Who Trusts Labour?

[John Drake]

5 hours ago, Oxford said:

Gasp! Yes, the choice between a rattle snake or a tarantula bite seems very easy for some people!

The rest of us just have to muddle along with the the ultimate question "Is that really it?"

[Off Topic]

Can you please shorten your signature file.

It is ridiculously long.

Thanks.

[bowes]

20 hours ago, Oxford said:

Who Trusts Labour?

Good question but who finds the alternatives more trustworthy?

I voted Labour last General election but nevertheless I can safely say I trust Theresa May, Tim Farron, Caroline Lucas, Nicola Sturgeon and Leanne Wood more than wolf in sheep's clothing Corbyn. Even Paul Nuttall is marginally less bad 

[Griff9of13]

30 minutes ago, bowes said:

I voted Labour last General election but nevertheless I can safely say I trust Theresa May, Tim Farron, Caroline Lucas, Nicola Sturgeon and Leanne Wood more than wolf in sheep's clothing Corbyn. Even Paul Nuttall is marginally less bad 

I suppose anyone who captained Great Britain RL to their last Ashes win over the Aussies deserves to be respected.  

[John Drake]

1 hour ago, bowes said:

I voted Labour last General election but nevertheless I can safely say I trust Theresa May, Tim Farron, Caroline Lucas, Nicola Sturgeon and Leanne Wood more than wolf in sheep's clothing Corbyn. Even Paul Nuttall is marginally less bad 

I know I'm wasting my time saying this, but unless you live in Islington North, you wouldn't be voting for Jeremy Corbyn if you voted Labour. Nor any of the other party leaders unless you live in their constituency.

Find out about your local candidates. Who are they, what are their views. Then make a decision based on that. It'll be them representing you in Parliament after 8th June if they win.

[Maximus Decimus]

49 minutes ago, John Drake said:

I know I'm wasting my time saying this, but unless you live in Islington North, you wouldn't be voting for Jeremy Corbyn if you voted Labour. Nor any of the other party leaders unless you live in their constituency.

Find out about your local candidates. Who are they, what are their views. Then make a decision based on that. It'll be them representing you in Parliament after 8th June if they win.

This is another problem with our system, it doesn't work as it was initially intended.

Look at the outrage over the leadership debates; really we shouldn't be having one at all because we are not voting for a leader.

Of course we all know that people do vote for leaders probably far more than they vote for local candidates.

[John Drake]

41 minutes ago, Maximus Decimus said:

This is another problem with our system, it doesn't work as it was initially intended.

Look at the outrage over the leadership debates; really we shouldn't be having one at all because we are not voting for a leader.

Of course we all know that people do vote for leaders probably far more than they vote for local candidates.

Indeed.

The 'constituency link' is always used by supporters of FPTP as a reason not to have a proportional electoral system (even though there are proportional systems that retain the constituency link), and now we have Theresa May - a supporter of FPTP, like her whole party - going round telling people 'give me your vote' when the only place she is on the ballot paper is Maidenhead. And she became PM in the first place without a single member of the general electorate voting for her to hold that position, and her MPs could ditch her whenever they want, without reference back to the electorate too.

It's utterly ridiculous.

[bowes]

2 hours ago, John Drake said:

I know I'm wasting my time saying this, but unless you live in Islington North, you wouldn't be voting for Jeremy Corbyn if you voted Labour. Nor any of the other party leaders unless you live in their constituency.

Find out about your local candidates. Who are they, what are their views. Then make a decision based on that. It'll be them representing you in Parliament after 8th June if they win.

This is true in local council elections but not at a parliamentary election. Ultimately a Labour victory means Corbyn as PM, McDonnell as Chancellor and Diane Abbott as Home Secretary. All possibilities beyond the pale as far as I'm concerned

[John Drake]

44 minutes ago, bowes said:

This is true in local council elections but not at a parliamentary election. Ultimately a Labour victory means Corbyn as PM, McDonnell as Chancellor and Diane Abbott as Home Secretary. All possibilities beyond the pale as far as I'm concerned

Labour aren't going to win the General Election. There is no prospect whatsoever of Jeremy Corbyn becoming PM.

Opinion polls are never that wrong!

What there is a prospect of on June 8th is losing a load of good, moderate Labour MPs, because people think they're voting against Jeremy Corbyn when they're not, ending up with an even more enfeebled opposition in this country than we have already and a government with a landslide majority that will be held to account by no one for the next five years.

[Niels]

3 hours ago, John Drake said:

I know I'm wasting my time saying this, but unless you live in Islington North, you wouldn't be voting for Jeremy Corbyn if you voted Labour. Nor any of the other party leaders unless you live in their constituency.

Find out about your local candidates. Who are they, what are their views. Then make a decision based on that. It'll be them representing you in Parliament after 8th June if they win.

That's what I usually do John.  Ed Balls was always helpful and I liked his views. Andrea Jenkyns has been very approachable also and having helped us I do feel some obligation to vote for her this time.

I did ask the local Labour Party who their candidate is and what their likely views are but the Administrator replied to say no candidate has been chosen yet. 

Does the Administrator decide who will contest the seat John?

[John Drake]

6 hours ago, Niels said:

That's what I usually do John.  Ed Balls was always helpful and I liked his views. Andrea Jenkyns has been very approachable also and having helped us I do feel some obligation to vote for her this time.

I did ask the local Labour Party who their candidate is and what their likely views are but the Administrator replied to say no candidate has been chosen yet. 

Does the Administrator decide who will contest the seat John?

Due to it being a snap election, there are lots of seats where the parties - not just Labour - haven't picked their candidates yet.

This explains better than I can what's happening in terms of candidate selection with all the main parties due to the exceptional circumstances involved:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39658426

[Niels]

Thank you John. You have been more informative.  It is interesting that the local branches won't make the decision about who is to be the candidate.

Mixed views about this as some of the branch views I like whereas others I don't. 

[Oxford]

The only real decision you make is whether to vote for this,                                        or this..........

But what you're buying is this,

 

[cookey]

Ah,would it be £300,000?,if not,what about £80 mill,sorry,actually £300 mill - I knew that all along,only teasing,dont worry,we'll just borrow some more or maybe print a few notes.You really couldn't make it up,no wonder noone trusts Labour.

A few more facts for our half dozen deluded socialist friends.

Latest Poll

Con     47%

Lab     28%

LDem    8%

            May - Good Campaign  41%

                       Bad Campaign     22%

      Corbyn     Good Campaign    21%

                       Bad Campaign      40%

 

[John Drake]

48 minutes ago, cookey said:

Ah,would it be £300,000?,if not,what about £80 mill,sorry,actually £300 mill - I knew that all along,only teasing,dont worry,we'll just borrow some more or maybe print a few notes.You really couldn't make it up,no wonder noone trusts Labour.

A few more facts for our half dozen deluded socialist friends.

Latest Poll

Con     47%

Lab     28%

LDem    8%

            May - Good Campaign  41%

                       Bad Campaign     22%

      Corbyn     Good Campaign    21%

                       Bad Campaign      40%

 

Don't you get a bit lonely in here?

Everyone else is discussing the General Election in the, er, General Election thread.

 

[kiyan]

I trust Labour but as I have said on other threads I would not trust the current labour leadership to run a bath.

I wonder how many are like me,:

I think my local Labour councillors have done a pretty good job, but was going to vote against them on Thurs in the hope a really bad local election result would send a message to the party to get Corbyn out ( potentially losing some great  people  in the hope that my Labour party  could re-emerge)

As  a GE has been called, I can vote with my heart on local elections ( not tactically), vote Labour locally but there is no way I will vote Labour in the GE (even though I think my local MP is pretty good), because I do not want Corbyn followers to have any argument for him to stay. There is simply no way I can honestly say I want  Corbyn. McDonnell, Abbott  as leaders of this country.

So yes, I trust Labour but do not trust the people they currently have in charge!

[Bob8]

3 hours ago, kiyan said:

I trust Labour but as I have said on other threads I would not trust the current labour leadership to run a bath.

I wonder how many are like me,:

I think my local Labour councillors have done a pretty good job, but was going to vote against them on Thurs in the hope a really bad local election result would send a message to the party to get Corbyn out ( potentially losing some great  people  in the hope that my Labour party  could re-emerge)

As  a GE has been called, I can vote with my heart on local elections ( not tactically), vote Labour locally but there is no way I will vote Labour in the GE (even though I think my local MP is pretty good), because I do not want Corbyn followers to have any argument for him to stay. There is simply no way I can honestly say I want  Corbyn. McDonnell, Abbott  as leaders of this country.

So yes, I trust Labour but do not trust the people they currently have in charge!

If they do onot understand a strong local result and a weak national result, they will not understand anything.  Your vote means more to your local candidate than it does to Corbyn.

[GaryO]

If by some unprecedented happening and Labour secure enough seats not to actually win the election but when added to the number of seats gained north of the border by the SNP they could form a majority coalition which I am sure they would should the opportunity arise, then that possibility alone for anyone of sound mind should tell them to avoid voting labour.

Corbyn and Sturgeon collectively running the country, a recipe for disaster on a unparalleled scale.

[nadera78]

3 minutes ago, GaryO said:

If by some unprecedented happening and Labour secure enough seats not to actually win the election but when added to the number of seats gained north of the border by the SNP they could form a majority coalition which I am sure they would should the opportunity arise, then that possibility alone for anyone of sound mind should tell them to avoid voting labour.

Corbyn and Sturgeon collectively running the country, a recipe for disaster on a unparalleled scale.

There's no way Labour and SNP would ever form a coalition, they just don't get on in Scotland at all. It's tribal.

If the numbers added up for a confidence and supply arrangement involving Labour/SNP/LibDems/Greens/Plaid/SDLP then you can guarantee that Corbyn and Sturgeon won't be involved in it. The latter because she doesn't sit at Westminster, the former because he'd have to make way in order to make the arrangement work. Probably someone like Cooper in charge instead. That's the only way those parties could ever work together, and it would also give Labour MPs an opportunity to oust Corbyn.

Not that the numbers will get anywhere close to allowing such a deal. Tories nailed on for a big victory.

[GaryO]

33 minutes ago, nadera78 said:

There's no way Labour and SNP would ever form a coalition, they just don't get on in Scotland at all. It's tribal.

If the numbers added up for a confidence and supply arrangement involving Labour/SNP/LibDems/Greens/Plaid/SDLP then you can guarantee that Corbyn and Sturgeon won't be involved in it. The latter because she doesn't sit at Westminster, the former because he'd have to make way in order to make the arrangement work. Probably someone like Cooper in charge instead. That's the only way those parties could ever work together, and it would also give Labour MPs an opportunity to oust Corbyn.

Not that the numbers will get anywhere close to allowing such a deal. Tories nailed on for a big victory.

I know she does not have a parliamentary seat, but she calls the tune and her puppets sing the song in Westminster, but unlike your good self Nadera I am not to certain and I did say if the opportunity should arise and present itself for a coalition that they would not find a way around your reasons for it not working, in any event should Labour ditch Corbyn to make it work, we cannot let Jimmy Krankie and Co any where near.

[ckn]

16 minutes ago, GaryO said:

I know she does not have a parliamentary seat, but she calls the tune and her puppets sing the song in Westminster, but unlike your good self Nadera I am not to certain and I did say if the opportunity should arise and present itself for a coalition that they would not find a way around your reasons for it not working, in any event should Labour ditch Corbyn to make it work, we cannot let Jimmy Krankie and Co any where near.

Why?  What have the SNP done that's so bad that it would mean that people mustn't vote Labour?  They've delivered a regional government capable of investing more than England and Wales in police, NHS, social care, education, core infrastructure, renewable power investment and so on despite being on a fixed budget and zero debt generating powers at all.  The SNP have delivered, the Tories have delivered soundbites yet the SNP are treated like pariahs that would bankrupt Britain

[Griff9of13]

18 minutes ago, ckn said:

Why?  What have the SNP done that's so bad that it would mean that people mustn't vote Labour?  They've delivered a regional government capable of investing more than England and Wales in police, NHS, social care, education, core infrastructure, renewable power investment and so on despite being on a fixed budget and zero debt generating powers at all.  The SNP have delivered, the Tories have delivered soundbites yet the SNP are treated like pariahs that would bankrupt Britain

I was going to ask the same question. I've worked within Scottish government agencies (NHS Scotland and HIE) and they, from what I've seen, are way ahead of their English counterparts in terms of efficiency and effectiveness. 

[GaryO]

22 minutes ago, ckn said:

Why?  What have the SNP done that's so bad that it would mean that people mustn't vote Labour?  They've delivered a regional government capable of investing more than England and Wales in police, NHS, social care, education, core infrastructure, renewable power investment and so on despite being on a fixed budget and zero debt generating powers at all.  The SNP have delivered, the Tories have delivered soundbites yet the SNP are treated like pariahs that would bankrupt Britain

Not going to argue with you CKN, some great reasons there for them to push for independence, one wonders why it did not get a landslide vote last time around, surely these attributes have not just happened in the last couple of years, have they?

The fixed budget you mention, how does that figure per head for the 5.3million population which they have to cater for in comparison to the rest of the UK's 60 million heads. 

[ckn]

Just now, GaryO said:

Not going to argue with you CKN, some great reasons there for them to push for independence, one wonders why it did not get a landslide vote last time around, surely these attributes have not just happened in the last couple of years, have they?

The fixed budget you mention, how does that figure per head for the 5.3million population which they have to cater for in comparison to the rest of the UK's 60 million heads. 

Independence is still a novel concept to many Scots, especially the slightly older generations, until the late 90s the SNP was an irrelevance at best and had a UKIP-style irrationality that made them a joke party.  Give it 10-15 years and I think independence will become a majority view.

[Moose]

55 minutes ago, GaryO said:

Not going to argue with you CKN, some great reasons there for them to push for independence, one wonders why it did not get a landslide vote last time around, surely these attributes have not just happened in the last couple of years, have they?

The fixed budget you mention, how does that figure per head for the 5.3million population which they have to cater for in comparison to the rest of the UK's 60 million heads. 

Scotland receives £10,536 per head of population, England only £8,816.

Incidentally Scotland isn't the biggest recipient, Northern Ireland receives £10,536 and Wales £9,996.

[JonM]

On 29/04/2017 at 5:14 PM, Oxford said:

The only real decision you make is whether to vote for this,                                        or this..........

It's the choice between one lot who want to drive the bus off a cliff and another lot who've forgotten where the keys to the bus are.