Jump to content

The Labour Party - Part 2

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, melthebell said:

 

Funnily enough the "wrong" type of jew has just been posted on youtube.

 

Thanks Mell, i saw that also, she is definitely the wrong type of Jew, but a very wise one...the BoD would have you believe that every Jewish person hates Corbyn, when we know that that is far from the truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25/11/2020 at 15:22, Arnold_Lane said:

You keep missing the point that others are making;  Labour do not win general elections when they go too far to the left.  

 

You are telling people who want a more right-wing Labour party to vote Lib Dem or Tory.  Instead, if you want a more left-wing Labour party why don't you vote SWP?

 

I'm sure Starmer does not care if he loses 50,000 Corbynistas.  He would probably prefer them all to leave.

I think that you are missing the point too. It doesn't matter what you call a political party, it's what it stands for and what it does that matters. 

There's no point in voting for Starmer if he doesn't embrace Labour party principles and represent ordinary Labour party voters.  

I will not vote SWP because they are too far left, however Starmer is too far right. If you remember the apathy and discontent before the 2010 election with people saying there was no point in voting at all as none of the parties represented them, and all were corrupt. Corbyn only stood for leader because of this. Nobody expected him to win. 

The Brexit vote was in effect a kick in the pants for all politicians to LISTEN  to the electorate, which they were forced to do with the referendum. They weren't actually expected to vote 'out' in a million years, but did it anyway. Politics has been in turmoil eversince.

Corbyn reinvigorated politics and promised change, and people loved him for it. If it hadn't been for the relentless character assassination, and negative media reporting and refusing him a plafrorm to explain what he was about, he would have won. The media is run by the elite. 5 very rich men own 85% of it, and they didn't want Corbyn upsetting their set up.

 

You must have realised by now that for the last 40 years the world has been run by the Elite for the benefit of the Elite. the workers are only there to provide them with services, taxes and money.

When you get a cabinet stuffed with  ex Eton and Oxbridge types it should tell you all you need to know. Of those, 3 were Bullingdon boys (Cameron, Osborne and Boris) not a bad ratio when there were ony 15 Bullingdon boys altogether. And none of them had much experience in politics.

 

So much for democracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Anna B said:

The media is run by the elite. 5 very rich men own 85% of it

I can’t take anything you write seriously when you keep posting rubbish like this.

Edited by Arnold_Lane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Arnold_Lane said:

I can’t take anything you write seriously when you keep posting rubbish like this.

My mistake it's now 6 companies that control 90% of the media.

 

"As of 2020 six corporations hold ownership of 90% of the media.

They are: CBS, Comcast, Disney, Murdoch News Corporation, Times Warner, and Viacom."

 

ATT has been bought by Times Warner, and some of Murdoch News Corps has recently been aquired by Disney. The remaining 10% is shared amongst small companies, which do not have the reach, power or the influence of the big 6.

 

https://techstartups.com/2020/09/18/6-corporations-control-90-media-america-illusion-choice-objectivity-2020/

 

You may also find this analytical report by the LSE interesting.

 

https://www.lse.ac.uk/media-and-communications/research/research-projects/representations-of-jeremy-corbyn

 

 

Edited by Anna B

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Anna B said:

I think that you are missing the point too. It doesn't matter what you call a political party, it's what it stands for and what it does that matters. 

There's no point in voting for Starmer if he doesn't embrace Labour party principles and represent ordinary Labour party voters.  

I will not vote SWP because they are too far left, however Starmer is too far right. If you remember the apathy and discontent before the 2010 election with people saying there was no point in voting at all as none of the parties represented them, and all were corrupt. Corbyn only stood for leader because of this. Nobody expected him to win. 

The Brexit vote was in effect a kick in the pants for all politicians to LISTEN  to the electorate, which they were forced to do with the referendum. They weren't actually expected to vote 'out' in a million years, but did it anyway. Politics has been in turmoil eversince.

Corbyn reinvigorated politics and promised change, and people loved him for it. If it hadn't been for the relentless character assassination, and negative media reporting and refusing him a plafrorm to explain what he was about, he would have won. The media is run by the elite. 5 very rich men own 85% of it, and they didn't want Corbyn upsetting their set up.

 

You must have realised by now that for the last 40 years the world has been run by the Elite for the benefit of the Elite. the workers are only there to provide them with services, taxes and money.

When you get a cabinet stuffed with  ex Eton and Oxbridge types it should tell you all you need to know. Of those, 3 were Bullingdon boys (Cameron, Osborne and Boris) not a bad ratio when there were ony 15 Bullingdon boys altogether. And none of them had much experience in politics.

 

So much for democracy.

Anna I always enjoy reading your messages and agree with 99% of your opinions.

I was therefore a bit taken aback, shocked even, at your apparent support for Jess Phillips during the Labour leadership election a year ago. A more superficial, shallow, intellectually light weight, grandstanding politician you couldn’t find in the Parliamentary party, although there are some notable contenders, eg Wes Streeting.

That said, it is all about opinions.

 

Out of interest what did you see in her ?

 

I’ve written all that then just remembered we’ve got Keir Starmer as leader. Invalidates much of what I’ve written

Edited by Ridgewalk
....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Anna B said:

My mistake it's now 6 companies that control 90% of the media.

 

"As of 2020 six corporations hold ownership of 90% of the media.

They are: CBS, Comcast, Disney, Murdoch News Corporation, Times Warner, and Viacom."

 

ATT has been bought by Times Warner, and some of Murdoch News Corps has recently been aquired by Disney. The remaining 10% is shared amongst small companies, which do not have the reach, power or the influence of the big 6.

 

https://techstartups.com/2020/09/18/6-corporations-control-90-media-america-illusion-choice-objectivity-2020/

 

 

That’s for America and is still inaccurate.  Who are you trying to fool?

Edited by Arnold_Lane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ridgewalk said:

Anna I always enjoy reading your messages and agree with 99% of your opinions.

I was therefore a bit taken aback, shocked even, at your apparent support for Jess Phillips during the Labour leadership election a year ago. A more superficial, shallow, intellectually light weight, grandstanding politician you couldn’t find in the Parliamentary party, although there are some notable contenders, eg Wes Streeting.

That said, it is all about opinions.

 

Out of interest what did you see in her ?

 

I’ve written all that then just remembered we’ve got Keir Starmer as leader. Invalidates much of what I’ve written

I'm not into personality politics myself - How about some policies.

54 minutes ago, Arnold_Lane said:

That’s for America and is still inaccurate.  Who are you trying to fool?

Give us some right numbers Arnold or else you run the risk of being labelled a muck thrower for the sake of it with no figures to back up your claims.

 

Good to see Anna back on form after a few days of being sidetracked with the Starmer leadership. To make any changes to this country a political party first has to gain power to do so. I'm sure this is possible even with the media as it is. BUT, not with a left leadership of the Labour party.

 

As it is, Labour do their dirty washing in public as they always have.

At least they stab each other in the front not like the Tories who prefer other methods. Remember how they got rid of Maggie, how they nobbled Angela Ledsome from the leadership contest (no final vote at all) and how Gove (failed) to do for Boris. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Anna B said:

I think that you are missing the point too. It doesn't matter what you call a political party, it's what it stands for and what it does that matters. 

There's no point in voting for Starmer if he doesn't embrace Labour party principles and represent ordinary Labour party voters.  

I will not vote SWP because they are too far left, however Starmer is too far right. If you remember the apathy and discontent before the 2010 election with people saying there was no point in voting at all as none of the parties represented them, and all were corrupt. Corbyn only stood for leader because of this. Nobody expected him to win. 

The Brexit vote was in effect a kick in the pants for all politicians to LISTEN  to the electorate, which they were forced to do with the referendum. They weren't actually expected to vote 'out' in a million years, but did it anyway. Politics has been in turmoil eversince.

Corbyn reinvigorated politics and promised change, and people loved him for it. If it hadn't been for the relentless character assassination, and negative media reporting and refusing him a plafrorm to explain what he was about, he would have won. The media is run by the elite. 5 very rich men own 85% of it, and they didn't want Corbyn upsetting their set up.

 

You must have realised by now that for the last 40 years the world has been run by the Elite for the benefit of the Elite. the workers are only there to provide them with services, taxes and money.

When you get a cabinet stuffed with  ex Eton and Oxbridge types it should tell you all you need to know. Of those, 3 were Bullingdon boys (Cameron, Osborne and Boris) not a bad ratio when there were ony 15 Bullingdon boys altogether. And none of them had much experience in politics.

 

So much for democracy.

So i guess you wont be voting then? 

 

give it up anna. Even it his most popular time (Glasto and the Corby army)he still managed to lose to Teresa May

By the time the next election came round his constant dithering over issues (if he had been as decisive on Brexit as he was about which pronoun he wanted to be known by then Labour might have stood a chance) and lack of true leadership was seen by the general public and that resulted in a massive hammering in the polls.

 

Corbyn made more appearances in the media in the run up to the general election than any other MP. Labour representation was higher than any other party (see the loughbrough uni report) in the media across all platforms. 

Labour had its chance, twice, and blew it both times. Corbyn will forever be known as the leader who couldn't beat May and got destroyed by Johnson.

 

Who ran the world before 1980 then? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Flanker7 said:

Give us some right numbers Arnold or else you run the risk of being labelled a muck thrower for the sake of it with no figures to back up your claims.

Anna claimed without evidence that 5 rich men own 85 percent of the media.  I challenged that.  She changed it to 6 corporations own 90 percent and provided a link which makes that claim - but it's for America.

 

It's still false.

 

Do 6 Corporations Control 90% of the Media- The Meme Policeman

 

I'm not the muck thrower.  I'm the one warning against it, just for the sake of it.

Edited by Arnold_Lane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guardian isn't owned by a "rich man" but they soon reined back on their support for Corbyn when they realised he was a lame duck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Anna's points about the Media - She is basically right although her research seems to be a bit casual.

I don't think she's trying to fool any one.

 

This is a bit better -  dated May 6th 2015 - 

*According to the data, ‘research finds 95% of tabloid’s editorials in runup to election have been anti-Labour, with most of those directly vilifying the Labour leader‘.

http://www.albionmill.org.uk/?p=1476   * (All biographical and business information provided by Wikipedia) about 'Who owns the UK Media' which needs to be taken with a pinch of salt. However, I think its accurate in the main.

 

5 hours ago, sheffbag said:

Corbyn made more appearances in the media in the run up to the general election than any other MP. Labour representation was higher than any other party (see the loughbrough uni report) in the media across all platforms. 

See above - Sheffbag seemed to be claiming all publicity is good publicity. I don't think thats right. More like the best defence is attack, and you don't have to defend any of your own policies/ideas as Arnold artfully shows.

 

 

Circulation Figures - However, 3 popular papers currently refuse to submit their figures -  They are all Conservative backers.

https://www.pressgazette.co.uk/most-popular-newspapers-uk-abc-monthly-circulation-figures/

Edited by Flanker7
Tidy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Flanker7 said:

Re: Anna's points about the Media - She is basically right although her research seems to be a bit casual.

I don't think she's trying to fool any one.

 

My bold:  Nope, she is wrong.

 

 

19 minutes ago, Flanker7 said:

This is a bit better -  dated May 6th 2015 - 

*According to the data, ‘research finds 95% of tabloid’s editorials in runup to election have been anti-Labour, with most of those directly vilifying the Labour leader‘.

http://www.albionmill.org.uk/?p=1476   * (All biographical and business information provided by Wikipedia) about 'Who owns the UK Media' which needs to be taken with a pinch of salt. However, I think its accurate in the main.

So?  Tabloids aren't the entire media.

19 minutes ago, Flanker7 said:

See above - Sheffbag seemed to be claiming all publicity is good publicity. I don't think thats right. More like the best defence is attack, and you don't have to defend any of your own policies/ideas as Arnold artfully shows.

This is a discussion forum.  I pointed out Anna was wrong.  Presenting my own policy won't make her right.  I can reply to any post any way I see fit.  In this case, I pointed out a falsehood and said there is no point discussing the rest.

Edited by Arnold_Lane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.