Some of the people in here arguing essentially not to give a homeless guy a tenner because it won't get them a house.
Labour had 2 options this election, kick corbyn and go with policy's allready popular to win an end austerity then think about moving further left or try for one great big leap to socialism and hand the torys a free win.
The choose the latter and are now calling every one else stupid, they are such complete morons, consumed by ideology over practicality they would rather see perpetual tory rule than park there stupid ideology for one election to actually help the working class even a little, and then they wonder why the working class has abandoned them.
It's almost unbelievable the logic loops these guys are jumping through to defend destroying the Labour Party. Worst result for Labour since pre ww2 but some how there path was right because milliband didn't win either?? Milliband at least returned more seats and was fighting the hangover of Iraq still, you guys hae managed to make the labour party not only loose but hae such a small number of seats they are Completly ignorable for 5 years, but ofc its never there fault, my only hope is labour can weed there kind out and cadt them back into political obscurity,
you can keep shouting about your corbyn labour, but your days are done, the liberals are taking back the party and your never getting a say again.
- - - Updated - - -
And yet I was right.
How's that feel?
Yes but "THE NEXT LABOUR LEADER WILL RUIN THE ECONOMY!".
It's staggering that posters in here aren't getting this. The moment a Labour leader tries to take on the billionaires and the vested interests in this country then that's what's going to be messaged by the media, relentlessly, until said leader is gone.
The way to 'take on the billionaires' and vested interests is to be smart. Corbyn and McDonnell weren't smart, they clumsily parroted 6th form student level politics, essentially holding up big signs saying "Watch out". Get your foot in the door first, then get to work.
I think this is true for a lot of people. I find it interesting that people are saying Labour needs the working class, when it could well turn out that actually, the working classes need the 'managerial' or 'champagne socialists' who aren't going to bother thinking of those less fortunate in future becase they will simply bite the hand that feeds them.
God, how many times does this simple fact need to be explained to you? The policies that they chose WERE popular with people. Lots of people. Know who they weren't popular with? Billionaires. You know, the people that own papers and can afford to fund an enormous amounts of lies to be flooded onto Facebook. Hence a large number of people voted for a party funded by those billionaires with policies that weren't popular (apart from Brexit, of course).
Your ability to ignore facts when presented to you in simple terms is almost as irritating as your determination to say that the media have no impact on people's positions while you spout "facts" that are in fact constant lies repeated by the media. Like the "fact" that the Labour policies weren't popular, for example.
When challenging a Kzin, a simple scream of rage is sufficient. You scream and you leap.
Originally Posted by George CarlinOriginally Posted by Douglas Adams
Clearly very popular. Didn't know there were soany billionaires voting across the country.
You do realise a fsct is s OK meting you can back up with evidence and the GE result stands for its self.
You can peddle all the conspiracy theory's you want, but the reality is corbyn lost what should hae been an easy election, what ever excuse you want to use to sleep at night is up to you. But don't for a second think any one will belive his policy was popular when they suffered the worst defeat since 1935, if it was a slim loss you might hae some credibility to your claim but not when the loss was that crushing.
I can't read this one myself, but the headline says it all.
This Guardian article links to YouGov research that shows the policies are popular.
An article from YouGov itself explaining the same thing.
All easily available from a quick Google. All showing how wrong you are. I don't expect any of this to get through, however, you just seem too invested in your position to allow facts to sway you.
When challenging a Kzin, a simple scream of rage is sufficient. You scream and you leap.
Originally Posted by George CarlinOriginally Posted by Douglas Adams
Yes, people think that individual policies sound good. But the graph under the one you wanted us to look at shows that, when all the policies are taken as a whole, people didn't think they were affordable or that Labour would manage the economy well. But the most important policy of all - Brexit - is where Labour failed the most.
Edit: I hope Tarandis isn't wasting his time replying to me, I put him on ignore some time ago.
Last edited by DarkAmbient; 2019-12-14 at 02:12 PM.
And why do people think Labour can't manage the economy? When historically the Tories have always been the party responsible for increasing the debt, and couldn't even balance the books under Thatcher when they were selling off everything the country owned? Why do people think Labour are so bad when the Tories have added a trillion pounds the national debt in 9 years? Why do people think the Labour policies weren't affordable, when their manifesto (and the one for the last election) were fully costed and the Tories manifestos weren't?
And we're back to the media. Again. And their ability to ensure that Labour is always associated in people's minds with the kind of points you make. Policies, leaders, none of that matters if you have a constant stream of disinformation coming out. Unless people start to think for themselves instead of picking up those points and parroting them back.
When challenging a Kzin, a simple scream of rage is sufficient. You scream and you leap.
Originally Posted by George CarlinOriginally Posted by Douglas Adams
Both Tory and Labour manifestos were judged as not credible by the IFS. Labour would have had to undertake massive borrowing to meet their promises.
Labour's reputation on the economy is mostly unfair. Some of it stems from memories of the three day week, some of it is from the 2008 crisis which obviously wasn't Labour's fault (although Blair had allowed Brown to spend too much and subsequently the economy wasn't in a great position to deal with the crisis). The perception is that austerity had to happen because of Labour's big spending, even though Osborne recently admitted that austerity wasn't actually necessary at all. Because of the Blair/Brown years people now think of Labour as irresponsible big spenders and the perception is really hard to shift, and their 2019 manifesto certainly didn't help in that regard.
Sadly politics is as much about perception as it is about the truth, maybe more so. Corbyn should have understood this.
The three day week, you say? That thing that happened under a Tory government? Yup, that certainly sounds unfair to me.
That is exactly what I'm talking about. A lie repeated so many times that people just repeat it as if it were true. And it is used as a stick to beat Labour with. And you wonder why we despair at the power of the media in this country?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-Day_Week
When challenging a Kzin, a simple scream of rage is sufficient. You scream and you leap.
Originally Posted by George CarlinOriginally Posted by Douglas Adams