belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
fine, in that case you go in and make a bunch of demands, put down a genuinely 'radical' green platform and accept nothing less. Dont allow those cunts to play the game, the point is to expose them.
Green Party talking coalition with yellow Tories ('Lib Dems')
- Thread starter sihhi
- Start date
Random
Ethnic nalgocrat
I wonder whether fewer and fewer GP members will turn up to the counsultation meetings, and whether this is what the LDs are hoping to happen - consensus by exhaustion.
Random
Ethnic nalgocrat
Well, as I'd hope you'd know by now, I agree with you.
Unfortunately I lost both my elections, so I am not in a position to do anything as an elected representative. Next time!
Matt
Wre you standing in the council as well? How close did you come?
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
possibly, tho I think they'd have to put a bloody good offer on the table to convince anyone. The ones who will keep turning up will be those who hate the idea most I'd reckon
Random,
Yes, I was standing in both. Unfortunately we got swamped across Hackney -despite getting more votes than any Green Party local candidates in the borough, ever, we were well off getting elected. I was about 800 votes down from Labour, out of 5600 cast, alas.
Matt
Yes, I was standing in both. Unfortunately we got swamped across Hackney -despite getting more votes than any Green Party local candidates in the borough, ever, we were well off getting elected. I was about 800 votes down from Labour, out of 5600 cast, alas.
Matt
glenquagmire
Rightwing NuLab apologist
And fourth in the Westminster election? That was really baffling.
I mean, obviously I'm glad Labour won, but was a bit disappointed to see you finishing behind the Tories in Hackney!
We got wiped out across London, really.
I wasn't surprised to come fourth to the Tories - beating them was always a "stretch goal" in our strategy this time. They have a solid base vote of 4,000+. I *was* surprised to lose votes, despite the squeeze election. Basically, about 500 of 'my' voters went to the LDs cos they thought they could beat Abbott, about 300 went to Labour for the same reason, and 6,000 voters who haven't cast a ballot since 1997 turned up to vote Labour cos they hate the Tories so much. We didn't get a look in.
I suspect it will be different next time, with the LD vote collapsing utterly.
Matt
I wasn't surprised to come fourth to the Tories - beating them was always a "stretch goal" in our strategy this time. They have a solid base vote of 4,000+. I *was* surprised to lose votes, despite the squeeze election. Basically, about 500 of 'my' voters went to the LDs cos they thought they could beat Abbott, about 300 went to Labour for the same reason, and 6,000 voters who haven't cast a ballot since 1997 turned up to vote Labour cos they hate the Tories so much. We didn't get a look in.
I suspect it will be different next time, with the LD vote collapsing utterly.
Matt
glenquagmire
Rightwing NuLab apologist
I expected the LD vote to collapse this time round. They didn't seem to be putting much effort in.
glenquagmire
Rightwing NuLab apologist
Hmmm. Didn't see much of them round my way out campaigning.
Was expecting you to run us closer in SNC tbh. Looks like you'd put some effort into Smalley Road Estate but not enough into Somerford Grove. But you probably know that already.
Was expecting you to run us closer in SNC tbh. Looks like you'd put some effort into Smalley Road Estate but not enough into Somerford Grove. But you probably know that already.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
thanks for that brilliant insight
this seemed to have happened in most of the heartlands - massive labour votes in glasgow, lanarkshire, the big labour cities etc.
i put it down to david cameron's face and accent. i've been amazed by the reaction to the last week from (edinburgh) friends who don't follow politics, each one of them spitting blood at the election of the tories, and half of them talking about punching cameron in the face (pub talk but still).
this from folk who weren't adults when the tories were last in power.
Fair enough, that is the right response for a party like the Greens.
They should however as a rule avoid coalitions with anyone unless they look like they can be the dominant force in a coalition on which they can impose a good chunk of their agenda.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
of course they should.
The point on this thread is that the Greens claim to be different to the 'old parties.' But they're not particularly
I'll believe that when I see it
Anyway, I thought it had been established that the sheffield greens have discussed the proposal as per the party's rules and rejected it
Random
Ethnic nalgocrat
The greens have already allied with the tories and lib dems in leeds that time
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
and they've rejected a deal, clearly not complete idiots. even the ex-lib independent has rejected their shitty offer!
http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/Lib-Dems-to-lead-the.6293743.jp
http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/Lib-Dems-to-lead-the.6293743.jp
yes, seven years ago and it went so spectacularly well for us, and for the good people of the City of Leeds that we're positively chomping at the bit to do it everywhere else
cesare
shady's dreams ♥
Augie March
blahem
The Greens are the new Lib Dems.
The Lib Dems are the new Tories.
The Tories are the same old twats.
The Lib Dems are the new Tories.
The Tories are the same old twats.
Er... Not really no.
sihhi
Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered
1. Funny how refusing to talk to someone becomes punching?
2. Where does internal culture come from, if not structure?
Would you not concede that the Green Party (aside from its pro-ALMO politics, selling off state owned airport etc.) has major problems in its internal structure - namely the fact that so many of the councillors are 100% "right on" and leftist - yet have little control over what councillors or MEPs do in the party name.
1. I was indulging in hyperbole - I'm sure you get my general point. Hearing what people have to say, and then telling the membership about it and having a vote, is exactly the correct thing to do.
2. The structure is NOT the problem in my view. The passivity of membership because of a culture of 'niceness' and unwillingness to offend is the problem. It is entirely possible to hold local parties to account regionally and nationally. We don't do it enough because people don't want to have fights, and because we haven't had an honest enough conversation as a national party about our ideology and strategies for social change. That is much more of a problem than structure, which (while not perfect) is much MUCH more accountable than any other political party in the UK.
Matt
P.S. The Green Party does not have pro-ALMO politics. It *does* have two or three incidences I know of over the last decade in which councillors have felt pressured into voting for ALMOs as the "least worst" funding option on offer given the current funding framework. That's not a position I agree with, but it is simply not true to say that we are in favour of ALMOs as a party - we aren't, and the vast majority of Green councillors have voted and campaigned against them. If we were in favour of ALMOs as a party, they wouldn't have named me housing spokesperson, for a start.
P.P.S. I probably won't post again on this thread, for the same reason that I've mostly given up on U75 - it'll just be more heat than light and end up with people swearing at each other, which I can't really be bothered with these days. Which makes me sad, but oh well. I wish that people could recognise that it is possible for a party to be imperfect (which the Green Party is) without being *the enemy* (which the Green Party isn't).
2. The structure is NOT the problem in my view. The passivity of membership because of a culture of 'niceness' and unwillingness to offend is the problem. It is entirely possible to hold local parties to account regionally and nationally. We don't do it enough because people don't want to have fights, and because we haven't had an honest enough conversation as a national party about our ideology and strategies for social change. That is much more of a problem than structure, which (while not perfect) is much MUCH more accountable than any other political party in the UK.
Matt
P.S. The Green Party does not have pro-ALMO politics. It *does* have two or three incidences I know of over the last decade in which councillors have felt pressured into voting for ALMOs as the "least worst" funding option on offer given the current funding framework. That's not a position I agree with, but it is simply not true to say that we are in favour of ALMOs as a party - we aren't, and the vast majority of Green councillors have voted and campaigned against them. If we were in favour of ALMOs as a party, they wouldn't have named me housing spokesperson, for a start.
P.P.S. I probably won't post again on this thread, for the same reason that I've mostly given up on U75 - it'll just be more heat than light and end up with people swearing at each other, which I can't really be bothered with these days. Which makes me sad, but oh well. I wish that people could recognise that it is possible for a party to be imperfect (which the Green Party is) without being *the enemy* (which the Green Party isn't).
Good riddance green slime.
Basically leaving because you don't like having your politics challanged...
Similar threads
