In the News

[CCB III]

31 minutes ago, For Fecks Sake said:

Riiiiiiight that's the reason they voted against Labour..... Brexit..... Why the fuck did Labour not so the smart thing and come out against Brexit as opposed to sending mixed signals and sitting on the fence most of the time?

Same with independence in Scotland, consistently come out saying they are against independence, well look what's happened as a result, 1 fucking MP returned.

Labour is a shit show and has no fucking clue what it stands for anymore.

The smart thing would've been to accept the result of the referendum. That's what cost them. It was the Labour heartlands that wanted it, and they felt like they were betrayed by their own party, so voted Tory. 
 

Agree re the rest, mind you. They are a shambles and I can't stand this current iteration. 
 

This can be related to my earlier point as well though, the political conversation in the media dictates where Labour goes. Tories keep edging right, with little to no criticism, so Labour have to do the same. 
 

 

[CCB III]

13 minutes ago, For Fecks Sake said:

Bullshit.

Labour should have the conviction to stand by the very things that resulted in them being formed in the first place.

It's just an opinion, and one many on the left share. 
 

I agree re the latter, and if they did so, they'd be brexiteers my man. 

[manboobs109]

11 minutes ago, CCB III said:

It's just an opinion, and one many on the left share. 
 

I agree re the latter, and if they did so, they'd be brexiteers my man. 

I've got to say your conversion to Brexiteer is heartening. Funny how we were all racist morons not that long ago.

[Don Fonte]

2 hours ago, Misers Hill said:

See she's lying in a state in Edinburgh fir 3 days....Mass influx of hun assured?

I do hope the bin lorry drivers of Edinburgh are finished their strike and all extremely tired.

[Dr_Manhattan]

27 minutes ago, CCB III said:

£3,000,000 in expenses doesn't mean he's a millionaire FFS, that's expenses claimed over decades of service.

That's £3m of living expenses that he didn't have to pay for himself. Undoubtedly some of it was legitimately incurred as part of his job, but we've seen from numerous expense scandals on both sides of the house just what these reptiles get away with claiming for.

29 minutes ago, CCB III said:

He's not an advocate for gentrification...quite the opposite, he's stood on rent eviction pickets many times.

Fine, I look forward to him donating the profit from the sale of his house to some worthy cause, because to do otherwise would legitimise the filthy capitalist nature of property ownership.

31 minutes ago, CCB III said:

He's a democratic socialist, and wants to tax the rich, his wife and indeed himself, by your assertion, would be included in that.

It's really easy to passionately campaign for something you know full well is never going to happen.

32 minutes ago, CCB III said:

If he's a millionaire, he's actually advocating for policies that would go against his interests.

See above.

And lest we forget, he happily accepted £20k in fees to go on Iranian State TV, a regime that is notoriously anti-semitic and anti-LGBT. He of course claims he only did this to challenge the Iranian regime, but we'll have to take his word for that as PressTV had their OFCOM licence revoked in the UK for obvious reasons.

I find it weird that you seem to idolise the man who has done more to damage the PLP than anyone else in recent history.

[elephantstone78]

44 minutes ago, CCB III said:

The smart thing would've been to accept the result of the referendum. That's what cost them. It was the Labour heartlands that wanted it, and they felt like they were betrayed by their own party, so voted Tory. 
 

Agree re the rest, mind you. They are a shambles and I can't stand this current iteration. 
 

This can be related to my earlier point as well though, the political conversation in the media dictates where Labour goes. Tories keep edging right, with little to no criticism, so Labour have to do the same. 
 

 

Problem with your first sentence is if they did that then they lose support in cities which were heavily remain leaning, with their members and their MPs. They were fucked in 2019. Whatever their view. 
2nd referendum, they basically battle with Lib Dems for the remain vote. This keeps the membership and most of the PLP onside. They lose towns and rural areas esp when brexit party did a deal with the tories. 

That and the fact the average angry male in the likes of Dudley, Blyth Valley and Ashfield thought bojo was a bit of a laugh and corbyn was an ira loving commie. 
 

Labour could never be far left enough to satisfy the likes of you and be electable to the country writ large. 
 

Their (Labour) problem is that far left voters are so principled they would rather not vote than risk compromising and taking a pragmatic position that voting labour is their best hope of getting some of the things they want. 
 

You saw the same in the usa with the Don. Had all the Bernie supporters voted for Hilary she would have won in 16. 

[Dr_Manhattan]

9 minutes ago, elephantstone78 said:

Problem with your first sentence is if they did that then they lose support in cities which were heavily remain leaning, with their members and their MPs. They were fucked in 2019. Whatever their view. 
2nd referendum, they basically battle with Lib Dems for the remain vote. This keeps the membership and most of the PLP onside. They lose towns and rural areas esp when brexit party did a deal with the tories. 

That and the fact the average angry male in the likes of Dudley, Blyth Valley and Ashfield thought bojo was a bit of a laugh and corbyn was an ira loving commie. 
 

Labour could never be far left enough to satisfy the likes of you and be electable to the country writ large. 
 

Their (Labour) problem is that far left voters are so principled they would rather not vote than risk compromising and taking a pragmatic position that voting labour is their best hope of getting some of the things they want. 
 

You saw the same in the usa with the Don. Had all the Bernie supporters voted for Hilary she would have won in 16. 

Great summary.

There is a schism within both the tories and labour just now. On the right it's over Europe, and on the left it's New Labour vs Old Commies. The best thing for all of us would be for them both to split into their respective camps so we could disregard the extremists and give us a chance to vote in a centrist coalition.

[Redforever86]

2 hours ago, Dr_Manhattan said:

A free market economy is imperfect, but it's preferable to a totalitarian state. It all sounds nice until you hand that level of power to a few individuals.

I think you need a mix of both, and it will change over time as technology and peoples tastes and demands change. 

In simple terms I'd say the free market is beneficial for choice, and the advancement of technology etc. However it isn't as efficient (if done properly) and offers the consumer/user less protection. 

I'd nationalise payments, and card processing, water, electricity, broadband (open reach side of it)  and the trains personally.

[Dr_Manhattan]

3 minutes ago, Redforever86 said:

In simple terms I'd say the free market is beneficial for choice, and the advancement of technology etc. However it isn't as efficient (if done properly) and offers the consumer/user less protection. 

Hmmm, broadly agree but if a private company shafts you, you're unlikely to use them again which harms them in the long run. If the government shafts you, suck it up buttercup, we're the only game in town so fuck you. 

[For Fecks Sake]

4 minutes ago, Redforever86 said:

I'd nationalise payments, and card processing, water, electricity, broadband (open reach side of it)  and the trains personally.

Labour had what, a decade of power and the opportunity, to do just and never did a fucking thing.

[Redforever86]

3 minutes ago, For Fecks Sake said:

Labour had what, a decade of power and the opportunity, to do just and never did a fucking thing.

Yeah they are useless unionist cunts. 

[elephantstone78]

5 minutes ago, Redforever86 said:

I think you need a mix of both, and it will change over time as technology and peoples tastes and demands change. 

In simple terms I'd say the free market is beneficial for choice, and the advancement of technology etc. However it isn't as efficient (if done properly) and offers the consumer/user less protection. 

I'd nationalise payments, and card processing, water, electricity, broadband (open reach side of it)  and the trains personally.

I am pretty much the same. 
 

Unfettered free markets gets you the global financial crisis, a  poisoned water supply in Flint Michigan, shit in the rivers and a pharmaceutical industry in the USA that leads half a million people declaring bankruptcy every year as they can’t pay their medical bills. 
 

But, let’s not pretend full state ownership of everything is affordable or sensible. 

[Ke1t]

10 hours ago, Poodler said:

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/9437726/prince-andrew-service-in-queens-memory-in-scotland/
 

 

lady Louise Windsor - PHWOAR 

[manboobs109]

14 minutes ago, Redforever86 said:

I think you need a mix of both, and it will change over time as technology and peoples tastes and demands change. 

In simple terms I'd say the free market is beneficial for choice, and the advancement of technology etc. However it isn't as efficient (if done properly) and offers the consumer/user less protection. 

I'd nationalise payments, and card processing, water, electricity, broadband (open reach side of it)  and the trains personally.

There is no way prisons, any kind of social care(especially children's homes) or policing should be privatised. That's the first things that should be renationalised iyam. Could be done very cheaply as well.

[manboobs109]

1 minute ago, Ke1t said:

? gormless looking cunt. Centuries of inbreeding there.

[manboobs109]

Just now, Bad_Mobby said:

Happily take it UTA 

Would she fuck. She'd set the hounds on her if you were within 100 yards of her.

[Ke1t]

12 minutes ago, manboobs109 said:

? gormless looking cunt. Centuries of inbreeding there.

She looks like a young Sandy Toksvig playing The Mad Hatter in a production of Alice in Wonderland. 

[CCB III]

1 hour ago, manboobs109 said:

I've got to say your conversion to Brexiteer is heartening. Funny how we were all racist morons not that long ago.

I'm not a brexiteer. 
 

I've admitted the argument around it was overly simplistic, on both sides. 
 

Euro sceptic probs still remain. 

[Don Fonte]

21 minutes ago, Ke1t said:

It's a tough one but I'll take one for the team.

Yes.

[elephantstone78]

1 minute ago, Don Fonte said:

It's a tough one but I'll take one for the team.

Yes.

Forgot to take her hairnet off after a shift at the bakery. 

[Don Fonte]

4 minutes ago, elephantstone78 said:

Forgot to take her hairnet off after a shift at the bakery. 

Soon get that wrapped round her throat.

[torry_battery_ram]

Have no time for the monarchy but did think Kate Middleton was looking hot in her black dress walking down Windsor Castle last night

[Fridge]

Would anyone seriously have voted Corbyn?

He was so ridiculously left wing it was unreal.

[elephantstone78]

1 minute ago, Fridge said:

Would anyone seriously have voted Corbyn?

He was so ridiculously left wing it was unreal.

Yes. 
How do you think he became labour leader? Raffle prize?

[sheepcrooky]

3 minutes ago, elephantstone78 said:

Yes. 
How do you think he became labour leader? Raffle prize?

Appealing to the popular party vote is completely different to appealing to the popular nation vote though. Most party members like radical action plans (that includes all political parties). 
 

The national populist vote doesn’t want radicalism. They want to be slightly better off than before with public services remaining intact. 

[Parklife]

8 minutes ago, Fridge said:

Would anyone seriously have voted Corbyn?

He was so ridiculously left wing it was unreal.

Which of his specific policies did you find "so ridiculously left wing"? 

[CCB III]

1 hour ago, elephantstone78 said:

Problem with your first sentence is if they did that then they lose support in cities which were heavily remain leaning, with their members and their MPs. They were fucked in 2019. Whatever their view. 
2nd referendum, they basically battle with Lib Dems for the remain vote. This keeps the membership and most of the PLP onside. They lose towns and rural areas esp when brexit party did a deal with the tories. 

That and the fact the average angry male in the likes of Dudley, Blyth Valley and Ashfield thought bojo was a bit of a laugh and corbyn was an ira loving commie. 
 

Labour could never be far left enough to satisfy the likes of you and be electable to the country writ large. 
 

Their (Labour) problem is that far left voters are so principled they would rather not vote than risk compromising and taking a pragmatic position that voting labour is their best hope of getting some of the things they want. 
 

You saw the same in the usa with the Don. Had all the Bernie supporters voted for Hilary she would have won in 16. 

I take your points and probably agree with some, especially on Brexit. I do wonder if it might've been different. 
 

Regarding your reference to the left of the party being too principled to vote for the centre, that's just patently shite. It was the other way round. Heaps of centrist types who pedalled the anti semitism shit defected to Lib Dem or whatever, or simply didn't vote. The problem is what is meant to be a left leaning party, has been infiltrated by centrist careerists, who drag the conversation closer to the right. When the members elected a democratic socialist, well, of course that wouldn't be good for their careers, thus started a smear campaign from within and many prominent celebs etc became Corbyn critical too. For the wrong reasons. Of course he was unelectable, he wasn't exactly given fair coverage. 
 

Almost all prominent leftists will vote Labour, the centrists are the ones who'll flip flop parties, some to Tory, some to Lib Dem, whatever. 
 

The reason Bernie bros never turned up for Hilary is because of the shady shit in the primaries. 
 

I don't blame people who want a fairer society for refusing to cooperate with a system that's never going to give them what they want, or to back a candidate they don't believe in. 
 

Why should a Corbyn supporter vote for SKS? Because he's not the tories? That's a fucking shite reason. 
 

Same in USA, Hilary thought she'd win on the basis she wasn't Trump, she offered little to no progressive policies that targeted the working class and their needs. 
 

I voted Corbyn twice, but I wouldn't vote for SKS, as my principles don't align with his. How do politics change or go anywhere if his campaign is essentially "I'm not them." It's not good enough. 

 

Corbyn put his neck on the line trying to make society a wee bit fairer for its participants. He's roundly demonised and considered a monster. Compare and contrast to a war criminal in Tony Blair who has a knighthood, the pinnacle of British society. 

 

Cunts like SKS only care about self preservation, the change they want is tiny, pointless changes, that are akin to putting band aids on axe wounds. 

[CCB III]

13 minutes ago, Fridge said:

Would anyone seriously have voted Corbyn?

He was so ridiculously left wing it was unreal.

10.000.000 people did. 
 

He's not even that left wing, that's what's funny. 
 

In other European nations he'd be viewed as relatively moderate, but the British conversation is so far right we don't see it that way. 
 

 

[CCB III]

1 hour ago, Dr_Manhattan said:

Great summary.

There is a schism within both the tories and labour just now. On the right it's over Europe, and on the left it's New Labour vs Old Commies. The best thing for all of us would be for them both to split into their respective camps so we could disregard the extremists and give us a chance to vote in a centrist coalition.

Where no meaningful, lasting change could ever take place. 
 

What a thing to strive for!!!

[elephantstone78]

5 minutes ago, sheepcrooky said:

Appealing to the popular party vote is completely different to appealing to the popular nation vote though. Most party members like radical action plans (that includes all political parties). 
 

The national populist vote doesn’t want radicalism. They want to be slightly better off than before with public services remaining intact. 

I agree. 

Would you say that’s happened since the tories took over in 2010?