RugbyRebels

OptimisticJock wrote:

Stones of granite wrote:

SerjeantWildgoose wrote:What he really meant was Orange or Blue.

he should have asked what school ye went to.

Dundee ain't Glasgow.
Anyway, Baz is secretly a Fifer

Adder wrote:

Stones of granite wrote:

SerjeantWildgoose wrote:What he really meant was Orange or Blue.

he should have asked what school ye went to.

Dundee ain't Glasgow.
Anyway, Baz is secretly a Fifer

You need to look after your women better, she don't look happy!

canta_brian wrote:

Digby wrote:

fivepointer wrote:
its in all the MPs interests to fight the party's corner even if most of them know Corbyn is a massive liability. For now, they have to put aside their disdain for the leadership.

I wouldn't if I were them. Imo they're best served by such a trouncing that not only is Corbyn gone but so too all (or enough of) the hard left idiots who've swarmed into the party under Corbyn. And if the party is now further to the left and even in replacing Corbyn simply votes in another idiot then they need to move somewhere more progressive or accept it'll be a long fight to reclaim Labour and we'll be in a one party state for sometime.

Is there really much difference between a 1 party state and a 2 party state with pretty much the same policies?

Maybe labour need to split and form 2 loosely cooperative parties?

Sent from my D6603 using Tapatalk

Yes there's a difference, and really if people need a distinction as stark as Corbyn and May to be able to tell the difference then they're lucky breathing is an autonomous function. Also the policies Corbyn likes were being espoused before, by the Socialist Party

And maybe Labour need to split on that basis, or they can accept they're a protest party and stay as they are, but it's not only Labour who have some very different camps within the group

Labour has always looked like a massive coalition of interests, even more so than the Tories. How do you reconcile the views of suburban middle class 'socialists' in London and working class 'socialist' living in old industrial areas of the country? Europe has traditionally been the Tories curse, but Brexit has displayed an enormous fault line within labour.

There is definitely an opportunity for a soft left, pro Eu party. 48% of people wanted to stay after all. Corbyn belongs to the far left of Labour and even if he falls but his supporters keep control, Labour will not contest successfully unless they track back more to the centre. Either thats a party split or maybe some more moderate Labour MPs find a more natural home in the Liberal party.

Sandydragon wrote:Labour has always looked like a massive coalition of interests, even more so than the Tories. How do you reconcile the views of suburban middle class 'socialists' in London and working class 'socialist' living in old industrial areas of the country? Europe has traditionally been the Tories curse, but Brexit has displayed an enormous fault line within labour.

There is definitely an opportunity for a soft left, pro Eu party. 48% of people wanted to stay after all. Corbyn belongs to the far left of Labour and even if he falls but his supporters keep control, Labour will not contest successfully unless they track back more to the centre. Either thats a party split or maybe some more moderate Labour MPs find a more natural home in the Liberal party.

Thing with that is a lot of liberals are way to the right of Labour, people like David Laws (used to illustrate rather than as a current politico) could form partnerships on many areas with those to the right of Labour, but there would still be some stark differences.

Differences yes, but there are some very different views in all the major parties. I think many of the labour moderates and probably the liberal MPs could find common cause. More so than with the likes of Corbin.

Sandydragon wrote:Differences yes, but there are some very different views in all the major parties. I think many of the labour moderates and probably the liberal MPs could find common cause. More so than with the likes of Corbin.

I thought forming a new party was more on the cards then we've seen so far. There could be an agreement reached between some in Labour and the Lib Dems, and maybe even a few in the Conservatives, but so far they're not showing much concern about presenting a progressive centre to centre-left party to the electorate, there's really only Blair giving any momentum to that idea, and I don't think people are avoiding the idea just because Blair is speaking about it

Sandydragon wrote:

Adder wrote:

Stones of granite wrote: Dundee ain't Glasgow.
Anyway, Baz is secretly a Fifer

You need to look after your women better, she don't look happy!

Bit of make up on and you be up her like a rat up a drain pipe.



Tories tipped to take 10 seats up here, can't see it.

OptimisticJock wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Adder wrote:

You need to look after your women better, she don't look happy!

Bit of make up on and you be up her like a rat up a drain pipe.



Tories tipped to take 10 seats up here, can't see it.

In a certain light after 10 pints.............

If the Tories take ten seats north of the border it will be huge. Even a couple would be a massive achievement.

I think Sturgeon has over played her hand in the last few weeks and will suffer at the election because of it.

So, what appears to be a bounce back in Scotland (how big remains to be seen) I see a poll of Welsh voters has the Tories as the largest party in Wales for the first time since 1852 or something.

Maybe, just maybe, Corbyn might take the frickin hint now?

Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk

I can see them getting a lot of votes but not translating into seats.

Donny osmond wrote:So, what appears to be a bounce back in Scotland (how big remains to be seen) I see a poll of Welsh voters has the Tories as the largest party in Wales for the first time since 1852 or something.

Maybe, just maybe, Corbyn might take the frickin hint now?

Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk

No, it's all someone else's fault.

Sandydragon wrote:

Donny osmond wrote:So, what appears to be a bounce back in Scotland (how big remains to be seen) I see a poll of Welsh voters has the Tories as the largest party in Wales for the first time since 1852 or something.

Maybe, just maybe, Corbyn might take the frickin hint now?

Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk

No, it's all someone else's fault.

Ah, he's using the Sturgeon/Salmond playbook.

Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk

OptimisticJock wrote:I can see them getting a lot of votes but not translating into seats.

Do you mean the Cons in Scotland? It might go anyway... in the immortal words of Paul Gascoigne, I don't predict anything and never will, however it would be nice if we were more than just a 1 party state.

Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk

We'll never stay a one party state. Eventually people will get too annoyed with the incumbents even if they do a good job and the other parties prat around. Though Chairman May does keep pushing for Sovereign powers so maybe she has long term plans for a one party state and those undemocratic souls who don't agree with her

Donny osmond wrote:

OptimisticJock wrote:I can see them getting a lot of votes but not translating into seats.

Do you mean the Cons in Scotland? It might go anyway... in the immortal words of Paul Gascoigne, I don't predict anything and never will, however it would be nice if we were more than just a 1 party state.

Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk

Yeah mate and I agree on the 1 party state.

Digby wrote:We'll never stay a one party state. Eventually people will get too annoyed with the incumbents even if they do a good job and the other parties prat around. Though Chairman May does keep pushing for Sovereign powers so maybe she has long term plans for a one party state and those undemocratic souls who don't agree with her

Sorry, I meant Scotland not the UK

Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk

Donny osmond wrote:

Digby wrote:We'll never stay a one party state. Eventually people will get too annoyed with the incumbents even if they do a good job and the other parties prat around. Though Chairman May does keep pushing for Sovereign powers so maybe she has long term plans for a one party state and those undemocratic souls who don't agree with her

Sorry, I meant Scotland not the UK

Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk

It'd hold for Scotland too in the longer term.

Digby wrote:

Donny osmond wrote:

Digby wrote:We'll never stay a one party state. Eventually people will get too annoyed with the incumbents even if they do a good job and the other parties prat around. Though Chairman May does keep pushing for Sovereign powers so maybe she has long term plans for a one party state and those undemocratic souls who don't agree with her

Sorry, I meant Scotland not the UK

Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk

It'd hold for Scotland too in the longer term.

It should, but doesn't. We've been a one party state for as long as I can remember. For years it was so under labour, but now they've fallen out of favour and it's the snp. We don't really do plurality, not enough symbolism in it for us.

Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk

Donny osmond wrote:

Digby wrote:

Donny osmond wrote: Sorry, I meant Scotland not the UK

Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk

It'd hold for Scotland too in the longer term.

It should, but doesn't. We've been a one party state for as long as I can remember. For years it was so under labour, but now they've fallen out of favour and it's the snp. We don't really do plurality, not enough symbolism in it for us.

Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk

Does one party being replaced by another suggest it's that much of a one party state? And perhaps the issue (or complaint) here is about FPP given the SNP have 98% of the seats and had 50% of the actual vote.

FPP is a clearly flawed system, so why bother with it? Is there no will to have it changed in England, or something?

Digby wrote:We'll never stay a one party state. Eventually people will get too annoyed with the incumbents even if they do a good job and the other parties prat around. Though Chairman May does keep pushing for Sovereign powers so maybe she has long term plans for a one party state and those undemocratic souls who don't agree with her

Labour, or perhaps the Liberals, will bounce back. Remember 1997 and it looked like a Labour one party state for some time thereafter.

cashead wrote:FPP is a clearly flawed system, so why bother with it? Is there no will to have it changed in England, or something?

Nope. We even had a referendum on it.

Sandydragon wrote:

cashead wrote:FPP is a clearly flawed system, so why bother with it? Is there no will to have it changed in England, or something?

Nope. We even had a referendum on it.

I tend to think that referendum would have been lost even if a good proportional voting system had been put forward, but for whatever reasons the Lib Dems agreed to that god awful AV system. When it does come around again, and it turns out referendums aren't just for Christmas, those for a change will need to be much smarter at stopping a narrative of that seems to suggest politicians are bad, and they're trying to make the changes to the voting system so they can have more control of your life and do still worse things