European Elections 2019

[Kaka Tim]

To kill it off you're gonna have to convince people a neoliberal regional trade block is a good idea. Don't you think that's sort of counter-intuitive?

Its a better idea than being fucked over by the US, china and the EU via the IMF and WTO. Least shit option.

 

[Pickman's model]

To kill it off you're gonna have to convince people a neoliberal regional trade block is a good idea. Don't you think that's sort of counter-intuitive?

these days counter-intuitive no longer means perverse but good

 

[SpackleFrog]

Its a better idea than being fucked over by the US, china and the EU via the IMF and WTO. Least shit option.

Ahhhhhhh, lesser evilism, that's usually a great tactic.

 

[brogdale]

To kill it off you're gonna have to convince people a neoliberal regional trade block is a good idea. Don't you think that's sort of counter-intuitive?

tbf the folk actually killing it off are already well convinced.

 

[redsquirrel]

So does this mean you think its credible for labour to keep to its present policy? Its shedding votes to both sides - it has to go one way or the other. The fence sitting fudge was probably the least shit position (but still shit) for multiple reasons - but no more. All the polling and the Local and Euro votes show that.

How so? You keep saying this but you've not actually outlined why.

Leaving aside the political arguments, electorally Labour needs to at least keep it's Leave voters if it doesn't want to lose seats. Look at the seats I cited as examples, to go full on remain means losing Ashfield, perhaps even Don Valley and Bolsover(!). I agree any sort of social democratic leave policy is not going to happen but there needs to be enough given to Labour-leaning leave-leaning voters that they can feel able to vote for Labour, that there is at least some type of engagement and respect paid to them. Yes that means some sort of fudge which is going to be unpopular with lots but it keeps enough leave voters and remain voters in the tent that they have a chance of a majority government.

I'll ask a simple question - which seats are you gaining with your strategy? Considering that Ashfield is gone, Dudley North is gone, Newcastle-under-Lyme is questionable, even Don Valley and Bolsover are in the fight for your life category, (you are counting on the Tories and BP splitting each others vote) you need to be gaining some seats.

 

[belboid]

I'm a bit shocked...but there is a good article in Tribune!

Hold the Line

 

[Mr Moose]

Where is the debate? You've literally said that Labour leave voters are wrong to feel betrayed because they were not bothered about this issue 10 years ago. That's not a debate, that's you patronising and dismissing millions of people.

EDIT: At Moose not KT.

I’m not patronising people, but thanks for the lesson in it. I’m lamenting that this phoney Brexit drivel is the thing that breaks Labour.

You are comfortable with it because it fits your analysis that it threatens neoliberalism. I don’t agree, in fact far from it. It’s not patronising to say so and it’s not even patronising to ask again. Patronising would be to think you never can because the working class can’t be asked twice, like they have never experienced political disappointment or challenge.

I don’t see that the UK can, with confidence, continue in the EU. But a shithouse Tory Brexit should be resisted, not least of all because it is another win for them. Compromise is for everyone in this.

 

[chilango]

If Labour go "full remain" they're fucked. It'll finish them.

 

[brogdale]

If Labour go "full remain" they're fucked. It'll finish them.

Wait till they go revoke!

 

[Mr Moose]

If Labour go "full remain" they're fucked. It'll finish them.

Yes, until they are not. There are two large parties for a reason.

 

[Mr Moose]

Wait till they go revoke!

Would probably be more popular than a second referendum position to be fair. Less fucking about.

 

[Mr Moose]

To kill it off you're gonna have to convince people a neoliberal regional trade block is a good idea. Don't you think that's sort of counter-intuitive?

A lot of people seem convinced that a trade deal with the US that opens the NHS up to the market is a good idea. Certainly what Nige wants. The notion that we want these deals is almost unchallenged in mainstream Brexit discourse.

But yes, hard sell the EU right now.

 

[redsquirrel]

A lot of people seem convinced that a trade deal with the US that opens the NHS up to the market is a good idea.

What absolute and utter bunkum. The marketisation of the NHS (and other public services) is incredibly unpopular, poll after poll has shown that. That is why the marketisation that has taken place has had to be undercover of "austerity" etc.

I’m not patronising people, but thanks for the lesson in it. I’m lamenting that this phoney Brexit drivel is the thing that breaks Labour.

No you are telling people they are wrong to feel betrayed, because the care about this issue. If you don't understand why that is patronising then I don't know what to say. This is as crazy as your nonsense that Corbyn needs to go so the Labour Party can move leftwards.

 

[Dogsauce]

People didn’t used to care about it much apart from cranks like Farage, and still don’t. It’s a proxy for other stuff.

This is why trying to fight it by making a case for remain would be ineffective. Where we’re going to we don’t need reason.

 

[gosub]

A lot of people seem convinced that a trade deal with the US that opens the NHS up to the market is a good idea. Certainly what Nige wants. The notion that we want these deals is almost unchallenged in mainstream Brexit discourse.

But yes, hard sell the EU right now.

 

[kebabking]

A lot of people seem convinced that a trade deal with the US that opens the NHS up to the market is a good idea.

Name twelve of them.

 

[Old Spark]

Battens Ukip fruitcakes join Nigels milkshakes


'Go home!': Brexit Party supporters heckle British-Sikh MEP

 

[Mr Moose]

What absolute and utter bunkum. The marketisation of the NHS (and other public services) is incredibly unpopular, poll after poll has shown that. That is why the marketisation that has taken place has had to be undercover of "austerity" etc.
No you are telling people they are wrong to feel betrayed, because the care about this issue. If you don't understand why that is patronising then I don't know what to say. This is as stupid as your nonsense that Corbyn needs to go so the Labour Party can move leftwards.

As an aside, do you ever post without trying to rubbish someone you disagree with?

The marketisation of the NHS has been happening despite opposition. I’m glad you can rule it out as a consequence of a headlong rush into a US trade deal.

 

[Mr Moose]

Name twelve of them.

Lots of people want a trade deal with the US. That is a risk.

 

[kebabking]

Lots of people want a trade deal with the US. That is a risk.

That's not what you said.

 

[belboid]

Lots of people want a trade deal with the US. That is a risk.

We've got a trade deal with the US.

Yes, of course there is a risk of having a really shit such deal - the EU tried to get us to pass one. But any such move can be blocked, like that one was.

 

[redsquirrel]

The marketisation of the NHS has been happening despite opposition. I’m glad you can rule it out as a consequence of a headlong rush into a US trade deal.

Can you maintain a consistent point. This is a different claim to your previous one.

 

[DexterTCN]

Lots of people want a trade deal with the US. That is a risk.

Yup. Part of the current discussions are US access to the UK NHS (and other) IT systems.

 

[Kaka Tim]

Ahhhhhhh, lesser evilism, that's usually a great tactic.

you have a better one?

 

[Poi E]

Yup. Part of the current discussions are US access to the UK NHS (and other) IT systems.

Only because the US will want to firewall the fuckers. They've heard of Capita.

 

[redsquirrel]

you have a better one?

Have you read the Tribune piece belboid posted? I'm not a social democrat and so it would not be my preferred option. But from within the LP framework the piece (making many of the same points that have been made on this thread) presents a considered position that makes more sense both politically and electorally than the full remain option.

This tension, over which coalition the party wants to build, underlies the debate in Labour today about whether to embrace a second referendum. Is Labour now fundamentally a progressive party, which means leaving behind workers in some of the most deprived parts of Britain to chase the votes of ‘progressive’ Tories and Liberal Democrats in Remain-voting areas? Or is it a socialist party, which means trying to unite workers across the culture war divide on the basis that a Labour government would improve their lives?

And on the subject of risks, questions should be asked of second referendum supporters too. Is it not a risk to write off so many areas which have voted Labour for generations, and in which the party has deep roots, for voters who are more politically transient? Is this risk not increased by the fact that a majority of Labour’s seats, and a super-majority of their target seats, are in Leave-voting areas?

 

[SpackleFrog]

A lot of people seem convinced that a trade deal with the US that opens the NHS up to the market is a good idea. Certainly what Nige wants. The notion that we want these deals is almost unchallenged in mainstream Brexit discourse.

But yes, hard sell the EU right now.

I don't know why you've quoted my post, cos you've not engaged with it at all.

 

[Dogsauce]

You don’t need over half the vote to win a parliamentary seat, few of them are won with such a high percentage. Thus it is not necessarily the greatest concern for labour if an area is say up to 60% leave as they may already have this sort of number opposing them (conversely this also means that it is right to worry about the Brexit party if they’re pulling 40% in some areas, but that vote probably won’t stand in a GE).

 

[SpackleFrog]

you have a better one?

Yes - how about a Brexit where we take the key infrastructure of the economy into public ownership, so we can plan for people's needs and give them decent schools and food and healthcare and create green jobs? How about promising to scrap the hostile environment and offer mutual free movement to the EU, without the posted workers directive? How about saying we won't allow the NHS to be pillaged by multi nationals? How about saying we will collaborate and co-operate with left govts in the EU and around the world?

Why do we always have to insist that radical change is impossible?

 

[gosub]

Yes - how about a Brexit where we take the key infrastructure of the economy into public ownership, so we can plan for people's needs and give them decent schools and food and healthcare and create green jobs? How about promising to scrap the hostile environment and offer mutual free movement to the EU, without the posted workers directive? How about saying we won't allow the NHS to be pillaged by multi nationals? How about saying we will collaborate and co-operate with left govts in the EU and around the world?

Why do we always have to insist that radical change is impossible?

Take 4 bank holidays and think again.