Another Drive4show 'Anything goes' thread

[super_realist]

First topic message reminder :

Kobe beef isn't that a real thing.Not familiar with the gent but Basketball is a great spectator sport in that there is a score every few seconds and always a result .
Lowry has done very  well to say the least in view of the stick he gets.Good lad

Do you think so? It's certainly a great sport to play, but it's pretty boring to watch. 75% of the game is irrelevant. It only becomes slightly interesting in the last quarter when the match is won and lost. I thinks that's the problem with American sport. They concentrate so much on there being frequent scoring, that it becomes routine and lacks excitement when they do score.
I prefer moments of brilliance in sports rather than just constant routine points.

[Soul Requiem]

Owen Jones, who I find pretty annoying, is no more noticable then Farage. Lily Allen the same with Hopkins. Nothing about trying to look woke , a word I don't  really understand, it's just people expressing opinions. Doesn't mean they are the majority, it's still the minority.

It's not about individuals being more noticeable, it's about how many individuals are noticeable. Newspapers are overwhelmingly right wing that's irrefutable but social media where so called celebrities extol the virtues of things that they have no understanding of is overwhelmingly left wing.

[beninho]

Owen Jones, who I find pretty annoying, is no more noticable then Farage. Lily Allen the same with Hopkins. Nothing about trying to look woke , a word I don't  really understand, it's just people expressing opinions. Doesn't mean they are the majority, it's still the minority.

It's not about individuals being more noticeable, it's about how many individuals are noticeable. Newspapers are overwhelmingly right wing that's irrefutable but social media where so called celebrities extol the virtues of things that they have no understanding of is overwhelmingly left wing.

But it depends on what you look for. Social media is full of people with different views. I don't have an issue with celebrities expressing an opinion though.

[superflyweight]

Nope, it isn't.

A minority of people find ridiculous things offensive.  This is then picked up, picked up by the media, and brought to the attention of loads of people  who then getting in a frothing mess that the country is becoming this that and the other. When it's really just a very small amount.

Case, in point, being Mr Realist. Who thinks this.

It's like, people want to be offended at each step. A minority get upset, then a bigger group get upset by the minority. People aren't helping themselves.

This is all true, but it's pretty much how things have always been.  Social media just amplifies it to a greater extent.  The majority of people would have no knowledge of the latest 'Twitter Storm' and even if they did, they wouldn't have a strong opinion on it.  

Also doesn't help that the main news outlets now seem to be obsessed about reporting on what "ordinary people" think about the latest news story.  I don't really want to know what Gary from Swindon thinks about the possibility of negotiating an equitable and beneficial trade deal with the USA - I'm guessing that the fact that Gary is wandering the streets during the working day and has time to offer an opinion means that he's probably not the best person to consut for an opinion on the complexities of international trade.

[kwinigolfer]

What does everyone make of the apparent re-nationalising of some of the rail network?
Seems the ultimate irony from 3,000 miles away.

[navyblueshorts]

Super, this should be interesting

"Scottish independence: Nicola Sturgeon to give indyref2 update on Brexit day"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-51311288

I’m sure it’s just coincidental that Caledonia sounds very similar to Catalonia.

Let’s hope the U.K. govt handles itself a bit better than the Spanish govt did when faced with a separational crisis.

Hopefully, they just pretty much ignore her. Sure they'll get their wish to sod off in the near future, but now is hardly the time.

Bearing in mind the current numbers of SNP seats a) in Westminster & b) in Holyrood thats probably the best  approach to boost her popularity and mandate even more. It’s clearly not in his nature but Johnson will have to tread carefully here.

Of course the other one that will eventually surface as well is the majority of NI MPs floating the idea that it may be better for them to align themselves to Dublin rather than Westminster.

See the trouble with being a bull in a china shop and lying through your teeth is that you have to continue to lie bigger and bigger until eventually it all goes pop!!! I’m afraid standing with your fingers in your ears going la la la la just doesn’t cut it.

She can have a pseudo-referendum all she wants - if not approved by Westminster it amounts to the sum total of sweet FA. Yes, it might make her more popular in Scotland and it might hurry up their exit, which I can't wait for.

NI re-uniting w/ Eire was always an option in Good Friday Agreement wasn't it? Johnson can't stop that if majority want it as far as I know. Good luck to them.

As I've said before, devolution etc was the beginning of the end of the UK - can't give people a bit of 'freedom' and prevent them from asking "If we can have this, why can't we have it all?". Brexit has sped/is speeding it up. Maybe we'll all grow up one day and have a mature, future relationship w/ EU as England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland. Shame about the global influence and permanent Security Council member at UN and all that, but that's what you get for petty, small-minded, Nationalist bollox.

[navyblueshorts]

JAS, they're all liars. You can't seriously believe that any politician is trustworthy.

Would Johnson actually care anyway? It just means that his party would be in forever.

Just an observation here...when a Left of center politician is caught lying, the retort never comes back as, “Yeah but they’re all liars”, the condemnation, vilification, shaming, ridiculing goes into overdrive. Whereas when Tories do it, by far the most common retort is “Yeah but they’re all liars” as if that’s some kind of valid excuse!!

I rationalise the above by recognising that we do live in a conservative democracy where lying is acceptable. If you vote for lies then you shouldn’t get irked by it when it happens.

That's exactly what happens, the left blame the right for their lies and the right blame the left, foolish to suggest otherwise.

Hmmm, not 100% sure you got the point Soul which was that there has been in recent times an awful lot more lies peddled by the right. In spite of which a majority of the electorate find it acceptable. Now is that because
a) They are really good liars and many believe them or b) The truth isn’t really that important. Which one is it?

They have other priorities? i.e. they want out of EU above all else?

[navyblueshorts]

Nope, it isn't.

A minority of people find ridiculous things offensive.  This is then picked up, picked up by the media, and brought to the attention of loads of people  who then getting in a frothing mess that the country is becoming this that and the other. When it's really just a very small amount.

Case, in point, being Mr Realist. Who thinks this.

It's like, people want to be offended at each step. A minority get upset, then a bigger group get upset by the minority. People aren't helping themselves.

This is all true, but it's pretty much how things have always been.  Social media just amplifies it to a greater extent.  The majority of people would have no knowledge of the latest 'Twitter Storm' and even if they did, they wouldn't have a strong opinion on it.  

Also doesn't help that the main news outlets now seem to be obsessed about reporting on what "ordinary people" think about the latest news story.  I don't really want to know what Gary from Swindon thinks about the possibility of negotiating an equitable and beneficial trade deal with the USA - I'm guessing that the fact that Gary is wandering the streets during the working day and has time to offer an opinion means that he's probably not the best person to consut for an opinion on the complexities of international trade.

[super_realist]

Owen Jones, who I find pretty annoying, is no more noticable then Farage. Lily Allen the same with Hopkins. Nothing about trying to look woke , a word I don't  really understand, it's just people expressing opinions. Doesn't mean they are the majority, it's still the minority.

The difference is that the likes of Lily Allen and Owen Jones don't want you to hold an opinion if its different from theirs. That's what the whole "woke" thing is about. If you don't tow the line, then you aren't welcome. It's about dictating how we think and what we say and if you don't follow it then society should shun you.

Some of the woke  fallout from the left regarding the  Lawrence Fox issue was pretty disgraceful. The whole woke movement is about oppressing opinion and freedom of speech. It is the most intolerant movement, which is pretty ironic

[beninho]

There is no woke movement. You are again falling into the minority thinking pigeonhole. There was no woke fallout. Some people expressed views on what fox said. That's it. Owen Jones expresses views, but his views are agreed with by some. Hopkins expresses views, well not much anymore, and hers are agreed with. Now you may agree with her, and think she is less intolerant then the left liberals.

There is no woke movement, nothing to fear.

[beninho]

In response to the earlier point about people opinions on the news.

This is over 10 years old, but still pretty true!

[super_realist]

There is no woke movement.  You are again falling into the minority thinking pigeonhole. There was no woke fallout. Some people expressed views on what fox said. That's it. Owen Jones expresses views, but his views are agreed with by some. Hopkins expresses views, well not much anymore, and hers are agreed with. Now you may agree with her, and think she is less intolerant then the left liberals.

There is no woke movement,  nothing to fear.  

The size of it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. If there is no movement, why were the views of Lawrence Fox even questioned. Surely if there was no such movement, it wouldnt have even been reported.
There's certainly nothing to fear, it's just annoying that these pretentious millennials in the media want to dictate what you can think and say.
There certainly a section of society who feels it is their cause to dictate their views on everyone else. The whole climate debate is built on this intolerance of other people's views.
Mac for instance claims you can't criticise a black woman without it being both sexist and racist. They see racism everywhere where there is none.

[JAS]

Nope, it isn't.

A minority of people find ridiculous things offensive.  This is then picked up, picked up by the media, and brought to the attention of loads of people  who then getting in a frothing mess that the country is becoming this that and the other. When it's really just a very small amount.

Case, in point, being Mr Realist. Who thinks this.

It's like, people want to be offended at each step. A minority get upset, then a bigger group get upset by the minority. People aren't helping themselves.

This is all true, but it's pretty much how things have always been.  Social media just amplifies it to a greater extent.  The majority of people would have no knowledge of the latest 'Twitter Storm' and even if they did, they wouldn't have a strong opinion on it.  

Also doesn't help that the main news outlets now seem to be obsessed about reporting on what "ordinary people" think about the latest news story.  I don't really want to know what Gary from Swindon thinks about the possibility of negotiating an equitable and beneficial trade deal with the USA - I'm guessing that the fact that Gary is wandering the streets during the working day and has time to offer an opinion means that he's probably not the best person to consut for an opinion on the complexities of international trade.

As it happens I know a few “Gary’s from Swindon” and fair play...you have a point :-p

[beninho]

Why do you think it's a movement, when it's just people expressing opinions. Why are you seemingly more concerned with people you class as woke expressing opinions, when Twitter is also full of racists and right wing intolerance, such as Hopkins.

No one is trying to dictate how to think.

You, are showing the problem I mentioned earlier. You seem to think it's a bigger problem then it actually is. And, as you mentioned, the media reporting such minor points doesn't help, as it blows things up beyond where it should go.

As I see you edited your post. I dont believe the whole climate change debate is built on intolerance of other views, I feel that a minority, such as extinction rebellion are being used as everyone who has issues with climate change. Again, you are falling into the same trap.

[super_realist]

Why do you think it's a movement, when it's just people expressing opinions. Why are you seemingly more concerned with people you class as woke expressing opinions, when Twitter is also full of racists and right wing intolerance, such as Hopkins.

No one is trying to dictate how to think.

You, are showing the problem I mentioned earlier. You seem to think it's a bigger problem then it actually is. And, as you mentioned, the media reporting such minor points doesn't help, as it blows things up beyond where it should go.

As I see you edited your post. I dont believe the whole climate change debate is built on intolerance of other views, I feel that a minority, such as extinction rebellion are being used as everyone who has issues with climate change. Again, you are falling into the same trap.

It's just a term of phrase, call it a fad, a trend, a few annoying students or Lily Allen types if you wish. It's got a definition because it exists, so to claim it doesn't is dishonest.

By the way, I've never seen climate change activists ever have a rational discussion about the topic. Anything which counters their narrative and indoctrination is shouted down as "denial" rather than just a point they haven't considered, same as many things are shouted down as racist when they aren't.
I'm not saying it's taking over, but it certainly exists.

[beninho]

I'm not doubting it exists. But it's in a minority. Not everyone with concerns about climate change are activists, in fact very few are. So basing your whole opinion on a minority of people is a bit daft.

You seem to keep proving my point.

[Soul Requiem]

I'm not doubting it exists. But it's in a minority. Not everyone with concerns about climate change are activists, in fact very few are. So basing your whole opinion on a minority of people is a bit daft.

You seem to keep proving my point.

That might be why he specifically referred to activists then

[beninho]

Activists have strong opinions? Shock horror!

[JAS]

JAS, they're all liars. You can't seriously believe that any politician is trustworthy.

Would Johnson actually care anyway? It just means that his party would be in forever.

Just an observation here...when a Left of center politician is caught lying, the retort never comes back as, “Yeah but all politicians are liars”, the condemnation, vilification, shaming, ridiculing goes into overdrive. Whereas when Tories do it, by far the most common retort is “Yeah but all politicians are liars” as if that’s some kind of valid excuse!!

I rationalise the above by recognising that we do live in a conservative democracy where lying is acceptable. If you vote for lies then you shouldn’t get irked by it when it happens.

Oh...and would Johnson care anyway? Most definitely not, care is not a word I’d remotely associate with Johnson in any shape or form.

On the last part, certainly for a while yes.

Why do you only acknowledge the lies of the right. What about the laughable lies of Corbyn  et al. That's why I said they're all liars.
I don't see one side as being any better than the other. Why do you? You can't still be bitter that Labour didn't win, its not like you could genuinely want to have a Labour government with the feeble Corbyn at the helm.

So,
1. In your rush to make your point you totally missed “when a left of centre politician is caught lying”
2. Aside from the idiotic “Stupid Woman” lip reading lie, name another one of consequential significance??
3. “I don’t see one side as being any better than the other” yep...an important part of the observation I was making. Fullfact.org absolutely buried that misguided assumption.
4. Bitter...no it is what it is and I’ll personally make the best of it but angry at the idiocy of the electorate for giving a 5 (but given the now required unprecedented swings 10) year mandate to a party who have managed to expand the poverty trap from 2.6 million to 4.1 million whilst at the same time increasing the wealth of the top 1000 by a factor of 3, bitter? No. Angry? Well a bit yeah. Too many thought it was more important that Corbyn was a bit of a drip not to be trusted. Essentially the choice we were made to face was a priveleged intellectual but cripplingly emotionally detached buffoon or a principled, empathetic, not as well educated, rebel but a bit of a wet fish lacking in charisma anti establishment moaner. collectively we plumped for the former so what will be will be and those that condoned that choice can justify the various instances of doom that we are about to tackle. I’ll try hard not to say “see, told you what would happen”

[super_realist]

Eh, how about the most obvious one.
Corbyn claimed he would do "absolutely anything" to stop a no deal Brexit, yet he never voted for any of the deals.
There's also the lies of his election manifesto. Completely unworkable, panned by financial institutions and seen as transparent by the voting public.

It's funny that you don't seem to blame Corbyn and Labour for their own failure, you pin it on the lies of Tories, which I agree exist, but Corbyn is culpable for not providing a viable alternative.
Labour had an open goal to take over the country, not once but twice, and they weren't even close, their attempt from six yards went out for a throw in.
If you don't lay at least some blame at Labour's door for the current situation then I think you aren't looking at the whole picture.
By the way, the definition of poverty has changed dramatically. It's not what it used to be, it's a considerably wider definition.

[super_realist]

Activists have strong opinions? Shock horror!

No, activists unwilling to consider other viewpoints without labelling dissenters as climate deniers.Shouting down the opinions of others because they can't engage in debate.

[dynamark]

I still cannot believe the other senior labour folk just let corbyn and co get on with it when it was a total disaster about to happen.To be fair Watson stepped away and wet Jon Ashworth said it in private but the current crop aiming to lead all just jogged along showing a severe lack of judgment which is not exactly a good omen for the future.

[beninho]

Well, there was a leadership challenge, Corbyn won after a vote of the members. Not sure what else they could have done.

[navyblueshorts]

There is no woke movement.  You are again falling into the minority thinking pigeonhole. There was no woke fallout. Some people expressed views on what fox said. That's it. Owen Jones expresses views, but his views are agreed with by some. Hopkins expresses views, well not much anymore, and hers are agreed with. Now you may agree with her, and think she is less intolerant then the left liberals.

There is no woke movement,  nothing to fear.  

Riggghhhtttt....

[dynamark]

Ben appreciate he was the elected leader but I'm thinking of senior experienced MPs who must have been watching in horror as the campaign unfolded and the support drained away.
Other then a few they just appeared to blindly followed the leader over the cliff.

[kwinigolfer]

I think Pompey snaffle the Div 1 FA Cup survival bonus after tonight's results.
Plus, loads of attractive 5th Round ties, including the Rooney Derby.

PFC will likely be the only non-Prem team in the 6th Round . . . . . . .

[JAS]

Who remembers that old Hansen(?) comment...”You don’t win anything with kids!!” A bit ironic this morning.

[super_realist]

Who remembers that old Hansen(?) comment...”You don’t win anything with kids!!”  A bit ironic this morning.

Not really, it was only tin pot opposition in the shape of Shrewsbury and required an own goal, not exactly class of 92 stuff.

[pedro]

Here’s a new name for you super: Living-in-the-future-pool?

[I'm never wrong]

only tin pot opposition in the shape of Shrewsbury

[McLaren]

Super

Must be a good day for you, seeing that MSP go down for texting a cute boy.

[super_realist]

Super

Must be a good day for you, seeing that MSP go down for texting a cute boy.

Always good to see that revolting party expose a few of their dodgy skeletons.

[JAS]

Super

Must be a good day for you, seeing that MSP go down for texting a cute boy.

Always good to see that revolting party expose a few of their dodgy skeletons.

What is it with politicians that allow them to think that (with the technology that exists nowadays) they can get away with this kind of Poopie. The predatory actions themselves should disqualify him from ever holding a position of power or authority but in addition, doesn’t it expose a naivety of thinking that should also eliminate them from any kind of public office.

[McLaren]

16 is the age of consent in Scotland. Did he really do anything wrong, other than betray his partners trust?

[navyblueshorts]

16 is the age of consent in Scotland. Did he really do anything wrong, other than betray his partners trust?

Far too rational, Mac. No-one is interested in anything like that; too busy being outraged. Hang him high!

[beninho]

Loved reading to outrage on social media. While, you have to accept, it's a bit dodgy. He's still not done anything illegal.

Someone, on Facebook I think,commented that age means nothing to a pedophile. When age means everything to one.

People have just shouted people a lot, like they don't know what it means.

[JAS]

I still cannot believe the other senior  labour folk just let corbyn and co get on with it when it was a total disaster about to happen.To be fair Watson stepped away and wet  Jon Ashworth said it in private but the current crop aiming to lead all just jogged along showing a severe lack of judgment which is not exactly a good omen for the future.

I think quite a few did and quite rightly they were labelled traitorous. That does NOT necessarily mean what they were saying was wrong. The overriding thing in an election campaign is unity.
The arguments and points they were making had been made and debated at conference and conference came to conclusions and from that a manifesto was constructed. When you go into battle you have to be united. The dissenting voices were too numerous and the leadership wasn’t strong enough to quell them. The Labour Party is a broad church with some quite wide ranging views. During Blair’s electoral success the Left of the party accepted things and acquiesced over things that they weren’t comfortable with (PFI in the NHS for instance), the Iraq war they railed against quite vociferously especially Corbyn.
Now...
Corbyn always was a rebel who was a thorn in the side of various labour leaders (on the right of the party) so when he was elected the Blairite right never really had any qualms about undermining his leadership, after all it was what he had done for years. Whilst he was a great rebel, when the boot was placed on the other foot he clearly couldn’t cut it. Yes things were stacked against him more than most, it would have been naive to have expected a level playing field in the media, he would have known and expected the knives there (maybe not as vociferous as they were). What he SHOULD have been able to count on though was the loyalty of his own side, particularly in an election campaign.
It’s for the conscience of “lifelong” Labour men like Ian Austin to reflect on just how much they helped elect a 80 seat Tory majority. Much as I have disdain for the likes of Chukka Amuna, at least he had the decency to leave the party before externally bleating to the media what a pish flap Corbyn was as leader.

[McLaren]

By the wikipedia definition "an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children", Derek Mackay is not a bad person.

Although given the age gap he could be accused of taking advantage of a less experienced person, not a great attribute for a senior public servant to have.

[JAS]

16 is the age of consent in Scotland. Did he really do anything wrong, other than betray his partners trust?

Mac...what would you say is the biggest single issue with politics today in terms of politicians and the electorate?
Is it fair to say it’s Trust? (Or rather lack of trust). So...when a politician exposes himself as untrustworthy what do you think his options are?

Yes you’re right he hasn’t done anything illegal (based on the current story). The line between acceptable and unacceptable isn’t always drawn along legal lines.
Employing fancy dan accountants or domiciling yourself in somewhere like Panama to help you avoid your fair share of tax isn’t illegal. Most taxpayers don’t find that acceptable but it’s not illegal (actually bad example, most taxpayers are probably quite oblivious to how much they get shafted)

[Soul Requiem]

Did the left really accept things when Blair was leader? If I recall such was his majority that the numerous rebels of which Corbyn was one were pretty much ignored, you reap what you sow in that regard.

[Soul Requiem]

16 is the age of consent in Scotland. Did he really do anything wrong, other than betray his partners trust?

Mac...what would you say is the biggest single issue with politics today in terms of politicians and the electorate?
Is it fair to say it’s Trust? (Or rather lack of trust). So...when a politician exposes himself as untrustworthy what do you think his options are?

Yes you’re right he hasn’t done anything illegal (based on the current story). The line between acceptable and unacceptable isn’t always drawn along legal lines.
Employing fancy dan accountants or domiciling yourself in somewhere like Panama to help you avoid your fair share of tax isn’t illegal. Most taxpayers don’t find that acceptable but it’s not illegal (actually bad example, most taxpayers are probably quite oblivious to how much they get shafted)

Or is the reality that it's an opinion based on jealousy, it's deemed as acceptable because it's firstly legal and I'm going to say that most people would do the same if given the chance.

[McLaren]

Mac...what would you say is the biggest single issue with politics today in terms of politicians and the electorate?
Is it fair to say it’s Trust? (Or rather lack of trust). So...when a politician exposes himself as untrustworthy what do you think his options are?

What naive simpleton is looking for trust from a politician?

[dynamark]

Anyway Philip Schofield gay shock- who gives a monkeys certainly I don't .
One of the reasons I go to work is to avoid day time TV.
Isnt Salmon in court soon as well ?

[JAS]

Did the left really accept things when Blair was leader? If I recall such was his majority that the numerous rebels of which Corbyn was one were pretty much ignored, you reap what you sow in that regard.

Don’t entirely disagree, I think there was a significant element of “We’ll make him reap what he sowed”

[JAS]

16 is the age of consent in Scotland. Did he really do anything wrong, other than betray his partners trust?

Mac...what would you say is the biggest single issue with politics today in terms of politicians and the electorate?
Is it fair to say it’s Trust? (Or rather lack of trust). So...when a politician exposes himself as untrustworthy what do you think his options are?

Yes you’re right he hasn’t done anything illegal (based on the current story). The line between acceptable and unacceptable isn’t always drawn along legal lines.
Employing fancy dan accountants or domiciling yourself in somewhere like Panama to help you avoid your fair share of tax isn’t illegal. Most taxpayers don’t find that acceptable but it’s not illegal (actually bad example, most taxpayers are probably quite oblivious to how much they get shafted)

Or is the reality that it's an opinion based on jealousy, it's deemed as acceptable because it's firstly legal and I'm going to say that most people would do the same if given the chance.

...and on that point we’ll agree to differ, it’s got eff all to do with jealousy, it’s about the elite taking the piss and a) getting away with it and b) trying to normalise it as acceptable. It’s not...simples!!

[navyblueshorts]

16 is the age of consent in Scotland. Did he really do anything wrong, other than betray his partners trust?

Mac...what would you say is the biggest single issue with politics today in terms of politicians and the electorate?
Is it fair to say it’s Trust? (Or rather lack of trust). So...when a politician exposes himself as untrustworthy what do you think his options are?

Yes you’re right he hasn’t done anything illegal (based on the current story). The line between acceptable and unacceptable isn’t always drawn along legal lines.
Employing fancy dan accountants or domiciling yourself in somewhere like Panama to help you avoid your fair share of tax isn’t illegal. Most taxpayers don’t find that acceptable but it’s not illegal (actually bad example, most taxpayers are probably quite oblivious to how much they get shafted)

Or is the reality that it's an opinion based on jealousy, it's deemed as acceptable because it's firstly legal and I'm going to say that most people would do the same if given the chance.

Count me as one that wouldn't.

[super_realist]

By the wikipedia definition "an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children", Derek Mackay is not a bad person.

Although given the age gap he could be accused of taking advantage of a less experienced person, not a great attribute for a senior public servant to have.

Mac, it might not be illegal, but it's incredibly creepy for a 42 year old man to try to covertly tap up a naive 16 year old using social media. This is not the sort of behaviour which passes as acceptable for any political party, regardless of whether it is legal. In many parts of Scotland, he is old enough to be his grandfather.

What is it about politicians that results in so many of them having and acting upon such dubious sexual desires.

[super_realist]

I still cannot believe the other senior  labour folk just let corbyn and co get on with it when it was a total disaster about to happen.To be fair Watson stepped away and wet  Jon Ashworth said it in private but the current crop aiming to lead all just jogged along showing a severe lack of judgment which is not exactly a good omen for the future.

I think quite a few did and quite rightly they were labelled traitorous.  That does NOT necessarily mean what they were saying was wrong. The overriding thing in an election campaign is unity.
The arguments and points they were making had been made and debated at conference and conference came to conclusions and from that a manifesto was constructed. When you go into battle you have to be united. The dissenting voices were too numerous and the leadership wasn’t strong enough to quell them. The Labour Party is a broad church with some quite wide ranging views. During Blair’s electoral success the Left of the party accepted things and acquiesced over things that they weren’t comfortable with (PFI in the NHS for instance), the Iraq war they railed against quite vociferously especially Corbyn.
Now...
Corbyn always was a rebel who was a thorn in the side of various labour leaders (on the right of the party) so when he was elected the Blairite right never really had any qualms about undermining his leadership, after all it was what he had done for years. Whilst he was a great rebel, when the boot was placed on the other foot he clearly couldn’t cut it. Yes things were stacked against him more than most, it would have been naive to have expected a level playing field in the media, he would have known and expected the knives there (maybe not as vociferous as they were). What he SHOULD have been able to count on though was the loyalty of his own side, particularly in an election campaign.  
It’s for the conscience of “lifelong” Labour men like Ian Austin to reflect on just how much they helped elect a 80 seat Tory majority. Much as I have disdain for the likes of Chukka Amuna, at least he had the decency to leave the party before externally bleating to the media what a pish flap Corbyn was as leader.

The news that Corbyn was a pish flap didn't need publicised by Ian Austin it was plain to see and Austin is not the one responsible for a Tory majority of 80 either, that's Corbyn, his swivel eyed lunatic cabinet and his suicidal tenure of a party which has never had success under the direction he was taking them in.  The only way back for Labour whether you like it or not is one along the lines of Blair.
The Tories don't have a majority because they are somehow brilliant, they have a majority because Labour have no direction, no plan, a degree of leftishness that no one wanted and a feeble leader who could not even beat the three worst Tory PM's in living memory. He is quite clearly the worst leader of any party in 80 years and probably the biggest loser we have ever seen in politics. If he didn't love himself so much he would have resigned immediately, the fact he didn't shows how deluded he is, and how deluded his party is. He should have  been sacked immediately to save any credibility and signal that Labour wished to move on and change direction.
You cannot blame Ian Austin for any significant influence on the outcome. Are you really suggesting that a guy no one has ever heard of should be more persuasive than the leader of a party?

[dynamark]

I have to say Super has summed that up very well,JC was living out his own dream and I go back to my posts how on earth did the rest of the party go along with him.Someone mentioned Momentum and party membership for £3 which was very relevant.
Long way back now and so far none of the potential leaders have the courage to spell it out.

[super_realist]

I have to say Super has summed that up very well,JC was living out his own dream and I go back to my posts how on earth did the rest of the party go along with him.Someone mentioned Momentum and party membership for £3 which was very relevant.
Long way back now and so far none of the potential leaders have the courage to spell it out.

If its not Starmer and a move to centre ground then Britain may well become a one party nation.
Rebecca Long Bailey would be the worst possible outcome as she is just the Corbyn continuum candidate.
The constant denial by momentum makes once roll eyes in absolute credulity. They could not be more deluded if they think they can remain so left wing and hope to turn around their fortunes around.

[beninho]

Dyna, you ho on about why others went along with Corbyn. Yet, and as previously mentioned, a lot didn't. In 2016, he was challenged and Owen Jones stood against him, he had the backing of most centrist mps including Nandy and Starmer. He lost, badly. Then in 2017, labour did ok at the GE. So no real clamour to get rid based on that result. All went wrong when people realised Brexit split labour more then the Tories. No idea, what any mp was meant to do.

Anyway, hope Starmer wins,.

[Sponsored content]