Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Hold your nose and vote Labour?

Will you vote Labour?

  • Yes

    Votes: 70 32.1%
  • No

    Votes: 148 67.9%

  • Total voters
    218
I get like that sometimes, maybe they just lost the plan to strip private schools of charitable status down the back of the sofa? It's always in the last place you look for it, etc.
My understanding is that the team around Starmer are 100% focused on winning the election by getting support from TV stations and newspapers. Cutting the membership out of everything so that they aren't able to complain policies designed to appeal to Murdoch and Rothermere are presented, and chasing ONLY middle class voters in Labour/Tory marginals in middle England, and "Red Wall" voters by appealing to bigotry. A complete misunderstanding of the current political situation due to them being 100% enmeshed in the Westminster media/political bubble. They are trying to win, they are just completely wrong about how they are going about it.
 
"Organise Corbyn Inspired Socialist Alliance" is a strange name.

How is it that "OCISA Ltd is a Company Limited by Guarantee"?
I would not want to vote for a company.

This sounds a little like a fake organisation.
It's a community interest company. It was done that way because the Labour right use "lawfare" so readily and none of us involved (at least so far) have the sort of dosh that allows us to take chances with that. So if we scare the Labour Party enough that they start using court cases to bankrupt us (which is a tactic they have used in the past few years on a few people) nobody ends up with long term problems as a result. OCISA itself gets wound up the moment the election is over. If the candidate wins anu leftover funds go towards staffing and equipping their office in Parliament, if not they get donated to something else via a final vote by the membership. It's not a political party. It's more like an employment agency choosing a candidate for the job of MP for Holborn St Pancras and presenting them to the electorate as a potential employee. The candidate themselves will be an independent and doesn't even have to be a member of OCISA. So long as nobody involved does anything illegal the worst that can happen is that a court case can be brought against OCISA, which would take until after the election, and then it will be already dissolved. We have learned from what has been done in the past to Jeremy Corbyn, Ken Livingstone, and Tony Greenstein. None of us have the public profile to raise the sort of money they have had to.
 
It's a community interest company. It was done that way because the Labour right use "lawfare" so readily and none of us involved (at least so far) have the sort of dosh that allows us to take chances with that. So if we scare the Labour Party enough that they start using court cases to bankrupt us (which is a tactic they have used in the past few years on a few people) nobody ends up with long term problems as a result. OCISA itself gets wound up the moment the election is over. If the candidate wins anu leftover funds go towards staffing and equipping their office in Parliament, if not they get donated to something else via a final vote by the membership. It's not a political party. It's more like an employment agency choosing a candidate for the job of MP for Holborn St Pancras and presenting them to the electorate as a potential employee. The candidate themselves will be an independent and doesn't even have to be a member of OCISA. So long as nobody involved does anything illegal the worst that can happen is that a court case can be brought against OCISA, which would take until after the election, and then it will be already dissolved. We have learned from what has been done in the past to Jeremy Corbyn, Ken Livingstone, and Tony Greenstein. None of us have the public profile to raise the sort of money they have had to.
As for the name. It predates my involvement and I'm not mad keen either. However it's too late to change it, and anyway most of the best possible names for any left group have already been thoroughly devalued.
 
It's a community interest company. It was done that way because the Labour right use "lawfare" so readily and none of us involved (at least so far) have the sort of dosh that allows us to take chances with that. So if we scare the Labour Party enough that they start using court cases to bankrupt us (which is a tactic they have used in the past few years on a few people) nobody ends up with long term problems as a result. OCISA itself gets wound up the moment the election is over. If the candidate wins anu leftover funds go towards staffing and equipping their office in Parliament, if not they get donated to something else via a final vote by the membership. It's not a political party. It's more like an employment agency choosing a candidate for the job of MP for Holborn St Pancras and presenting them to the electorate as a potential employee. The candidate themselves will be an independent and doesn't even have to be a member of OCISA. So long as nobody involved does anything illegal the worst that can happen is that a court case can be brought against OCISA, which would take until after the election, and then it will be already dissolved. We have learned from what has been done in the past to Jeremy Corbyn, Ken Livingstone, and Tony Greenstein. None of us have the public profile to raise the sort of money they have had to.
Why would the
It's a community interest company. It was done that way because the Labour right use "lawfare" so readily and none of us involved (at least so far) have the sort of dosh that allows us to take chances with that. So if we scare the Labour Party enough that they start using court cases to bankrupt us (which is a tactic they have used in the past few years on a few people) nobody ends up with long term problems as a result. OCISA itself gets wound up the moment the election is over. If the candidate wins anu leftover funds go towards staffing and equipping their office in Parliament, if not they get donated to something else via a final vote by the membership. It's not a political party. It's more like an employment agency choosing a candidate for the job of MP for Holborn St Pancras and presenting them to the electorate as a potential employee. The candidate themselves will be an independent and doesn't even have to be a member of OCISA. So long as nobody involved does anything illegal the worst that can happen is that a court case can be brought against OCISA, which would take until after the election, and then it will be already dissolved. We have learned from what has been done in the past to Jeremy Corbyn, Ken Livingstone, and Tony Greenstein. None of us have the public profile to raise the sort of money they have had to.
Why and how would the Labour Party take you to court? It has not taken other left-wing opponents to court. On what basis could it sue you?
 
I mean it's obvious isn't it. Wanky reformists under right-winger SHAMEr can only take advantage of local and national trends (and tactical voting) to deliver a paltry 20% swing and cost the Tories their deposit. Whilst the true vanguard of the working classes can hire a hall in central London and allocate trestle tables and meeting rooms for a weekend and only have tiny bit of internecine warfare that tears the movement apart. It's obvious who can deliver magnificent proletariat victory in 2023/2025 ...
 
Back in 2008 the Socialist Alliance, having reformed from the Socialist Alliance (Provisional) after the first Socialist Alliance split, agreed to "promote One Party for the Left" at their AGM. This makes things very simple, all everyone on the left needs to do is vote for them at the general election. No need for 22 pages of bickering.
 
Back in 2008 the Socialist Alliance, having reformed from the Socialist Alliance (Provisional) after the first Socialist Alliance split, agreed to "promote One Party for the Left" at their AGM. This makes things very simple, all everyone on the left needs to do is vote for them at the general election. No need for 22 pages of bickering.

Analogy

IMG_5669.png
 
Are any of the bend over and vote Labour at all costs brigade on here actually members of the Labour Party ?
 
I doubt it. Probably like the bend over and don't vote at all costs brigade on here.
I could totally understand someone looking at the current batch of bastards on all sides and choosing not to vote. That's their right.

I tend towards the view that better people than me have died for the right to cast a vote, and the least I can do is get off the couch and do it. Even if my "vote" is a dick and hairy balls. Though I'm thinking Green to send a message about how disgusted I am at both major parties backpedaling on environment issues; even if I don't fully agree with all the Greens' principles. It's not like they'll win.
 
I could totally understand someone looking at the current batch of bastards on all sides and choosing not to vote. That's their right.

I tend towards the view that better people than me have died for the right to cast a vote, and the least I can do is get off the couch and do it. Even if my "vote" is a dick and hairy balls. Though I'm thinking Green to send a message about how disgusted I am at both major parties backpedaling on environment issues; even if I don't fully agree with all the Greens' principles. It's not like they'll win.
TBH a vote for the Greens might be the most effective, there isn't a hope in hell that they will get power, I personally think it unlikely that they will even keep Brighton Pavilion now that Lucas has called it a day but no major party is above policy stealing if they think there are votes in it. The Tories have tended to steal them off the UKIP but it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that Labour (even Keir "I Won't commit to anything" Starmer) and LibDem will nick a few ideas off the Greens if they believe the public want them.
 
In what way?
In the way I have described, the realisation that there is a 'green' vote to be had may (not necessarily will) cause mainstream parties to adopt greener leaning policies. I wouldn't want to give them too much credit but the whole idea of at least aiming for Net Zero would probably have a lot less traction without the Green Party and the fact they get a fair number of votes.
 
In the way I have described, the realisation that there is a 'green' vote to be had may (not necessarily will) cause mainstream parties to adopt greener leaning policies. I wouldn't want to give them too much credit but the whole idea of at least aiming for Net Zero would probably have a lot less traction without the Green Party and the fact they get a fair number of votes.
Not convinced.
 
In the way I have described, the realisation that there is a 'green' vote to be had may (not necessarily will) cause mainstream parties to adopt greener leaning policies. I wouldn't want to give them too much credit but the whole idea of at least aiming for Net Zero would probably have a lot less traction without the Green Party and the fact they get a fair number of votes.

When I was in Junior school we made election predictions. Some predicted the Greens would win the next general election due to increased concern for the environment (ozone hole, acid rain etc). However I thought I was rather clever by suggesting that they wouldn't win the next election in 1992, as concern hadn't yet reached a sufficient level, but they would definitely win the one after that.
 
Is it not confusing for the electorate when the Labour Party's Shadow Paymaster General appears to welcome someone who has been pleading to be a Conservative Party election candidate into the Labour Party?:


1-8f853ecb34.jpg


2-87ff46ab84.jpg


3-e1f35ef449.jpg


 
Given the choice I'd rather have a Starmer led Labour in power than a Sunak led Tories...
I think that is true even of the most rabid anti-Starmer posters on here, given that there are only two choices that are actually available. Personally I will probably vote Labour for that very reason though if I can be convinced that the LibDems may carry South Derbyshire between now and next year I might vote for them. I may not be struck on the winner but for me it is more important who loses.
That said we live in a state of quantum politics at the moment, it doesn't matter which way any given electron jumps since the behaviour of billions of others causes things to even out predictably.
The same is currently true of voters, if someone really feels that their principles would be compromised by voting Labour of course they shouldn't, the people who died for our right to vote also died for right to not vote as well.
 

View attachment 394444

Is that the sound of whining and snivelling I hear, because the costs have spiralled out of control and they know they've fucked up?
Hmm, apart from the fact that there has been a lot of antisemitism in the Labour Party, including from a previous leader. They need to address this better than they have done in the past
 
Never been a member of any political party. I just vote whatever is most likely to beat the tories in my local area when i have done, sometimes the lead is so high it seems pointless and I have not always bothered. One case was when unfortunately that was once ukip and the tories won anyway. I have no faith in any of them but more tories doesn't appear to be the answer at all. Labour maybe shite but they can't be worse than what we have now. Even if horrendously incompetent it means nothing happens, which is better than at outright attack.
 
Like not have the right wingers hide all the antisemitism complaints then blame the previous leader of antisemitism for not handling them you mean?
Nobody has handled it well. It’s been a shocking and dispiriting time. Shameful really.
 
Back
Top Bottom