Current Affairs The Labour Party

[Deleted member 48881]

next general elections will be theirs to lose IMO

 

[davids]

How would you define "getting into bed with"? Also would you not concede that any opposition worth it's salt should be pushing to be in government currently? Would you say any attempt to try and force (or win) an election is an attempt to get ones face in a trough? Or is that something only labelled at Corbyn's Labour?

It would depend on whether you see binning any Socialist principles you might still have is being worth it.

 

[Redstarrob]

Part of the problem I have though is if the two people organising a march both have convictions for violent offences , it’s not a huge stretch to imagine any violence might involve them . Even if they’re not directly involved in any violence their presence has to be a concern doesn’t it ?

Say If when Everton were campaigning and protesting over Kirkby and the two blokes organising a march Both hsd convictions for violence and one had multiple convictions and then the march kicked off you think questions wouldn’t be asked ? SYL’s mate went to nick over an attempted kidnapping over a ten grand drugs debt , they’re hardly pilllars of the local community.

You are quite right mate, but at least you can see there are two sides, i have no time for the extreme right or left, they are both cheeks of the same a- -e

 

[orchard]

It would depend on whether you see binning any Socialist principles you might still have is being worth it.

I don't think Labour are joining up to facillitate a trans-Atlantic corporate reich.

I think it may be a single technicality to get this deal assessed now ratherv than wait for the clock to tick down further and May bring it back to the table at the 11th hour.

 

[davids]

I don't think Labour are joining up to facillitate a trans-Atlantic corporate reich.

I think it may be a single technicality to get this deal assessed now ratherv than wait for the clock to tick down further and May bring it back to the table at the 11th hour.

Any so called Socialist who could negotiate anything with Reece Mogg needs to take a long hard look in the mirror and think why they entered politics. But sadly for most of them that's becoming transparently clear.

 

[NilSatisOptimum]

Any so called Socialist who could negotiate anything with Reece Mogg needs to take a long hard look in the mirror and think why they entered politics. But sadly for most of them that's becoming transparently clear.

Thats unfair Rees Mogg is a Parlimentarian similar beast to Corbyn, they both believe in due process, if that ever stops this country is well and truly up the creek without a paddle. But their politics are polar opposite. I know what they both are, in an age where so many of their cohorts practice political confabulation...

 

[catcherintherye]

It would depend on whether you see binning any Socialist principles you might still have is being worth it.

What socialist principles do you see Labour binning?

 

[davids]

What socialist principles do you see Labour binning?

Collusion with the likes of Reece Mogg would be a start.

 

[orchard]

Collusion with the likes of Reece Mogg would be a start.

Seriously desperate.

Collusion is a secret agreement between two or more parties to limit open competition by deceiving, misleading, or defrauding others of their legal rights, or to obtain an objective forbidden by law typically by defrauding or gaining an unfair market advantage.

 

[zzr45]

The ‘socialist’ lads a week ago: Rees-Mogg represents everything wrong with this country and is a disgrace to the country.

This week: Rees-Mogg is a respectable parliamentarian who is doing the right thing for the country in continuing to push for Brexit as it means Labour will get in.

Oh lads. You cards.

 

[davids]

Seriously desperate.

Collusion is a secret agreement between two or more parties to limit open competition by deceiving, misleading, or defrauding others of their legal rights, or to obtain an objective forbidden by law typically by defrauding or gaining an unfair market advantage.

Seriously desperate.

Collusion is a secret agreement between two or more parties to limit open competition by deceiving, misleading, or defrauding others of their legal rights, or to obtain an objective forbidden by law typically by defrauding or gaining an unfair market advantage.

Would selling his soul be a better term then? And if the press hadn't got hold of it,collusion is apt.Obviously Reece Mogg had a word with Teresa first. And what am I desperate about? Having a Labour Party that still holds socialist principals in high regard? Or is getting into power at any price OK with you?

 

[davids]

The ‘socialist’ lads a week ago: Rees-Mogg represents everything wrong with this country and is a disgrace to the country.

This week: Rees-Mogg is a respectable parliamentarian who is doing the right thing for the country in continuing to push for Brexit as it means Labour will get in.

Oh lads. You cards.

Sell their souls for a seat at the top table.So easy to talk the talk,when it suits this weeks agenda.

 

[catcherintherye]

Collusion with the likes of Reece Mogg would be a start.

What collusion do you see mate? JRM and the Labour Party (or sections of it) have a common enemy but I'm not sure it's collusion. Ourselves and Manchester United have a common enemy in Liverpool but we are not colluding together are we?

Likewise the majority of remainers and leavers hate this deal (particularly the hardened sections of both). Both want to bring it down. I'm not sure either are colluding, or betraying principles are they? Politics like life is is a chaotic business.

 

[catcherintherye]

Would selling his soul be a better term then? And if the press hadn't got hold of it,collusion is apt.Obviously Reece Mogg had a word with Teresa first. And what am I desperate about? Having a Labour Party that still holds socialist principals in high regard? Or is getting into power at any price OK with you?

You seem a bit obsessed with Rees Mogg mate. I have no idea what he will do, but I do doubt he would support any motion that will come from Labour (which won't be happening imminently). It's currently the Lib Dems/SNP who are pushing hardest for it. Even if he did support the vote it's not really within the control of Labour politicians, less so Labour supporters to be accountable for the actions of what some Tory MP's do.

There are sometimes example's of collusion that go on. There are examples of where left wing parties are involved in it. I am happy to provide numerous examples of this. However I don't think this motion of no confidence, that as yet hasn't arrived (and in all likelihood won't arrive for the foreseeable) which may get the backing of JRM is a particularly adept example of it.

On a final note if you are going to take a critical line of the left, for me the obvious critical line would be the one that sections of the left have treated JRM as some sort of fascistic figure. Or that his position around Brexit is akin to a fascistic position. For the most part it is intellectual nonsense. Maybe this makes me colluding with JRM, but I just see it as being open and honest about how I see an issue.

 

[catcherintherye]

The ‘socialist’ lads a week ago: Rees-Mogg represents everything wrong with this country and is a disgrace to the country.

This week: Rees-Mogg is a respectable parliamentarian who is doing the right thing for the country in continuing to push for Brexit as it means Labour will get in.

Oh lads. You cards.

I haven't seen much of either but elements of both can be true can't they? I haven't seen many people slating Rees Mogg but maybe they have. I personally think the guy is quite charming and intelligent in quite a weird condescending manner. I'd also say, sections of the lefts campaign against him was unhelpful and bordered on the ridiculous.

Some of his views on abortion, religion and poverty are hypocritical and distasteful. His views on Brexit are to me quite risky and would likely lead to economic hardship but you could hardly say they were evil. He views sovereignty as a central feature and I would say thats a reasonable enough position.

I've got no idea if he would vote with Labour on a motion of no confidence, though I highly doubt he would do so. My view of him (as broadly outlined above) wouldn't change an awful lot either way though. His position seems to be you need to change the leader not the government. Personally I disagree with him that this issue is entirely or centrally of Theresa Mays making, but it's not an unreasonable position. Hopefully that provides some degree of clarity beyond some of the needless hyperbole that can exist within political discussions?