Is there anything in politics more shit than the Labour Party?

[Roxy Hearts]

58 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

Local politics, Malinga, local politics.  You're obviously quite passionate about that stuff, but the OP is all about the big picture. 

 

Labour look like they'll win big in Westminster, where it really counts, and then spend four and a bit years sucking up to the Murdoch empire, being tough on the poor and disabled, standing up to workers, paying no attention to the environment, hoping that the private sector will put a few quid into infrastructural investment, and telling health, education, and local and regional government to "do more with less".

 

That's shit.  There may well be shit out there that's more shit, but that sure as hell doesn't make this edition of the "Labour" party any less shit.

Correct!

[James1874f]

7 hours ago, Roxy Hearts said:

I vote SNP and have done for years. I'll never vote for Labour again as they're not the same party I used to vote for. 

 

Tell me what policies Labour have to improve Scotland. I'm concerned about the NHS and Scottish Water privatisation and Labour being the establishment stooges they are, don't care about Scotland and its people or principles! Now off you go, wave your union flag and enjoy your day.

That last sentence is exactly why the majority of sensible Scots will never vote for independence. 

 

The thick patriots of the SNP will never understand. 

[The Real Maroonblood]

22 minutes ago, James1874f said:

That last sentence is exactly why the majority of sensible Scots will never vote for independence. 

 

The thick patriots of the SNP will never understand. 

[Roxy Hearts]

2 hours ago, James1874f said:

That last sentence is exactly why the majority of sensible Scots will never vote for independence. 

 

The thick patriots of the SNP will never understand. 

Labour, Tories and Libdems have independence supporters. Thick British patriots like yourself "will never understand". Independence is more popular than the SNP!

[The Real Maroonblood]

3 minutes ago, Roxy Hearts said:

Labour, Tories and Libdems have independence supporters. Thick British patriots like yourself "will never understand". Independence is more popular than the SNP!

The thick ones are fearties who don’t want to govern their own country.

Weird behaviour.

Edited April 15 by The Real Maroonblood

[Roxy Hearts]

4 minutes ago, The Real Maroonblood said:

The thick ones are fearties who don’t want to govern their own country.

Weird behaviour.

Beyond my comprehension. What a state the UK is in.

[The Real Maroonblood]

9 minutes ago, Roxy Hearts said:

Beyond my comprehension. What a state the UK is in.

It certainly is.

Land of hopelessness and despair.

Edited April 15 by The Real Maroonblood

[il Duce McTarkin]

Roxy and TrMb, two of the biggest fieldie slavers on this board.

 

[James1874f]

1 hour ago, Roxy Hearts said:

Labour, Tories and Libdems have independence supporters. Thick British patriots like yourself "will never understand". Independence is more popular than the SNP!

Well to be honest not really hard to be more popular than the SNP right now is it.

 

I'm that much of a British patriot I voted for independence the last time,if the vote was held tomorrow I'd vote no for many reasons, one being absolute roasters like you. 

 

People like you and other SNP supporters going on as if nobody else cares about Scotland or who disagrees with the SNP must be a unionist. 

 

 

 

[manaliveits105]

4 hours ago, James1874f said:

That last sentence is exactly why the majority of sensible Scots will never vote for independence. 

 

The thick patriots of the SNP will never understand. 

Fair comment 

[Cranston]

1 hour ago, The Real Maroonblood said:

It certainly is.

Land of hopelessness and despair.

This is hypocrisy of a high level. The Snp Greens coalition has been diabolical for Scotland.

[Jim_Duncan]

2 hours ago, il Duce McTarkin said:

Roxy and TrMb, two of the biggest fieldie slavers on this board.

 

It’s been ten years. 
 

They're like lads that got chatting and dancing with a hot lass in a night club, only for her to wave goodbye at lights-up time before sashaying away into the night, never to be seen again. Sure, we’d all love to GHPed, but it’s never going to happen, no matter how many times you pay the entry fee again, gents. 
 

Ten years. 
 

Move on. 

[il Duce McTarkin]

1 minute ago, Jim_Duncan said:

It’s been ten years. 
 

They're like lads that got chatting and dancing with a hot lass in a night club, only for her to wave goodbye at lights-up time before sashaying away into the night, never to be seen again. Sure, we’d all love to GHPed, but it’s never going to happen, no matter how many times you pay the entry fee again, gents. 
 

Ten years. 
 

Move on. 

 

She sashayed all the way to McTarkin Towers.

 

[Jim_Duncan]

2 minutes ago, il Duce McTarkin said:

 

She sashayed all the way to McTarkin Towers.

 

 

Bonne chance et bon courage, gouverneur. 

[il Duce McTarkin]

37 minutes ago, Jim_Duncan said:

 

Bonne chance et bon courage, gouverneur. 

 

You said hot lass in a nightclub, not bang-average bloke in a nighclub.

[Jim_Duncan]

28 minutes ago, il Duce McTarkin said:

 

You said hot lass in a nightclub, not bang-average bloke in a nighclub.

The lights were low. 

[il Duce McTarkin]

35 minutes ago, Jim_Duncan said:

The lights were low. 

 

 

 

[The Real Maroonblood]

8 hours ago, il Duce McTarkin said:

Roxy and TrMb, two of the biggest fieldie slavers on this board.

 

Give your head another wobble.

[Roxy Hearts]

8 hours ago, James1874f said:

Well to be honest not really hard to be more popular than the SNP right now is it.

 

I'm that much of a British patriot I voted for independence the last time,if the vote was held tomorrow I'd vote no for many reasons, one being absolute roasters like you. 

 

People like you and other SNP supporters going on as if nobody else cares about Scotland or who disagrees with the SNP must be a unionist. 

 

 

 

You're an excellent advocate for British Unionism! It's quite simple, if you don't support Independence, you're a unionist and what's wrong with that ya "roaster!"

 

8 hours ago, il Duce McTarkin said:

Roxy and TrMb, two of the biggest fieldie slavers on this board.

 

A bit much coming from you, il Duce! 😁

[JudyJudyJudy]

5 hours ago, Jim_Duncan said:

The lights were low. 

[JudyJudyJudy]

6 hours ago, il Duce McTarkin said:

 

You said hot lass in a nightclub, not bang-average bloke in a nighclub.

 

[il Duce McTarkin]

3 hours ago, The Real Maroonblood said:

Give your head another wobble.

 

😄👍

[il Duce McTarkin]

2 hours ago, Roxy Hearts said:

 

A bit much coming from you, il Duce! 😁

 

Agreed 

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

14 hours ago, The Real Maroonblood said:

The thick ones are fearties who don’t want to govern their own country.

Weird behaviour.

I think some are too thick to comprehend that.

[manaliveits105]

Has the Labour deputy leader ( the one who wants to do away with right to buy despite making £48000 profit on her own ) been cleared by the police investigation into her tax affairs yet ? 
and why is Keith now in hiding after giving her his full backing over the matter ? 
 

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 hour ago, manaliveits105 said:

Has the Labour deputy leader ( the one who wants to do away with right to buy despite making £48000 profit on her own ) been cleared by the police investigation into her tax affairs yet ? 
and why is Keith now in hiding after giving her his full backing over the matter ? 
 

 

No not yet !

[ehcaley]

6 hours ago, manaliveits105 said:

Has the Labour deputy leader ( the one who wants to do away with right to buy despite making £48000 profit on her own ) been cleared by the police investigation into her tax affairs yet ? 
and why is Keith now in hiding after giving her his full backing over the matter ? 
 

 

This from a man that adores Lizzie Lettuce😂 you're a trier, I'll give you that.desperate stuff from Lord Ashcroft

[Ulysses]

An analysis which shows that Starmer's edition of Labour is actually less popular than Miliband's version was in 2015 - and we all know what happened then.

 

Labour aren't ahead.  The Conservatives are behind.  So when Labour win, they'll begin their term of office with levels of unpopularity normally seen in governments with 4-5 years of unpopular decisions behind them.

 

Tice '29, anyone? 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/22/labour-tories-election-polls-analysis?CMP=share_btn_url

 

 

 

 

Edited April 22 by Ulysses

[BlueRiver]

33 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

An analysis which shows that Starmer's edition of Labour is actually less popular than Miliband's version was in 2015 - and we all know what happened then.

 

Labour aren't ahead.  The Conservatives are behind.  So when Labour win, they'll begin their term of office with levels of unpopularity normally seen in governments with 4-5 years of unpopular decisions behind them.

 

Tice '29, anyone? 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/22/labour-tories-election-polls-analysis?CMP=share_btn_url

 

 

 

 

 

A sign of the more general distrust in politicians over the past decade or so? 

 

Those graphs seem to have been tracking downwards for quite some time. 

[il Duce McTarkin]

53 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

An analysis which shows that Starmer's edition of Labour us actually less popular than Miliband's version was in 2015 - and we all know what happened then.

 

Labour aren't ahead.  The Conservatives are behind.  So when Labour win, they'll begin their term of office with levels of unpopularity normally seen in governments with 4-5 years of unpopular decisions behind them.

 

Tice '29, anyone? 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/22/labour-tories-election-polls-analysis?CMP=share_btn_url

 

 

 

"These numbers show that the public has not changed its mind significantly on Labour".

 

Satisfaction is a qualitative and relative term, Ulysses (as you know). I'd say that the British public has changed its mind on Labour, and on politics and politicians in general - largely on account of the general skip fire that's been smouldering since the global financial crash of 2008. The trajectory has been consistently downwards when measured against the pervasive optimism that accompanied the changing of the guard in 1997 (whichever side of the fence you were on), and before the tragedy of the Iraq war. Trust and satisfaction are not terms that are easily reconciled with the current national zeitgeist, and even the most flamboyant and robust of populist on either side of the spectrum would struggle to shift the needle at the present time. Apathy born of weariness reigns supreme.

Amplified by 24 hour news channels and increasingly insidious deployment of social media, whatabouteries are the new what-ifs, and confusion and confuddlement are the new clarity. 

 

At the moment Labour appear the least smelly shite in the toilet pan, but in the final analysis, they're still a shite.

 

 

Edited April 22 by il Duce McTarkin

[Ulysses]

1 hour ago, BlueRiver said:

 

A sign of the more general distrust in politicians over the past decade or so? 

 

Those graphs seem to have been tracking downwards for quite some time. 

 

1 hour ago, il Duce McTarkin said:

 

"These numbers show that the public has not changed its mind significantly on Labour".

 

Satisfaction is a qualitative and relative term, Ulysses (as you know). I'd say that the British public has changed its mind on Labour, and on politics and politicians in general - largely on account of the general skip fire that's been smouldering since the global financial crash of 2008. The trajectory has been consistently downwards when measured against the pervasive optimism that accompanied the changing of the guard in 1997 (whichever side of the fence you were on), and before the tragedy of the Iraq war. Trust and satisfaction are not terms that are easily reconciled with the current national zeitgeist, and even the most flamboyant and robust of populist on either side of the spectrum would struggle to shift the needle at the present time. Apathy born of weariness reigns supreme.

Amplified by 24 hour news channels and increasingly insidious deployment of social media, whatabouteries are the new what-ifs, and confusion and confuddlement are the new clarity. 

 

At the moment Labour appear the least smelly shite in the toilet pan, but in the final analysis, they're still a shite.

 

 

 

The 2008 crash did a lot of damage to ordinary people and political systems in "the West", while somehow strangely not interrupting the serene onwards and upwards progress of the very rich.  Because of the deliberate deployment by vested interests of some of the factors @il Duce McTarkin mentions, the main beneficiaries of this systemic mistrust are the right, particularly the far right.  But what happens when they also fail, as they inevitably will?

[John Findlay]

13 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

 

The 2008 crash did a lot of damage to ordinary people and political systems in "the West", while somehow strangely not interrupting the serene onwards and upwards progress of the very rich.  Because of the deliberate deployment by vested interests of some of the factors @il Duce McTarkin mentions, the main beneficiaries of this systemic mistrust are the right, particularly the far right.  But what happens when they also fail, as they inevitably will?

When it comes to politics, they all fail in the end, far right, far left, and even those in the centre.

[il Duce McTarkin]

9 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

 

The 2008 crash did a lot of damage to ordinary people and political systems in "the West", while somehow strangely not interrupting the serene onwards and upwards progress of the very rich.  Because of the deliberate deployment by vested interests of some of the factors @il Duce McTarkin mentions, the main beneficiaries of this systemic mistrust are the right, particularly the far right.  But what happens when they also fail, as they inevitably will?

 

A spot of civil unrest and sporadic war before the Chinese move their puppets in (he says flippantly, shrugging his shoulders and pouting like a huffy French waiter).

 

Goodness knows, though. If these things are truly cyclical, you'd like to think that some form of renewed sense of social responsibility and appreciation for the importance of the common good may spring forth from the shitshows and carefully manufactured malaise. 

[i wish jj was my dad]

15 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

 

The 2008 crash did a lot of damage to ordinary people and political systems in "the West", while somehow strangely not interrupting the serene onwards and upwards progress of the very rich.  Because of the deliberate deployment by vested interests of some of the factors @il Duce McTarkin mentions, the main beneficiaries of this systemic mistrust are the right, particularly the far right.  But what happens when they also fail, as they inevitably will?

What I can't wrap my head around is how the very same mob who broke the banks in 2008 managed to persuade the poor schmucks who paid for it to elect them and keep them in power. 

 

[Ulysses]

2 hours ago, i wish jj was my dad said:

What I can't wrap my head around is how the very same mob who broke the banks in 2008 managed to persuade the poor schmucks who paid for it to elect them and keep them in power. 

 

 

I think it was Douglas Adams who wrote about people who kept voting for the same lizards, even though they treated the voters like shit, for fear that the wrong lizards would get into office.  🤷‍♂️

 

2 hours ago, il Duce McTarkin said:

 

Goodness knows, though. If these things are truly cyclical, you'd like to think that some form of renewed sense of social responsibility and appreciation for the importance of the common good may spring forth from the shitshows and carefully manufactured malaise. 

 

Is it the "end of days" for the "West", or is it just that the political pendulum has swung too far in the direction of conservatism in the last 40-45 years and it means it's time for a correction?

 

By the time the mid-1970s came around, socialists knew that the game was up for things like state ownership, planned economies and "workers owning the means of production", and they proceeded to lose the run of themselves and run out of sensible policies across a lot of the developed world.  In response, the right won electoral support on a platform that said government should be rational, effective, and above all relevant to the interests of people.  Whether conservatives in the 80s and 90s actually believed all that, they acted like they did and that played a large part in securing support for (or at least neutralising opposition to) neoliberalism and globalisation.  Nowadays, it's as though conservatives know the game's a bogey for neoliberalism, and that they've come to fear or hate globalisation. But like the lefties of the 70s, they've no idea what to replace those with, so it's their turn to lose the run of themselves and turn their backs on sensible policies, aided and abetted by whatever rump of the hard left still exists.  Meanwhile, it's the people in the middle who are in favour of sensible, rational, effective and relevant government.   

[il Duce McTarkin]

36 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

I think it was Douglas Adams who wrote about people who kept voting for the same lizards, even though they treated the voters like shit, for fear that the wrong lizards would get into office.  🤷‍♂️

 

 

Is it the "end of days" for the "West", or is it just that the political pendulum has swung too far in the direction of conservatism in the last 40-45 years and it means it's time for a correction?

 

By the time the mid-1970s came around, socialists knew that the game was up for things like state ownership, planned economies and "workers owning the means of production", and they proceeded to lose the run of themselves and run out of sensible policies across a lot of the developed world.  In response, the right won electoral support on a platform that said government should be rational, effective, and above all relevant to the interests of people.  Whether conservatives in the 80s and 90s actually believed all that, they acted like they did and that played a large part in securing support for (or at least neutralising opposition to) neoliberalism and globalisation.  Nowadays, it's as though conservatives know the game's a bogey for neoliberalism, and that they've come to fear or hate globalisation. But like the lefties of the 70s, they've no idea what to replace those with, so it's their turn to lose the run of themselves and turn their backs on sensible policies, aided and abetted by whatever rump of the hard left still exists.  Meanwhile, it's the people in the middle who are in favour of sensible, rational, effective and relevant government.   

 

I'm too short in the tooth to remember the 70s in any great detail. 

 

[Ulysses]

6 hours ago, il Duce McTarkin said:

 

I'm too short in the tooth to remember the 70s in any great detail. 

 

 

I'm not long enough in the tooth to have forgotten the 70s yet.   

[il Duce McTarkin]

2 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

I'm not long enough in the tooth to have forgotten the 70s yet.   

 

 

[Ulysses]

52 minutes ago, il Duce McTarkin said:

 

 

 

On a tangent, Scottish placenames are as fascinating to me as their Irish counterparts.

[John Findlay]

6 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

I'm not long enough in the tooth to have forgotten the 70s yet.   

Do you sit on your porch in your rocking chair?😉

[Gundermann]

5 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

On a tangent, Scottish placenames are as fascinating to me as their Irish counterparts.

 

 

Love them. Is máith líom siad. (?)

 

Off topic though? Labour have a fairly good record on supporting Gaelic in Scotland, at least.

[Ulysses]

3 hours ago, John Findlay said:

Do you sit on your porch in your rocking chair?😉

 

When I can find it.

[JudyJudyJudy]

Better late than never Labour 

 

 

https://x.com/leftiestats/status/1782714023630279117?s=46&t=Uyg6zS_aUfEwlXY6vOoxzQ

 

 

[Ulysses]

13 hours ago, Gundermann said:

 

 

Love them. Is máith líom siad. (?)

 

Off topic though? Labour have a fairly good record on supporting Gaelic in Scotland, at least.

 

Is maith liom iad / 'S toil leam iad (An actual Gàidhlig speaker might take issue with the second text string).

 

I'm aware that Kate Forbes and Alasdair Allan have used Gàidhlig in the chamber, and would have good records in supporting it.  I've also heard that Donald Cameron is an advocate for the language, though not a fluent speaker.  I reckon all the major parties are kinda lukewarm on the subject (vaguely positive but no real commitment), which given the level of interest on the part of the electorate isn't surprising.

[Gundermann]

Why would Labour hide its Union Jacks in Scotland...?

 

[redjambo]

24 minutes ago, Gundermann said:

Why would Labour hide its Union Jacks in Scotland...?

 

 

 

The Labour Party is now all about getting elected and appealing to as many voters as possible in order to do so. Getting into power usurps actual policies and beliefs. And people are falling for it.

[Malinga the Swinga]

4 hours ago, Gundermann said:

Why would Labour hide its Union Jacks in Scotland...?

 

Go on Labour, do whatever it takes to first of all win UK election and then play it's part in ridding Scotland of the vile and corrupt SNP government.

Obviously they're doing a grand job as the bitterness of your posts is ever increasing along with the desperation to throw any mud onto Labour as you can.

They're coming to power and the independence dream is dead. What a glorious start to the weekend.

[JudyJudyJudy]

Just now, Malinga the Swinga said:

Go on Labour, do whatever it takes to first of all win UK election and then play it's part in ridding Scotland of the vile and corrupt SNP government.

Obviously they're doing a grand job as the bitterness of your posts is ever increasing along with the desperation to throw any mud onto Labour as you can.

They're coming to power and the independence dream is dead. What a glorious start to the weekend.

👍🙌

[il Duce McTarkin]

4 hours ago, redjambo said:

 

 

The Labour Party is now all about getting elected and appealing to as many voters as possible in order to do so. Getting into power usurps actual policies and beliefs. And people are falling for it.

 

 

You say that like it's a bad thing, red'.

Do you think that they should really be pressing on with grandiose policy statements and pledges that they know will be twisted and slaughtered by the incumbent client media, thus placing unnecessary jeopardy upon their chances of getting into power with a sizeable majority?

One thing is for certain, if/when they DO get into power and the true state of the public finances after the criminal thievery and mismanagement of the last 14 years is revealed, their hands will be effectively tied.

No plan survives first contact with the enemy, so there's little to be gained in this instance for going all in with 'we'll do this and do that'.

 

I'm not a regular Labour voter, btw.

 

[il Duce McTarkin]

4 hours ago, Gundermann said:

Why would Labour hide its Union Jacks in Scotland...?

 

 

 

Boo hoo.

Another one for the petty grievance bank, Gundy.