I wouldn't be surprised if he was leader coming in to election campaign if there were some compromises on policies to keep other people in the party happy. For instance, proposing Burnham style re-nationalisation of the railways instead of Corbyn style re-nationalisation.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Jeremy Corbyn & Tom Watson elected leader and deputy leader of the Labour Party
- Thread starter deltic
- Start date
- Status
I wouldn't be surprised if he was leader coming in to election campaign if there were some compromises on policies to keep other people in the party happy. For instance, proposing Burnham style re-nationalisation of the railways instead of Corbyn style re-nationalisation.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
DarloRich
Veteran Member
i am sorry but what on earth are you talking about? They didn't know full well the war would be over soon! They expected to have to invade the Japanese home islands at vast human coast ( on both sides) and used the atomic bomb to try and avoid that cost. See Operation Downfall
you have little grasp of history I am afraid! But lets not let facts get in the way of a good old fashioned conspiracy theory?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
So: Democracy is OK as long as it gives you a result you like? :roll: We had a choice to change the system and we rejected it.
TheKnightWho
Established Member
Democracy tends to work best when people aren't completely misinformed. People on here are usually quick to complain if the government goes back on its promises, and with good reason!
DarloRich
Veteran Member
Did we,or did we not, have the opportunity to change the voting system? Did we vote to change that system?
People weren't completely misinformed. The facts were clear. We as a country voted NOT to change the system. The turn out (regardless of any black propaganda)was terrible which also suggests most people didn't care.
Harsh as that may be we must accept the result
Last edited:
TheKnightWho
Established Member
You keep asserting something without actually explaining how people weren't misinformed. The papers were saying plenty of things that were outright untrue about AV.
To claim that this is a good mandate for not changing the system is disingenuous at best.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
by the same token you keep asserting the other side of the argument with no real evidence of this "black propaganda". The case was made very poorly by the pro change camp and the turn out was terribly low.
I don't like the result but have to accept it - that is the point of democracy surely
BTW did we have the opportunity to vote for change in the democratic system? A simple yes or no will do!
TheKnightWho
Established Member
Because I didn't feel like providing a bunch of links that can easily be found on Google. The fact that the case was made poorly and the opposition lied and misled about it proves the point though: the public can't make up their minds all that well if they haven't got half the facts.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
again you dodge a simple question. yes or no: Did we have a chance to change the voting system? Did we as a country reject that chance?
I think the issue is that you didn't get the result you wanted and don't like it.
TheNewNo2
Member
God no. I despise UKIP, but that they got so many votes but only one seat makes an absolute mockery of our democratic process.
TheKnightWho
Established Member
again you dodge a simple question. yes or no: Did we have a chance to change the voting system? Did we as a country reject that chance?
I think the issue is that you didn't get the result you wanted and don't like it.
I didn't dodge the issue at all - I explained that it was a mockery of a referendum. I'm really not sure why you dispute this so much, when it's plainly evident.
Do you agree or disagree that the public were properly informed? You don't just get to say "we had a vote - it's settled" without looking at anything that might have affected it.
dcsprior
Member
Really? It's seemed to me that since the UKIP seat/vote disparity, there have been more calls for electoral reform, not less.
Personally I've little sympathy for UKIP on this issue, not because I dislike them, but because they're mostly ex-Tories: throughout the last ~20 years, Tories have been more against voting reform than anyone else - so for people who were in many cases members of the Conservative Party for years to start complaining loudly now that they're the ones disadvantaged strikes me as hypocritical.
Last edited:
asylumxl
Established Member
He's been the MP for Islington North since the 80s. I think he must be doing something right. He's won the leadership race with a massive majority too. I think it's better to wait and see than to make assumptions.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
You will, of course, be able to point to an OFCOM or Electoral Commission investigation into the reporting of this campaign. If so please let me have a link.
I am sorry but i still maintain you don't like the result therefore are trying to find ways to invalidate the process to justify your unhappiness. Whilst i am unhappy with the result I am prepared to accept that we (the electorate) decided not to change the voting system. The reason for that rejection, now, doesn't matter as it means electoral reform will be delayed for years. Whining about it wont change that. All the information was in the public domain and as far as I am aware no one was coerced into voting a particular way.
In any event the majority of the people chose not to take part. Is it fair to draw an inference that they didn't care?
I note you again haven't answered the simple question posed..........
Last edited:
Yes. This can also be seen through the landslide victory in the leadership election - he has a magnetism and dignity about him. People may well vote purely for him at the next election.
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
We didn't have the opportunity to change the voting system to a significantly more proportional one. We had the opportunity to replace FPTP with a system that was arguably slightly better in some respects, but which still gives results that are just as unrepresentative as the current system. As I recall there was even a 'no to AV, yes to PR' sub-campaign on the 'no' side.
backontrack
Established Member
[YOUTUBE]74dJMT75csk[/YOUTUBE]
We can currently get around the voting system by moving to another EU/EEA country and then acquiring citizenship after a few years so then enjoy fair votes for a national parliament for the first time in our lives, but some people want to remove our freedom of movement and it is unclear at the moment whether Corbyn is one of them.
Last edited:
asylumxl
Established Member
Where is the conspiracy theory exactly? Dropping nuclear bombs on civilian centres is good?
I hope nobody you love is ever killed or affected by the after effects. Several generations of people in the two cities are still experiencing problems from the bombings.
Last edited:
DarloRich
Veteran Member
where did i say it was a good thing? Show me in this quote where i said that? Show me or apologse.
As for conspiracy theory you are the one who said:
I have highlighted the raging conspiracy theory section for you.
Your view, clearly, is that those prosecuting the war knew that the Japanese were finished and dropped the bomb anyway in an effort to kill as many Japanese as possible and to test out how fantastic their super new weapon would be in the real world. The available evidence does not support this suggestion. It is clear that those planning the invasion of Japan ( which was thought to be unavoidable) felt they would loose at last half a million men in that invasion. The Japanese knew where the invasion would come and when. They had fortified the invasion areas and were prepared to fight. The choice to use the bomb was balanced on that basis. That , horrible though it is, less people would die after its use than would die in the invasion and its aftermath.
Or it was all a conspiracy...............
Last edited:
There is a concerted effort by the Tories to attack Corbyn from the word go, especially on my Facebook feed. Those most vocal are both bar workers which I can't see as a profession that the Tories traditionally give a damn about. Tbh I think the Tories have sucked in support from students and low wage vocations most recently which I can't understand.
I will wait for PMQs on Wednesday to see how good Corbyn is against the human waxwork.
I will wait for PMQs on Wednesday to see how good Corbyn is against the human waxwork.
asylumxl
Established Member
Apart from people within Project Manhattan, such as Richard Feynman, had objected to the use of the bombs on the cities. The US administration ignored the objections of the scientists and continued anyway, one reason being that they wished to see how it would work in a real world scenario.
I guess he's not a credible source. I digress.
deltic
Established Member
- Joined
- 8 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 3,213
Given the right wing media hysteria some one must be very worried that Corbyn will actually make a difference. It will be interesting to see what the first post-Corbyn opinion polls show.
asylumxl
Established Member
If they're so intent on trying to taint his image, it means he is probably doing something right.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
so no apology then. Ok we will move on.
chris11256
Member
- Joined
- 27 Dec 2012
- Messages
- 734
There will be an initial bump in the polls. It's whether he can sustain a lead that's the challenge. Right now he's the new leader, he's something different. Give it a year or so and take another look. I remember reading earlier, a labour politician in Scotland said, 'we'll either be reborn or we're all f*****'
As in my previous post, I think the real test will be whether labour succeeds in the elections next May, be it in Scotland, Wales or local council. Either way, personally I don't support him or the majority of the things he stands for.
Last edited:
As already posted Corbyn doesn't like the current format of PMQs. This week he's going to arm himself with questions set by the general public and he's looking in to different Labour MPs leading the questions.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
What do I think of Jeremy Corbyn becoming leader of the labour party?
Firstly I will set out my credentials as one has to do now as the right on studey brigade seem keen on attacking anyone insufficiently left wing. I was born and lived in a mining community on the north east, my family were miners (and other trades), Labour values are a central part of how I was brought up. I have been a party member for 20 years, I am a local TU rep and I am the branch chairman of my union.
You might expect me to be really happy, to join in with the #jezwecan nonsense etc. I want with all my heart to say that this is fantastic news, that things will get better for people in this country as Corbyn sweeps to power. I can’t and he won’t in my opinion. I voted for Burnham as the best of a bad job. I think Corbyn is a decent, honest, straight talking chap, I actually believe him when he speaks his mind and I agree with many of his policies, or at least the bones of them. I just don’t think real people in middle class, middle England, marginal constituencies will. Those are the people we need to win to take power. We can’t do it simply on our “core” vote.
I am sure we will recover ground lost in what should be our traditional heartlands in former industrial cities, in Scotland, in Wales and in the inner cities. I am sure the share of the vote will increase in these areas. I am sure we can recover voters from UKIP and others who have left us, just not enough. I am also sure our share of the vote it will fall elsewhere and that will be in the key areas we need to win.
The gamble we have taken as a party is that we can win more votes at the bottom than we loose in votes in the middle and at the top. I don't think we can. I think we have done what we tend to do in labour and take the moral high ground, standing on the side lines telling people how terrible things are while having absolutely no chance of getting into power to change things because we don’t want to give up or moderate any principles. In a moment off convulsive self harm we have handed power to the Tories for the next 5-10 years and allowed them a free kick at the needy, poorest and most disadvantaged in our country
I will OF COURSE be out trying to get him elected PM - I just don’t think we have a chance. I hope I am wrong!
PS I wonder how long it will take for the expulsions from the party to start?
Firstly I will set out my credentials as one has to do now as the right on studey brigade seem keen on attacking anyone insufficiently left wing. I was born and lived in a mining community on the north east, my family were miners (and other trades), Labour values are a central part of how I was brought up. I have been a party member for 20 years, I am a local TU rep and I am the branch chairman of my union.
You might expect me to be really happy, to join in with the #jezwecan nonsense etc. I want with all my heart to say that this is fantastic news, that things will get better for people in this country as Corbyn sweeps to power. I can’t and he won’t in my opinion. I voted for Burnham as the best of a bad job. I think Corbyn is a decent, honest, straight talking chap, I actually believe him when he speaks his mind and I agree with many of his policies, or at least the bones of them. I just don’t think real people in middle class, middle England, marginal constituencies will. Those are the people we need to win to take power. We can’t do it simply on our “core” vote.
I am sure we will recover ground lost in what should be our traditional heartlands in former industrial cities, in Scotland, in Wales and in the inner cities. I am sure the share of the vote will increase in these areas. I am sure we can recover voters from UKIP and others who have left us, just not enough. I am also sure our share of the vote it will fall elsewhere and that will be in the key areas we need to win.
The gamble we have taken as a party is that we can win more votes at the bottom than we loose in votes in the middle and at the top. I don't think we can. I think we have done what we tend to do in labour and take the moral high ground, standing on the side lines telling people how terrible things are while having absolutely no chance of getting into power to change things because we don’t want to give up or moderate any principles. In a moment off convulsive self harm we have handed power to the Tories for the next 5-10 years and allowed them a free kick at the needy, poorest and most disadvantaged in our country
I will OF COURSE be out trying to get him elected PM - I just don’t think we have a chance. I hope I am wrong!
PS I wonder how long it will take for the expulsions from the party to start?
Last edited:
DarloRich
Veteran Member
or who willl lead the Tory party at the next election. It might be Boris! I agree that is an unknown.
That would be an interesting election. Corbyn vs Johnson. Possibly with President Trump waiting in Washington.
- Status