Jeremy Corbyn

[FrankMunro-371]

Tony Blair is a fucking charlatan and now the Labour Party no longer serve his interests he's attacked Corbyn repeatedly whilst being eerily silent on damaging Tory policies. At least he's given up the guise that he's anything other than a Conservative with a red tie.

Regards your comments about Corbyn and terrorists, Frank, what are your thoughts on Cameron dealing with Saudi Arabia and the high profile public executions that country routinely carry out?

I do not support the Saudi regime, and I totally disagree with the public executions, I think many of their actions have been appalling and inexcusable, but it is not only Conservative governments that have had dealings with them.

Regarding Tony Blair, it amazes me how many Labour supporters are now so very critical of him. I am sure they all celebrated his landslide victory in 1997.

 

[leedswolf]

I was always critical of Tony Blair. He was a Thatcherite. Of course party supporters would celebrate winning an election. I am sure you would celebrate Wolves winning promotion irrespective of who the manager was?

 

[FrankMunro-371]

I was always critical of Tony Blair. He was a Thatcherite. Of course party supporters would celebrate winning an election. I am sure you would celebrate Wolves winning promotion irrespective of who the manager was?

And this what has always confused me. Most Labour supporters I know had a great dislike of Margaret Thatcher, yet they also say that Tony Blair was a "Thatcherite", so how did he become leader of the Labour Party?

I also wonder how history would have turned out if John Smith had not passed away.

 

[leedswolf]

It was a choice of Blair, Prescot and Beckett. Brown and Cook didn't stand which effectively cleared the path for Blair to succeed.

 

[Lord Knows]

Without the World financial crisis of 2008 Labour probably retains power in 2010 under Brown.

 

[Johnny75]

Without the World financial crisis of 2008 Labour probably retains power in 2010 under Brown.

:icon_lol:

I think you misunderstand how unpopular this man was, might want to take off your red specs and revisit the world where Brown was Chancellor and see how popular he was then.

All this absolution of the Labour Party over the financial crisis just paints sycohpants as sad individuals. Labour, like many governments were party to the city running riot and contributed to the deregulation that allowed them to do it freely.

 

[Templeton Peck]

Without the World financial crisis of 2008 Labour probably retains power in 2010 under Brown.

It was the framing of the debate that fucked Labour in 2010. Darling had already attained growth post-crunch still not achieved by Gideon 6 years later. The Tories chose to focus on the deficit and the national debt and with the aid of their friends in the media managed to convince the public that Labour had us on the verge of doing a Greece. Labour chose not to defend their record and call out the Tories for what was (and is) bloke in the pub economics and instead spent most of the time apologising. Oh and Brown had all the charm and charisma of John Redwood which didn't help.

Labour were responsible for the 2008 crash in as much as they signed up to the neo-liberal dogma that said thou shalt let rich banks do whatever they want with Brown's 'light touch' regulation. However, they were merely continuing Thatcher's work in that area and the idea that a Conservative govt would have had the banks under tighter control is laughable to say the least.

 

[The Saturday Boy]

:icon_lol:

I think you misunderstand how unpopular this man was, might want to take off your red specs and revisit the world where Brown was Chancellor and see how popular he was then.

All this absolution of the Labour Party over the financial crisis just paints sycohpants as sad individuals. Labour, like many governments were party to the city running riot and contributed to the deregulation that allowed them to do it freely.

As the Conservative party only got into government with the assistance of the Lib Dems it would have only taken a handful of different results to change the balance and given the opportunity I am sure the Lib Dems would have chosen to do a deal with Labour (although not with Brown as leader) rather than the Tories.

Absolutely agree with your last sentence.

 

[Lord Knows]

In 1950 UK wide turnout was 84 per cent. In 1997 it was 71 per cent but it fell to 59 per cent in 2001. It crept up to 66 per cent in 2015, but only 24 per cent of the electorate voted for the Conservatives, 20 per cent for Labour, 22 per cent for other parties and 34 per cent didn’t vote. Some 7.5 million eligible adults no longer bother to register to vote and registration is being made harder as people more often have to rent privately, move rented home more frequently, and have to register individually at every move. A growing number of people are not eligible to vote at Westminster elections because they were born elsewhere in Europe. The true proportions of adults living in the UK who voted for either Labour or Conservative in the general election of May 2015 will be far less than 40 per cent. It may be as low as a third when all those not allowed to vote are included.

In 1950 only 25 per cent of the electorate did not vote for either the Conservatives or Labour. Furthermore, almost everyone who could be registered to vote was registered. We still had identity cards. Now a majority, 56 per cent of the electorate, do not give the two main parties their vote, as do millions of others who are not registered to vote but could be. The majority of UK voters were dissatisfied with the status quo in May 2015. The UK electoral stage is now set for other possibilities.

http://labourlist.org/2016/05/danny-dorling-why-corbyns-moral-clarity-could-propel-him-to-number-10/

 

[Derby Wolf]

As the Conservative party only got into government with the assistance of the Lib Dems it would have only taken a handful of different results to change the balance and given the opportunity I am sure the Lib Dems would have chosen to do a deal with Labour (although not with Brown as leader) rather than the Tories.

Absolutely agree with your last sentence.

I doubt that, Clegg, Cable, Huhme and Davey amongst others all featured in a 2004 book 'The Orange Book: Reclaiming Liberalism' which encouraged competition and choice with public bodies and spending and saw a shift toward a social-conservative ideology which is what made it so easy for them to get into bed with the Tories.

 

[The Saturday Boy]

I doubt that, Clegg, Cable, Huhme and Davey amongst others all featured in a 2004 book 'The Orange Book: Reclaiming Liberalism' which encouraged competition and choice with public bodies and spending and saw a shift toward a social-conservative ideology which is what made it so easy for them to get into bed with the Tories.

IT was maths not ideology that formed a Lib Dem/Tory coalition. The Labour Party was divided at the time - mainly because of Gordon Brown - and anything other than a Lib Dem/Tory alliance was going to be a weak government. If Labour had held onto a few more seats lost to the Tories the maths would have probably been very different with a different outcome and without Gordon Brown as leader/PM.

 

[visage]

But its true that under the OBers the soul of the lib dems became more about economic liberalism than social liberalism. Without that a coalition with the tories would have been much harder to envisage.

 

[Derby Wolf]

IT was maths not ideology that formed a Lib Dem/Tory coalition. The Labour Party was divided at the time - mainly because of Gordon Brown - and anything other than a Lib Dem/Tory alliance was going to be a weak government. If Labour had held onto a few more seats lost to the Tories the maths would have probably been very different with a different outcome and without Gordon Brown as leader/PM.

I'm not disputing the fact Labour were compromised at the time, I'm highlighting that your assertion that under different circumstances the Lib-Dems would have formed a coalition with Labour. Whilst true with other leaderships it was far from the case with the Clegg led Party and that is everything to do with ideology.

 

[Premier Quality]

Gordon Brown could start an argument even if he was the only person in the room, he was a deeply unpleasant, bigoted guy who was an amazingly bad chancellor and an even worse leader. I don't see how anyone can really say anything positive about him to be honest.

He makes George Osborne look friendly and competent, and Tony Blair look honest. It's impressive in its own way...

 

[Tredman]

Gordon Brown was an amazingly bad chancellor

Yet he presided over the longest period of economic growth this country has ever seen

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/07/business_brown0s_britain/html/1.stm

 

[Premier Quality]

in large part due to the economy he inherited, and then following the Tories economic plan for the first term... and tab 5 on your own link shows the income/spending point where after the sensible first term he spaffed all the money away for no return...

TAXES AND SPENDING
Tight public spending in Labour's first term gave way to big increases in the second term and a growing public sector deficit.

The Treasury has said that public spending is likely to grow more slowly in the future to bring the budget back into balance.

Taxes have already exceeded 1997 levels as a proportion of GDP.

 

[Tredman]

It's always the way isn't it though? Under investment under a tory government results in unsustainable spending in the next labour government.

One example, having been at school in the 80s the schools and buildings were an absolute disgrace. They are many times better now due to the labour government. Should they not have spent that money? And why didn't the tory government spend that money.

It's a circular argument and really tedious; however, you can't just say all labour governments are profligate, as they often have to be.

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

Or indeed that all Conservative governments are cunts.

 

[Tredman]

True, true. Just most of them

To me the big issue has always been the tory governments being too occupied with looking after their base (look at the refusal to look at means testing fuel benefit - my seriously well off step father gets this, he spends most of his winters in spain...).

Unfortunately the disadvantaged and children are not their base and you get the chronic underfunding in NHS as we have now.

 

[Sniffer]

in large part due to the economy he inherited, and then following the Tories economic plan for the first term... and tab 5 on your own link shows the income/spending point where after the sensible first term he spaffed all the money away for no return...

TAXES AND SPENDING
Tight public spending in Labour's first term gave way to big increases in the second term and a growing public sector deficit.

The Treasury has said that public spending is likely to grow more slowly in the future to bring the budget back into balance.

Taxes have already exceeded 1997 levels as a proportion of GDP.

Of course the global economic crash wouldn't have happened under the conservatives. I recall an article before the crash written by the boy wonder Gideon stating that the UK should be following the model of the Irish tiger economy. That would have ended well. His party was also calling for less rather than more regulation of the financial services industry.