RugbyRebels

Sandydragon wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Sandydragon wrote: I'd stick Farage, Corbyn, McDonnell and Rees-Mogg in there with him as a point to politicians at large to stop fucking about.

True. And torture them until they repent on £350mil, sovereignty, and leaving the EU being good as it allows state intervention.

If there was ever a case for tightening up campaigning rules on little white lies, thats it My understanding is that a party couldn't publish a lie that blatant in a general election, but those rules didn't apply to the referendum. Not sure if that is accurate, but there should be some means where someone is telling fibs so obviously that they are rebuked by the Electoral Commission during the campaign.

If it were advertising for any other product, it would be deemed misleading.

It wasn't a party as such though; that's a core problem with the whole thing, people voted for a concept with nobody who would be accountable for implementing it. It then became a hospital pass for May and the tories to sort out, which they have utterly failed at

Banquo wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Banquo wrote: True. And torture them until they repent on £350mil, sovereignty, and leaving the EU being good as it allows state intervention.

If there was ever a case for tightening up campaigning rules on little white lies, thats it My understanding is that a party couldn't publish a lie that blatant in a general election, but those rules didn't apply to the referendum. Not sure if that is accurate, but there should be some means where someone is telling fibs so obviously that they are rebuked by the Electoral Commission during the campaign.

If it were advertising for any other product, it would be deemed misleading.

It wasn't a party as such though; that's a core problem with the whole thing, people voted for a concept with nobody who would be accountable for implementing it. It then became a hospital pass for May and the tories to sort out, which they have utterly failed at

Boris did represent the official leave campaign group. Farage and his merry gang were all a recognised political grouping taking part in the campaign. Certainly for the official campaigns, the funding they got had to come with responsibilities.

Sandydragon wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Sandydragon wrote: If there was ever a case for tightening up campaigning rules on little white lies, thats it My understanding is that a party couldn't publish a lie that blatant in a general election, but those rules didn't apply to the referendum. Not sure if that is accurate, but there should be some means where someone is telling fibs so obviously that they are rebuked by the Electoral Commission during the campaign.

If it were advertising for any other product, it would be deemed misleading.

It wasn't a party as such though; that's a core problem with the whole thing, people voted for a concept with nobody who would be accountable for implementing it. It then became a hospital pass for May and the tories to sort out, which they have utterly failed at

Boris did represent the official leave campaign group. Farage and his merry gang were all a recognised political grouping taking part in the campaign. Certainly for the official campaigns, the funding they got had to come with responsibilities.

But no way of formally holding them to account, that's my point. I don't deny they should be 'rebuked', but as they don't exist any more, its a bit pointless- and in fairness, Farage wasn't any part of the £350m thing as his campaign was rejected as being official. It was all a fallacious concept, since they could literally say what they wanted, knowing that someone else would have to make it happen (they didn't believe they'd win in the first place though).

Banquo wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Banquo wrote: It wasn't a party as such though; that's a core problem with the whole thing, people voted for a concept with nobody who would be accountable for implementing it. It then became a hospital pass for May and the tories to sort out, which they have utterly failed at

Boris did represent the official leave campaign group. Farage and his merry gang were all a recognised political grouping taking part in the campaign. Certainly for the official campaigns, the funding they got had to come with responsibilities.

But no way of formally holding them to account, that's my point. I don't deny they should be 'rebuked', but as they don't exist any more, its a bit pointless- and in fairness, Farage wasn't any part of the £350m thing as his campaign was rejected as being official.

Aye, it was the official leave campaign that should have been rebuked. If there was a way to speed up the assessment then their claim could have been countered t the time rather than take action later when frankly its a bit too late.

It also didn't help that the remain campaign was a mess.

Sandydragon wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:
Boris did represent the official leave campaign group. Farage and his merry gang were all a recognised political grouping taking part in the campaign. Certainly for the official campaigns, the funding they got had to come with responsibilities.

But no way of formally holding them to account, that's my point. I don't deny they should be 'rebuked', but as they don't exist any more, its a bit pointless- and in fairness, Farage wasn't any part of the £350m thing as his campaign was rejected as being official.

Aye, it was the official leave campaign that should have been rebuked. If there was a way to speed up the assessment then their claim could have been countered t the time rather than take action later when frankly its a bit too late.

It also didn't help that the remain campaign was a mess.

It was, but it had more acccountability as it was Tory/govt policy (which is often forgotten). It was theirs to lose....and they did!

Read an article in a dutch newspaper today talking about British politics and the love British politicians have for rhetoric... And right at the end, a clear and unfortunate comparison made by saying that Theresa May doesn't fit with this great tradition as she has not managed to get any further than 'Brexit is Brexit'.

Scathing.

Ken Loach advocates kicking out any Labour MPs who make a stand against anti-Semitism. Proving once again there's no problem on the left of the Labour party and it's all a media ploy to get at the Glorious Leader™

The Times ran a report highlighting the problem with Labour wanting to fill seats with those who support the Glorious Leader™ over progressive left of centre politics - https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/labo ... -zrls7p058

It's almost funny other than Labour might win

Digby wrote:The Times ran a report highlighting the problem with Labour wanting to fill seats with those who support the Glorious Leader™ over progressive left of centre politics - https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/labo ... -zrls7p058

It's almost funny other than Labour might win

They will almost certainly rout the Tories at the local elections.

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:The Times ran a report highlighting the problem with Labour wanting to fill seats with those who support the Glorious Leader™ over progressive left of centre politics - https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/labo ... -zrls7p058

It's almost funny other than Labour might win

They will almost certainly rout the Tories at the local elections.

With candidates like this who wouldn't want to back them? David Icke might have a better grip on reality.

I've no idea what I'd even like to happen in local elections, I don't even know if it's possible to do a good job such have been the extra legal duties imposed by central government and he such have been the cuts to funding by central government.

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:The Times ran a report highlighting the problem with Labour wanting to fill seats with those who support the Glorious Leader™ over progressive left of centre politics - https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/labo ... -zrls7p058

It's almost funny other than Labour might win

They will almost certainly rout the Tories at the local elections.

With candidates like this who wouldn't want to back them? David Icke might have a better grip on reality.

I've no idea what I'd even like to happen in local elections, I don't even know if it's possible to do a good job such have been the extra legal duties imposed by central government and he such have been the cuts to funding by central government.

She was also casting doubt over Jo Cox's death and the Westminster attack.

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: They will almost certainly rout the Tories at the local elections.

With candidates like this who wouldn't want to back them? David Icke might have a better grip on reality.

I've no idea what I'd even like to happen in local elections, I don't even know if it's possible to do a good job such have been the extra legal duties imposed by central government and he such have been the cuts to funding by central government.

She was also casting doubt over Jo Cox's death and the Westminster attack.

Does one laugh or despair that she can reach such a high level of politics?

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
With candidates like this who wouldn't want to back them? David Icke might have a better grip on reality.

I've no idea what I'd even like to happen in local elections, I don't even know if it's possible to do a good job such have been the extra legal duties imposed by central government and he such have been the cuts to funding by central government.

She was also casting doubt over Jo Cox's death and the Westminster attack.

Does one laugh or despair that she can reach such a high level of politics?

There is no political party one can sensibly vote for at this point.

The Parliamentary Labour party just seems like a bunch of Uncle Tom's.
Is that racist..?.... corporate stooges might be a less inflammatory description.

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: She was also casting doubt over Jo Cox's death and the Westminster attack.

Does one laugh or despair that she can reach such a high level of politics?

There is no political party one can sensibly vote for at this point.

I never have to worry too much about this as the Tories will win the seat easily, thus I'm left with a choice of voting either Greens or Lib Dem to add to national voting totals to add some little thing (and probably nothing) to the overall picture.

My local MP claims to be a remainer but also seems as much a remainer as May, and it was Gove he backed for the leadership role once Boris wasn't an option. He's also famously screamed at police officers there to protect him, he is though taller than one might think from just seeing him on TV

I do feel that Corbyn did a very good job of getting the youth Labour voters involved in politics again. But I also feel like his time has somewhat passed now, and Labour need to turn to a new leader. The only problem with that is...who?

I really feel Labour could do with a good old fashioned working class northerner in charge. Someone to "say it like it is", so to speak. Because Corbyn is neither an intellectual nor a man of the people. He's just a man...

Stom wrote:I do feel that Corbyn did a very good job of getting the youth Labour voters involved in politics again. But I also feel like his time has somewhat passed now, and Labour need to turn to a new leader. The only problem with that is...who?

I really feel Labour could do with a good old fashioned working class northerner in charge. Someone to "say it like it is", so to speak. Because Corbyn is neither an intellectual nor a man of the people. He's just a man...

Although Labour did benefit from a youth surge last time, it would appear that the under 24awere still under represented.

Corbyn brings too much baggage. A more moderate leader would attract more floating voters. Despite everything, the Torys are still ahead in the polls, which is insane.

Sandydragon wrote:

Stom wrote:I do feel that Corbyn did a very good job of getting the youth Labour voters involved in politics again. But I also feel like his time has somewhat passed now, and Labour need to turn to a new leader. The only problem with that is...who?

I really feel Labour could do with a good old fashioned working class northerner in charge. Someone to "say it like it is", so to speak. Because Corbyn is neither an intellectual nor a man of the people. He's just a man...

Although Labour did benefit from a youth surge last time, it would appear that the under 24awere still under represented.

Corbyn brings too much baggage. A more moderate leader would attract more floating voters. Despite everything, the Torys are still ahead in the polls, which is insane.

It's not the "moderation" that's the problem, it's his appearance. Labour needs to be left of centre, not right... Tony Blair was not a moderate, you have to remember that. A lot of what Corbyn and his team put out is far from extreme. But one or two policies, which are badly thought out and/or poorly released, are jumped upon and pushed as evidence that he's a pseudo communist.

Blair might not be a moderate if only looking to the Labour party, but withing British politics as a whole Blair was very much a moderate or centrist. I always rather liked Blair other than his actual policies which always seemed rather poorly thought out through to just being shit. There is I think we'd have to allow Blair came in following more than a decade of chronic lack of investment under the Tories in a variety of public services, and now after another decade of Tory government someone is going to have to bite the bullet on a chronic lack of investment, and that's both expensive and in political terms takes a long time to pay off so it's not obvious in advance you'd get any credit.

Digby wrote:Blair might not be a moderate if only looking to the Labour party, but withing British politics as a whole Blair was very much a moderate or centrist. I always rather liked Blair other than his actual policies which always seemed rather poorly thought out through to just being shit. There is I think we'd have to allow Blair came in following more than a decade of chronic lack of investment under the Tories in a variety of public services, and now after another decade of Tory government someone is going to have to bite the bullet on a chronic lack of investment, and that's both expensive and in political terms takes a long time to pay off so it's not obvious in advance you'd get any credit.

cripes.

While I don't think Blair was the right winger many make him out as, his middle and late stint as PM was definitely to the right of centre...

I just don't think there's any true socialist government out there, and the British Labour party currently stands as one of the only actual socialist parties, and that's mainly due to Corbyn and his team.

And I do think it's essential that we have some form of democratic socialism out there, it's just that Corbyn maybe doesn't have that democratic part...

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:Blair might not be a moderate if only looking to the Labour party, but withing British politics as a whole Blair was very much a moderate or centrist. I always rather liked Blair other than his actual policies which always seemed rather poorly thought out through to just being shit. There is I think we'd have to allow Blair came in following more than a decade of chronic lack of investment under the Tories in a variety of public services, and now after another decade of Tory government someone is going to have to bite the bullet on a chronic lack of investment, and that's both expensive and in political terms takes a long time to pay off so it's not obvious in advance you'd get any credit.

cripes.

Yep, I think he was a decent chap trying to do some good, he just went about it in ways I didn't like.

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:Blair might not be a moderate if only looking to the Labour party, but withing British politics as a whole Blair was very much a moderate or centrist. I always rather liked Blair other than his actual policies which always seemed rather poorly thought out through to just being shit. There is I think we'd have to allow Blair came in following more than a decade of chronic lack of investment under the Tories in a variety of public services, and now after another decade of Tory government someone is going to have to bite the bullet on a chronic lack of investment, and that's both expensive and in political terms takes a long time to pay off so it's not obvious in advance you'd get any credit.

cripes.

Yep, I think he was a decent chap trying to do some good, he just went about it in ways I didn't like.

I thought him a smarmy careerist. Each to their own.

Stom wrote:While I don't think Blair was the right winger many make him out as, his middle and late stint as PM was definitely to the right of centre...

I just don't think there's any true socialist government out there, and the British Labour party currently stands as one of the only actual socialist parties, and that's mainly due to Corbyn and his team.

And I do think it's essential that we have some form of democratic socialism out there, it's just that Corbyn maybe doesn't have that democratic part...

Depends what you mean by socialism. I think it's a fair point that Blair could easily have sat as a Lib Dem or left leaning Tory and having a choice to the left of Blair isn't the worst thing

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: cripes.

Yep, I think he was a decent chap trying to do some good, he just went about it in ways I didn't like.

I thought him a smarmy careerist. Each to their own.

as Jim Telfer observed you've got to want it. nonetheless I thought he was good, and I thought he'd helped the Labour Party grow up a bit, turns out it only worsened the backlash from the window lickers in the party. when I say I liked him it was never enough to want to vote for him, and he loused plenty up and left plenty he never even got into, but his wider ambitions for what a society should look like didn't alarm me, similar to Cameron, whereas Corbyn and the Tory right I'd have big concerns about