The Labour Party. All discussion here please

[I1L2T3 10]

Yes we know. It's all gone on the spending commitments Brown left us in 2010.

 

I think Balls, Miliband and a few of the SF faithful tried that one last month. It didn't really fool anyone other than those foolish enough to be voting Labour anyhow.

The problem for Labour is that Osbourne has the UK economy outperforming his rivals in the EU. He is cutting the deficit and some clown pointing out government debt is rising only adds to the fiscal bancrupcy of Labour strategy.

 

They'll need to do better than that. They need to convince 2,000,000 Tory voters not to vote Tory and to vote for the lot who plunged us into the financial doggy do.

 

Aren't these the additional spending requirements that Osborne pledged to eliminate in one parliament but then failed to to so, doubling the debt, losing the AAA rating and killing economic growth for 3 years in the process?

 

Can't blame Labour forever!!

[Bigthumb 10]

Aren't these the additional spending requirements that Osborne pledged to eliminate in one parliament but then failed to to so, doubling the debt, losing the AAA rating and killing economic growth for 3 years in the process?

 

Can't blame Labour forever!!

 

Well I can't argue that he said he would eliminate the deficit but didn't manage it. That is indeed a failure.The problem for Labour is Osborne was trying to eliminate the deficit caused by Labour's spending commitments.. Labour would not have tried. Their plan was for even greater debt. So nice try but no teddy bear.

 

Anyhow. It's not what I believe. Its what the electorate believe. The perception is that Labour can't be trusted with the economy. They need a 12.5% swing in 2020 to get back with a majority of ONE. So all these claims about Osbourne killing economic growth, whilst we have the fasted growth in the G7 just won't wash, because that line was tried and no one fell for it.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/12/i-am-quitting-labour-leadership-race-anti-business-doomed-ed-miliband

 

Did I mention the boundary changes?

Edited June 13, 2015 by Bigthumb

[I1L2T3 10]

Well I can't argue that he said he would eliminate the deficit but didn't manage it. That is indeed a failure.The problem for Labour is Osborne was trying to eliminate the deficit caused by Labour's spending commitments.. Labour would not have tried. Their plan was for even greater debt. So nice try but no teddy bear.

 

Anyhow. It's not what I believe. Its what the electorate believe. The perception is that Labour can't be trusted with the economy. They need a 12.5% swing in 2020 to get back with a majority of ONE. So all these claims about Osbourne killing economic growth, whilst we have the fasted growth in the G7 just won't wash, because that line was tried and no one fell for it.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/12/i-am-quitting-labour-leadership-race-anti-business-doomed-ed-miliband

 

Did I mention the boundary changes?

 

Actually, he was trying to eliminate a large deficit spike that was caused by

1. 6% loss of economic output in one year

2. The cost of bailing out the banks

 

It's ridiculous to suggest that Labour was overspending by £160bn a year. Utter rot.

[Bigthumb 10]

Actually, he was trying to eliminate a large deficit spike that was caused by

1. 6% loss of economic output in one year

2. The cost of bailing out the banks

 

It's ridiculous to suggest that Labour was overspending by £160bn a year. Utter rot.

 

I'm hoping Labour keep blowing that line. It lost them the election in 2015. I will be very happy for it to be their policy next time too because no matter how many times you trot it out or chunter about it with your mate at the Miner's Arms, the good voters that didn't take notice of it in 2015 certainly won't be impressed by it in 2020. But do keep up the good work. I'm rather pleased that's the best you have.

.

[I1L2T3 10]

I'm hoping Labour keep blowing that line. It lost them the election in 2015. I will be very happy for it to be their policy next time too because no matter how many times you trot it out or chunter about it with your mate at the Miner's Arms, the good voters that didn't take notice of it in 2015 certainly won't be impressed by it in 2020. But do keep up the good work. I'm rather pleased that's the best you have.

.

 

It's true. You can verify it yourself very easily.

 

Labour's big mistake was not pushing the truth about the cause of the deficit spike in 2009.

[Bigthumb 10]

It's true. You can verify it yourself very easily.

 

Labour's big mistake was not pushing the truth about the cause of the deficit spike in 2009.

 

:hihi::hihi::hihi:

 

That's funny. Keep it up I'm splitting my sides. Try 1000,000 extra wages to pay in the public sector.

 

Who do you think the unions are going to choose to be Labour leader until 2020?

[I1L2T3 10]

:hihi::hihi::hihi:

 

That's funny. Keep it up I'm splitting my sides. Try 1000,000 extra wages to pay in the public sector.

 

Who do you think the unions are going to choose to be Labour leader until 2020?

 

In 2008 government debt to GDP was lower than it was in 1997.

 

That's a fact

 

Between 1998 and 2010 the percentage of all workers in the public sector only grew from 20 to 21%

 

That's a fact too.

[Mister M 1,625]

Mary Creagh has withdrawn from the Labour leadership race.

 

---------- Post added 13-06-2015 at 18:03 ----------

 

In 2008 government debt to GDP was lower than it was in 1997.

 

That's a fact

 

Between 1998 and 2010 the percentage of all workers in the public sector only grew from 20 to 21%

 

That's a fact too.

 

I wouldn't bother to correct 'Bigthumb's' continuous sharting nonsense over this thread.

Right wingers love to accuse others of laziness & ignorance for their failings - so why doesn't he bother to take the time to get his fact's right? Er because he's lazy & ignorant.

Edited June 13, 2015 by Mister M

[Bigthumb 10]

In 2008 government debt to GDP was lower than it was in 1997.

 

That's a fact

 

Between 1998 and 2010 the percentage of all workers in the public sector only grew from 20 to 21%

 

That's a fact too.

 

Yes and the Titanic was doing really well breaking records as it sailed across the Atlantic until it hit an iceberg and sank. That's the problem. They screwed it up. And folks remember that and that's why they gave your boys the bums rush in 2010 and again last month.

 

---------- Post added 13-06-2015 at 19:00 ----------

 

Mary Creagh has withdrawn from the Labour leadership race.

 

---------- Post added 13-06-2015 at 18:03 ----------

 

 

I wouldn't bother to correct 'Bigthumb's' continuous sharting nonsense over this thread.

Right wingers love to accuse others of laziness & ignorance for their failings - so why doesn't he bother to take the time to get his fact's right? Er because he's lazy & ignorant.

 

 

How'd the election go for you? I stopped up to watch Ed Balls at the count. Classic.

 

I don't know if you managed to catch the TNS poll for the Holyrood Elections. You should check it out. Just in case you are too lazy...Labour on 19% down from 32% in 2011.

Edited June 13, 2015 by Bigthumb

[Jeffrey Shaw 90]

Maybe all non-Labour voters should:

a. sign-up as 'supporters';

b. pay their £3; and

c. vote for Jeremy Corbyn, thereby ensuring no Labour victory until after the next changeover?

[Stoatwobbler 10]

Maybe all non-Labour voters should:

a. sign-up as 'supporters';

b. pay their £3; and

c. vote for Jeremy Corbyn, thereby ensuring no Labour victory until after the next changeover?

 

Given the direction Labour are going, they really don't need Jeremy Corbyn to make themselves unelectable. The Labour top brass are already doing a job of making themselves unsupportable.

[sgtkate 10]

Maybe all non-Labour voters should:

a. sign-up as 'supporters';

b. pay their £3; and

c. vote for Jeremy Corbyn, thereby ensuring no Labour victory until after the next changeover?

 

I think the only chance Labour have is electing Jeremy Corbyn. If I wanted a right wing party I have those already. If I wanted a middle party, well I did have one of those but they seem to have vanished now. If I want a left wing party I don't really have one of those. I'd like labour to be that party and if they don't get elected, then more of the populous don't agree with me than ones that do. That's fine, but I want an actual choice and not simply Tory, Tory-light and the other ones.