he stays

Nigel Farage’s resignation as Ukip leader did not last long. The party has just sent out this statement from Steve Crowther, the Ukip chairman.

I just give up.

[RogerOThornhill]

I'm shocked, shocked to hear that Farage has decided not to step down as UKIP leader.

Apparently it's due to party NEC members wanting him to stay on which doesn't say much for Suzanne Evans.

[PorFavor]

Ha ha ha ha.

Last month.

“The debate in Scotland is about how to get the maximum power for Scotland as soon as possible to counter Westminster’s continued austerity and cuts programme — which both Labour and Tories have signed up to for the next parliament,” said Angus Robertson, the SNP’s leader in Westminster. 10 March 2015

Today

Using far more cautious language than seen from the SNP during the election campaign, Robertson linked last year’s referendum defeat with the need to take a slow and realistic approach to new powers.

“I want to see maximum decision-making in Scotland as soon we possibly can,” Robertson told BBC Radio Scotland, as the SNP’s new group of 56 MPs travelled to Westminster to take up their posts on Monday morning.

“Unfortunately, the most important thing to be aware of and to recognise and respect is that Scotland voted no in the referendum last year, which means we can’t realistically have all the powers we want to have as quickly as possible.

“It’s going to be a matter which is subject to discussion between the Scottish government and the UK government.”

See also the "brilliant" Sturgeon.

This is quite spectacularly cynical, riding the wave of self-delusion, accusing opponents of running down Scotland, and once the votes are in the bag changing tack, because the "unionist parties" were right all along.

Oh, give it to them anyway. They're just being polite . . . . .

(I assume that this is FFA that they're now doing a handbrake turn on.)




Edited

Bracket related

[PorFavor]

Meanwhile, in farce corner:

Nigel Farage withdraws his resignation as Ukip leader after members demand he stays

Nigel Farage’s resignation as Ukip leader did not last long. The party has just sent out this statement from Steve Crowther, the Ukip chairman.

I just give up.

Well, that's what you'd expect from someone who isn't a career politician . . .



Edited to add an "e". Nigel Farage really isn't a "carer" politician.

[yahyah]

Meanwhile, in farce corner:

Nigel Farage withdraws his resignation as Ukip leader after members demand he stays

Nigel Farage’s resignation as Ukip leader did not last long. The party has just sent out this statement from Steve Crowther, the Ukip chairman.

I just give up.

Six times the electorate have rejected him and still he wants more.
Even Natalie Bennetts only been passed over twice.

[StephenDolan]

Oh, and by the way - much as I don't like this or agree with the reasons why - Ed did cost some votes. Around here, where a LibDem held his seat, Ed Balls lost his and so forth, I've heard a lot of people saying they didn't like him. People who say they're not party-affiliated found a reason not to vote in Ed. A handful of those were (a) people who told me they voted Labour last time but not this time and (b) in Ed Balls' constituency. A majority of a handful says that matters.

I'm not saying it's him that lost the election, and I, personally, think he was an asset. But it's no point pretending the party didn't have a personality problem as well as a policy one. The fact that those who already liked him still like him doesn't mean plenty of people didn't. And if the party had answers to some of the other issues then maybe it would've been different. But regardless of Sturgeon and Cameron, it's as sad as it is true that Ed was not a vote winner where he was needed to be one. I think that's a sad reflection of how much spin has poisoned people's views, but I've no evidence for that.

Speaking to Conservative voting relatives since the GE, the Weak and Wierd appraisal popped up plus the SNP going nuts in power. Asked to elaborate on, give specifics on why these conclusions were reached and there's a shrug and a reliance on Because. Listing policies and asking which they opposed revealed very little issues.

Heartening and disheartening simultaneously.

[yahyah]

Ha ha ha ha.

Last month.

“The debate in Scotland is about how to get the maximum power for Scotland as soon as possible to counter Westminster’s continued austerity and cuts programme — which both Labour and Tories have signed up to for the next parliament,” said Angus Robertson, the SNP’s leader in Westminster. 10 March 2015

Today

Using far more cautious language than seen from the SNP during the election campaign, Robertson linked last year’s referendum defeat with the need to take a slow and realistic approach to new powers.

“I want to see maximum decision-making in Scotland as soon we possibly can,” Robertson told BBC Radio Scotland, as the SNP’s new group of 56 MPs travelled to Westminster to take up their posts on Monday morning.

“Unfortunately, the most important thing to be aware of and to recognise and respect is that Scotland voted no in the referendum last year, which means we can’t realistically have all the powers we want to have as quickly as possible.

“It’s going to be a matter which is subject to discussion between the Scottish government and the UK government.”

See also the "brilliant" Sturgeon.

This is quite spectacularly cynical, riding the wave of self-delusion, accusing opponents of running down Scotland, and once the votes are in the bag changing tack, because the "unionist parties" were right all along.

Oh, give it to them anyway. They're just being polite . . . . .

(I assume that this is FFA that they're now doing a handbrake turn on.)




Edited

Bracket related

The FFA that Murdoch's editorial yesterday said Cameron should force on them, so the SNP would have to force huge cuts or tax rises, and make Sturgeon have to explain it away.

[Eric_WLothian]

Do you get a sense those people didn't want the SNP holding power because they may have used it to further the break up of the Union or because they were perceived as being too leftist/awkward to deal with ?

As I've posted on the outreach thread, my neighbour's been shocked to find how many of her old friends veered to the right on the basis of the Tory fear campaign, but some were anxious about what they saw as a left wing bloc causing trouble. & these were people she had never thought of as right wing in their thinking...she wouldn't have been friends with them if they were, she's that type of person.

I am asking that question because...if, as is tempting, we want Labour to move to the left what is its future in getting those voters back ?
Is it Scots/Welsh nationalism they dislike or the policies the SNP/Greens/Plaid were putting forward that made voters fearful ?

Also have a feeling that the anti-austerity Axis women, during the debates, snapping at Ed, would have put a lot of people off going for Labour.

The SNP manifesto was pretty much a copy of the Labour one - it had to be, to attract Labour voters. The main difference was to scrap Trident - which wasn't really a priority election issue. That's why Ed was right to refuse any agreements - they couldn't vote against Labour without tearing up their manifesto.

Break up the union? Yes.
Awkward to deal with? Yes - but it wouldn't have mattered.

How did people perceive the SNP, and the other parties though ?
The media gave the idea they were well to the left.

Look at their history in Holyrood - Centralisation of power by freezing Council Tax and creating a single police force (and fire service); state guardians for under-18s (despite wanting a 16 voting age); removing the requirement for corroborative evidence in court (although they've U-turned on that one).
And the NHS (a pre-referendum report)

Last week the Institute for Fiscal Studies said that NHS spending in Scotland fell by 1 per cent in real terms between 2009/10 and 2015/16. In England it went up by 4.4 per cent.

http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/fac ... -nhs/18887
They make a lot of noise about being anti-Tory but happily accepted Tory support, giving them budget concessions, to run their minority government.

Left wing? Not in my opinion!

[PorFavor]

I'd just like to point out that I only edited my last post once. Are we operating some sort of "buy one get one free" system?

[utopiandreams]

Sorry, I shouldn't have fed the troll.

Tempting isn't it.

I am going to be very crude here, so anyone who's sensitive or thinks old ladies shouldn't know better, had better scroll on quickly.

I reckon they've had a woody ever since the exit polls came out. Imagining that helps no end.

I cannot imagine what goes through their heads, ohso. Nevertheless if they want to be heard they must at least be credible.

[utopiandreams]

I don't really care who has the last word, but may I say that we're all upset. Bernard Cribbins, I believe, had a song for this; it doesn't entirely end well.

[onebuttonmonkey]

Oh, and by the way - much as I don't like this or agree with the reasons why - Ed did cost some votes. Around here, where a LibDem held his seat, Ed Balls lost his and so forth, I've heard a lot of people saying they didn't like him. People who say they're not party-affiliated found a reason not to vote in Ed. A handful of those were (a) people who told me they voted Labour last time but not this time and (b) in Ed Balls' constituency. A majority of a handful says that matters.

I'm not saying it's him that lost the election, and I, personally, think he was an asset. But it's no point pretending the party didn't have a personality problem as well as a policy one. The fact that those who already liked him still like him doesn't mean plenty of people didn't. And if the party had answers to some of the other issues then maybe it would've been different. But regardless of Sturgeon and Cameron, it's as sad as it is true that Ed was not a vote winner where he was needed to be one. I think that's a sad reflection of how much spin has poisoned people's views, but I've no evidence for that.

Speaking to Conservative voting relatives since the GE, the Weak and Wierd appraisal popped up plus the SNP going nuts in power. Asked to elaborate on, give specifics on why these conclusions were reached and there's a shrug and a reliance on Because. Listing policies and asking which they opposed revealed very little issues.

Heartening and disheartening simultaneously.

It is, isn't it. Where there was a doubt-gap, it was easier to fall back on all of that. And people in Labour maybe thought more of doubt-gap had been answered than it had. After all, anything could be used to crack open that, from the unanswered economy issues to the SNP.

I don't know. I'm still in a kind of stubborn, bleak mourning. Not for Labour - for what it says about what people outside these conversations want.

[onebuttonmonkey]

By the way, I wasn't just venting my "what to do?" despair rhetorically. I genuinely don't know and would value the advice of those around here. mrs. onebuttonmonkey says I should rejoin Labour; I don't know if I've ever felt like I'm about to have less in common with them or less ability to influence them.

What to do?

[Eric_WLothian]

Ha ha ha ha.

Last month.
Today
See also the "brilliant" Sturgeon.

This is quite spectacularly cynical, riding the wave of self-delusion, accusing opponents of running down Scotland, and once the votes are in the bag changing tack, because the "unionist parties" were right all along.

Oh, give it to them anyway. They're just being polite . . . . .

(I assume that this is FFA that they're now doing a handbrake turn on.)




Edited

Bracket related

The FFA that Murdoch's editorial yesterday said Cameron should force on them, so the SNP would have to force huge cuts or tax rises, and make Sturgeon have to explain it away.

As I said yesterday, Sturgeon is in a corner. Last year, independence could be achieved within 18 months. Now, FFA will take years. Why? Because FFA will mean the removal of Barnett and increased austerity in Scotland. The Scottish Government will have to fill their existing deficit plus Barnett losses.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015 ... ta-reveals

FFA makes sense (if you ignore the plight of the less well of - as the Tories will) in order to reduce the cuts in England/Wales, at the expense of Scotland. Cameron has nothing to lose. Effectively Scotland would be competing with the rest of the UK, resulting in a race to the bottom - just what the Tories would like.

A lot rests on the shoulders of Jim Murphy in next year's SE. The question is, can he muster enough support to get rid of the (small) SNP majority. (Which would also have the benefit of leaving the 56 in Westminster out on a limb).

[yahyah]

By the way, I wasn't just venting my "what to do?" despair rhetorically. I genuinely don't know and would value the advice of those around here. mrs. onebuttonmonkey says I should rejoin Labour; I don't know if I've ever felt like I'm about to have less in common with them or less ability to influence them.

What to do?

I'd say listen to mrs.onebuttonmonkey.
Everyone who joins has a vote for the new leader I believe.

In fact that's one thing that worries me about the membership surge in the last couple of days for Labour & the Lib Dems. Wouldn't put it past the Tories to get people to join to try and influence who gets elected.

[SpinningHugo]

Still hoping that Stella Creasy can be persuaded to stand, tbh. And I do note that Liz Kendall refused to say yesterday that the solution to all Labour's problems was to return to the Blairite comfort zone (despite being bludgeoned to by Brillo Pad) So she might be worth watching, too......

I don't agree with much on the board at the moment (as can be guessed), but I do agree with the former, and thought Kendall performed very well. I like both a lot, and would prefer a woman.

I think Jarvis did th right thing. Watch his speech on May 8th in Barnsley to see why.

[Temulkar]

Wrong again, I did not vote Lib Dem in 2010. I nearly voted Lib Dem in 2010...you see the difference ?

& according to your pal, I'm just a Labour tribalist

& shouldn't we be talking about why the Greens got knocked out in Brighton as well ?

Funny Im sure I remember different, but hey ho faculties go as you age.

Losing Brighton council? Well the labour party voting with the Tory party has a large deal to do with that. We won the seat though. Gosh a bit like the referendum and Scotland. more pandas up there than Labour members of parliament.

So, how do you think the strategy of insulting and attacking anyone who questioned labour pay off them. I guess you think it was a success since you are carrying on with it. So much for a more welcoming FTN and a grand alliance.

FFS you really are some piece of work- do you want me to get my husband here and type in how I voted in 2010 ?

He fucking lives with me and knows how I vote.
But he'd ask me what I was doing wasting my time responding to an ageist twat and general arsehole.

If you read that as me being ageist, then you are not just bitter, you're a cretin..

Mods could you step in here, because I have tried to be nothing bit polite since the election. Ive tried to post stuff of interest to you lot not gloat etc.

[ohsocynical]

By the way, I wasn't just venting my "what to do?" despair rhetorically. I genuinely don't know and would value the advice of those around here. mrs. onebuttonmonkey says I should rejoin Labour; I don't know if I've ever felt like I'm about to have less in common with them or less ability to influence them.

What to do?

I feel totally helpless. All we're hearing now is politicians gagging for a taste of power and jostling for position.
What about all those who voted for them & who returned Labour in their constituencies? Not a word about how they're going to counter or rather try to counter some of the worst Tory policies. Have we disappeared?
Dave has a small enough majority that it's possible to make his life uncomfortable. I don't know about the rest of you, but it would at least give me a little satisfaction to see them having to dance for their supper.

They're supposed to be representing us. I'd like it to be now please not in the bloody autumn, otherwise I'm going to be really pissed and withdraw my support.

[ohsocynical]

I don't think we have any active mods on here at the moment. Haven't heard from Dan, Paul has just said he's not going to be around for a bit, and Ernst is tied up and won't be around for a while...

All I can suggest is a cool off period...

[ohsocynical]

By the way, I wasn't just venting my "what to do?" despair rhetorically. I genuinely don't know and would value the advice of those around here. mrs. onebuttonmonkey says I should rejoin Labour; I don't know if I've ever felt like I'm about to have less in common with them or less ability to influence them.

What to do?

The good thing about joining is you can always resign again. Quite satisfying in a way. I'd say listen your extremely wise wife

[ephemerid]

By the way, I wasn't just venting my "what to do?" despair rhetorically. I genuinely don't know and would value the advice of those around here. mrs. onebuttonmonkey says I should rejoin Labour; I don't know if I've ever felt like I'm about to have less in common with them or less ability to influence them.

What to do?

Have you seen the other new threads on the Daily Politics forum? One started by me ("Left") and another by Donut Hinge Party ("Outreach") where some of us have had a natter about some of the things you're concerned about.

People are rejoining Labour - apparently there have been more than 20,000 of them (younger people, mainly). It might be worth doing, as OMOV applies to the leadership election and I will be interested to see what the candidates are offering.

I still think that Labour should get away from the Blairite crapola and get real - they have lost a lot of votes this time; people in the 40-year-old age bracket have never experienced a truly left-wing government, and associate new Labour with Iraq and whatnot.
They often don't appreciate just how run down our public services were and how much had to be rebuilt - these are the people who didn't vote Labour and who have some legitimate concerns which we should be listening to.

I think there is an appetite - especially amongst people like me (60 next year) and those older who remember Wilson, Heath, and worked through the Thatcher years, and younger people who are sick of the same old stuff from all parties - to get active and engage with politics in a new way.
That's why I think we have to stop squabbling and get Labour, what's left of the LibDems, the Greens, the TUSC, NHA, and others together; knock their heads about a bit and get rid of the crazier elements, and put forward a real left-of-centre alternative to what's going on now.
The massive cost of social security is something that could be sorted out really quickly, for example - stopping all the stupid programmes and assessments, a mass building programme (think how the Greens could help with that!) of sustainable dwellings for rent only, a system of rent caps until that's done, a proper living wage......if we did all that, we could probably afford a citizens income on the amount we're spending now.

But - and it's big but - big ideas like this mean that someone will take a hit. Homeowners with massive debt, most likely, and as that's the demographic that voted Tory, it would take some persuading to get them on board.
I am inclined to think that when people can't get their operations unless they pay, can't get their kids into decent schools or colleges unless they pay, can't help older kids who will get no support while they can't find work, things will change. When it becomes obvious that immigration isn't slowing down, the country faces a constitutional crisis, the impact of leaving the EU is made clar to people foolish enough to think we can go it alone, things will change.

Whether people will be willing to suspend their own interests for the greater good remains to be seen, and on recent evidence it doesn't seem all that likely - but I have hope, and I refuse to give in to the Tory jackboot which really IS proto-fascism.
They'll fuck up, and soon, I think. Their arrogance will do for them in the end.

Take heart, OBM - some of us are still hanging in there.

[DonutHingeParty]

By the way, I wasn't just venting my "what to do?" despair rhetorically. I genuinely don't know and would value the advice of those around here. mrs. onebuttonmonkey says I should rejoin Labour; I don't know if I've ever felt like I'm about to have less in common with them or less ability to influence them.

What to do?

Well, I've just joined because being inside the tent pissing out is better than being outside pissing in. Arguably there has never actually been a better chance to influence the direction of the party - it's riven with schisms and ideological swivelling; it's got no policy ideas that the majority apparently want - it tried to play the American Smooth and ended up Foxtrotting it up like a toddler in her mum's high heels.

What the Labour Party does have is a heart - to nick from Catherine Bennett. It starts from the proposal - and if there's one legacy Ed Milliband will leave behind, I hope it's this - that Britain only succeeds when everyone succeeds. I reject the divisive label "working people", however. One Nation was also a well-meaning if hackneyed term. If people only ever see "the rich" or "benefit cheats" on a daily basis then they'll always demonise the other; It's harder to insult or vilify someone to their face. We have to build a common humanity in a way that MPs can't (they, after all, are fighting both for their jobs and their career prospects and can't be allowed to say "Well, I think they might have a point"). To be inclusive, we need to give other people, especially people who thought that the Tory party had the best offer the benefit of the doubt (until it's cut - ho ho!) and stay out of the vitriolic echo chamber, which although good at getting the faithful angry is not conducive to rational argument.

We can't sell policies - heck we don't even know what the policies are; or even what the strand of vaguely lefty thought will be that motivates it. Hating things just because they're Tory is a way to ensure oblivion. We have five years - five years in which to restructure the party to a Loyal opposition; to take back the bear pit of PMQs and save our anger for when it's actually needed, rather than mustering faux outrage about proposed slights. People know.

[yahyah]

edited to remove post. See below.

[yahyah]

Edited to remove post. See below.

[Temulkar]

FFS you really are some piece of work- do you want me to get my husband here and type in how I voted in 2010 ?

He fucking lives with me and knows how I vote.
But he'd ask me what I was doing wasting my time responding to an ageist twat and general arsehole.

If you read that as me being ageist, then you are not just bitter, you're a cretin..

Mods could you step in here, because I have tried to be nothing bit polite since the election. Ive tried to post stuff of interest to you lot not gloat etc.

I'm happy for them to remove the posts.

But you need to apologise.

I had a Lib Dem poster in my window in the weeks before the 2010.
I moved to a Plaid/Lib Dem marginal in 2007. Labour weren't in with a sniff here, and I was tempted, temporarily to want to vote Lib Dem as they were posturing nicely leftish.
A neighbour [the Green one who won't vote Labour, as it happens] put me straight about the Orange Bookers, I read things in the Guardian that made me feel uneasy, and in the end my gut feeling told me, correctly, that Clegg was a sham.

My husband, despite thinking I was wrong, did not try and persuade me not to vote Lib Dem, but in the last day or so I came to the conclusion I would not risk voting Lib Dem.
Even on the morning of the election I was wavering.
But I voted Labour in the polling booth, thankfully, because I'd have bitten of my right hand if I had gone for the Lib Dems.

So please don't patronise me by pretending you know how I voted.
To write that I voted Lib Dem is, as you once called what I wrote...arse gravy.
To then suggest that I can't remember how I voted is...arse gravy with lashings of extra arse gravy.

Yahyah, I humbly apologise. I was not inferring your faculties had gone but mine. OK.

Now maybe you would like to think about your whole approach towards me today.

[ephemerid]

Tem - please don't take this the wrong way......

There have been a few bruising encounters between some of us in both the run-up to the election and now in its aftermath.

It has been my observation that some people are very quick to see insult where there is none. Yahyah had an especially hard time of it yesterday from another poster. It doesn't help when people who are not Labour supporters give the impression that they are blaming Labour for failure when the picture is vastly more complicated than that.

You and I have crossed swords here before, Tem; and made up our differences away from here. I have a lot of respect for your views, but there are times when you, like me, attribute ideas/opinions to people which there is no evidence to support. We all do it on occasion, and now is not the time for any of us to indulge in it. Me included, obviously.

Please - let's have no more sniping. This last is not specifically directed at you, Tem, by the way. We went through all this yesterday, and it is upsetting people who are not involved in the argy-bargy and we will lose people permanently if it carries on. Quite a few of our number are taking a break, and for those of us who aren't, I recommend we think about how to move on.

(This peace-keeping initiative was brought to you by Pots and Kettles Inc purveyors of arguments to people who know better including Ephe)