Politics

[lord bunberry]

Having read a few threads on these boards and having watched a fair bit of the French campaign, is it now the case that we vote to keep the party we don't like out of power? What I'm basically trying to say is has tactical voting overtaken the strong local candidate vote.
Politics seems to be more and more about a personality contest between the various leaders. Is it any surprise that we see a reality tv star being elected to the most powerful office in world politics.
Ive spent my life following the political comings and goings in this country, but I've never seen a situation like we have now. A binary choice between two parties. Policies don't matter it seems.

[High-On-Hibs]

Having read a few threads on these boards and having watched a fair bit of the French campaign, is it now the case that we vote to keep the party we don't like out of power? What I'm basically trying to say is has tactical voting overtaken the strong local candidate vote.
Politics seems to be more and more about a personality contest between the various leaders. Is it any surprise that we see a reality tv star being elected to the most powerful office in world politics.
Ive spent my life following the political comings and goings in this country, but I've never seen a situation like we have now. A binary choice between two parties. Policies don't matter it seems.

:top marks

The western world is in a current state of constitutional crisis. Even in the modern age of internet access, very few people bother to spend 5 minutes reading a party manifesto, even if they fully intend on voting for that party. It's not a good position to be in as it allows parties and politicians off the hook as they make less and less promises while focusing almost fully on the main constititional issues affecting their country.

[makaveli1875]

Having read a few threads on these boards and having watched a fair bit of the French campaign, is it now the case that we vote to keep the party we don't like out of power? What I'm basically trying to say is has tactical voting overtaken the strong local candidate vote.
Politics seems to be more and more about a personality contest between the various leaders. Is it any surprise that we see a reality tv star being elected to the most powerful office in world politics.
Ive spent my life following the political comings and goings in this country, but I've never seen a situation like we have now. A binary choice between two parties. Policies don't matter it seems.

Your bang on there . Iv always voted for the party i believe in - labour , obviously influenced by my parents and grandparents who were staunch labour supporters. On June the 8th i will be ditching my beliefs/morals and voting tactically for the tories . The old grandparents will be turning in their graves but its got to be done.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

:top marks

The western world is in a current state of constitutional crisis. Even in the modern age of internet access, very few people bother to spend 5 minutes reading a party manifesto, even if they fully intend on voting for that party. It's not a good position to be in as it allows parties and politicians off the hook as they make less and less promises while focusing almost fully on the main constititional issues affecting their country.


They say a society gets the politicians it deserves.

[makaveli1875]

They say a society gets the politicians it deserves.

What did we do that was so bad to end up with Sturgeon.

[High-On-Hibs]

They say a society gets the politicians it deserves.

Politicians create the society that gets them the politicians they deserve. It's an endless cycle.


What did we do that was so bad to end up with Sturgeon.

Who would you consider better placed to be the First Minister of Scotland and on what merits?

[Just Alf]

What did we do that was so bad to end up with Sturgeon.

In a way this is an interesting post and points to the whole question. :agree:


Are you voting the way you are because you don't like Sturgeon or is it the SNP policies you're voting against?

PS I get it that it might be both! :aok:

[High-On-Hibs]

I often hear the argument "I don't want Scottish Independence because I just don't like Nicola Sturgeon or the SNP".

This is a perfect example of how politicians and MSM influences peoples state of thinking. People genuinely believe that Scottish Independence is a one party issue and not something that actually goes far beyond the policy of a single political party.

[Just Alf]

I often hear the argument "I don't want Scottish Independence because I just don't like Nicola Sturgeon or the SNP".

This is a perfect example of how politicians and MSM influences peoples state of thinking. People genuinely believe that Scottish Independence is a one party issue and not something that actually goes far beyond the policy of a single political party.

Indeed, reading the "Makavellian" thoughts above I see he's really Labour but gonna vote Tory (hence my question). Yet when I think it through, his best option would actually be to vote SNP and try to push for independence, if/when that comes along then he'll quickly have the party representing his politics (Labour) in government and with all the power rather than a lot of it shared with Westminster.

I think it's guys like M1875 that the wider independence campaign need to persuade rather than a lot of the mud slinging that seems to quickly happen.

Ps sorry M, just using you as an example! :agree:

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I often hear the argument "I don't want Scottish Independence because I just don't like Nicola Sturgeon or the SNP".

This is a perfect example of how politicians and MSM influences peoples state of thinking. People genuinely believe that Scottish Independence is a one party issue and not something that actually goes far beyond the policy of a single political party.

I actually agrer with this to an extent - but i think the onus is on the SNP as the 'champions' of indy as it were, to make this point. But obviously they dont like doing that as they also want to maintain their political success.

But, i think the fact that the SNP rise happened with a minimum of msm support shows that it is possible to cut through.

The SNP embraced social media and have been very strategic and clever in how they have engaged. We only need to look at our pal on here to see how they have created and inspired a whole army of activists to punt their messages constantly.

It shows it can be done, IF there is a message, or a cause that people buy into.

Labour have done it to an extent with momentum, but tge difference between them amd the SNP is that they will struggle to win the centre ground with their current leaders, bit salmond, swinney et al were brilliant at that.

[Pretty Boy]

I often hear the argument "I don't want Scottish Independence because I just don't like Nicola Sturgeon or the SNP".

This is a perfect example of how politicians and MSM influences peoples state of thinking. People genuinely believe that Scottish Independence is a one party issue and not something that actually goes far beyond the policy of a single political party.

In fairness to these people a lot of social media was hijacked by the 'wha's like us' brigade who wanted to make it very much a one party issue. You can see it on various threads on here with the 'I don't have to reconcile with or convince anyone' attitude. It's an attitude like that that will bring about another defeat for the Yes campaign unless it can be tempered.

I was (am?) a Yes supporter but I often find myself cringing at some of the slavish parroting of SNP rhetoric amongst others of the same view. The superior attitude of 'only we really love Scotland' grates on me something awful and shows a contempt for, and an unwillingness to recognise alternative viewpoints.

[grunt]

On June the 8th i will be ditching my beliefs/morals and voting tactically for the tories . The old grandparents will be turning in their graves but its got to be done.I simply don't understand this at all. To me it's like saying, "I've always been a Hibs fan, but next season I'm going to get a Hearts season ticket because I don't want Celtic to win the league". Can't get my head round it.

[Hibrandenburg]

Your bang on there . Iv always voted for the party i believe in - labour , obviously influenced by my parents and grandparents who were staunch labour supporters. On June the 8th i will be ditching my beliefs/morals and voting tactically for the tories . The old grandparents will be turning in their graves but its got to be done.

I think there will be a lot of this come election time. There's a lot of traditional Labour voters who will either vote Tory to preserve the union and a lot who will vote SNP to keep the tories at bay.

[makaveli1875]

In a way this is an interesting post and points to the whole question. :agree:


Are you voting the way you are because you don't like Sturgeon or is it the SNP policies you're voting against?

PS I get it that it might be both! :aok:

mainly Sturgeon . Every party has some policies i agree with and some i dont so for me it is more about the personality contest and who i think will be the best person to lead the country

Corbyn would be a disaster , Farron would possibly be even worse , Sturgeon would make those 2 look semi competent , so all that leaves is Maggie May , i dont like her but dont really dislike her either. At the moment i feel she is the best of a very very bad bunch

[grunt]

mainly Sturgeon . Every party has some policies i agree with and some i dont so for me it is more about the personality contest and who i think will be the best person to lead the country I take it you realise this is not a presidential election. In the UK we vote for a party, and the party selects a leader. You could vote for "May" and discover that Davis is leading the party next month. You're right that the Tories have been spinning this as a presidential election to cash in on the weakness of Corbyn.

Just another example of the misdirection game being played by the Tories.

[Smartie]

In fairness to these people a lot of social media was hijacked by the 'wha's like us' brigade who wanted to make it very much a one party issue. You can see it on various threads on here with the 'I don't have to reconcile with or convince anyone' attitude. It's an attitude like that that will bring about another defeat for the Yes campaign unless it can be tempered.

I was (am?) a Yes supporter but I often find myself cringing at some of the slavish parroting of SNP rhetoric amongst others of the same view. The superior attitude of 'only we really love Scotland' grates on me something awful and shows a contempt for, and an unwillingness to recognise alternative viewpoints.

I totally agree.

I'm in favour of independence but cringe at much of the debate.

I actually get quite angry at some of the petty, small-minded nature of much of it. We've managed to get so far, we only need to win a few hearts and minds and it is over the line. That extra push doesn't come from an aggressive, confrontation attitude - it will come from softer, reasoned debate. I get angry because I now think we're getting to the stage where much of the debate is counter-productive. The fact that so many (it seems) people are prepared to vote Tory when they are traditionally Labour supporters is frightening. You can be critical of these people but they have their reasons and we have to ask ourselves wtf is going on?


Whilst on one hand I think that it is good that people are engaging more with politics, I do worry that we're empowering politicians too much, and trusting external forces to make our lives better more than getting off our ***** and doing it for ourselves. Would a change in the UK constitution/ leaving the EU/ sending back all the foreigners etc etc REALLY do more to improve anyone's prospects than making a personal sacrifice to go to college, push for a promotion, take on some extra overtime, save a bit of money for a rainy day? I don't think so, and I think a lot of us are being distracted from that fact.

One of the reasons that I support independence is that I think we have too many politicians and are over-governed. By the time we've got layer upon layer of councillors, MSPs, MPs, members of the European parliament - all people who preach to us from time to time about efficiency savings without ever wondering if we really need them? I just looked at that and thought the weakest link is now the Westminster lot, get rid of them and transfer some extra power to Holyrood and let's get on with it.

[marinello59]

In fairness to these people a lot of social media was hijacked by the 'wha's like us' brigade who wanted to make it very much a one party issue. You can see it on various threads on here with the 'I don't have to reconcile with or convince anyone' attitude. It's an attitude like that that will bring about another defeat for the Yes campaign unless it can be tempered.

I was (am?) a Yes supporter but I often find myself cringing at some of the slavish parroting of SNP rhetoric amongst others of the same view. The superior attitude of 'only we really love Scotland' grates on me something awful and shows a contempt for, and an unwillingness to recognise alternative viewpoints.

I agree with all of that.

[Just Alf]

mainly Sturgeon . Every party has some policies i agree with and some i dont so for me it is more about the personality contest and who i think will be the best person to lead the country

Corbyn would be a disaster , Farron would possibly be even worse , Sturgeon would make those 2 look semi competent , so all that leaves is Maggie May , i dont like her but dont really dislike her either. At the moment i feel she is the best of a very very bad bunch

Fair do's, makes some sense.

[CapitalGreen]

mainly Sturgeon . Every party has some policies i agree with and some i dont so for me it is more about the personality contest and who i think will be the best person to lead the country

Corbyn would be a disaster , Farron would possibly be even worse , Sturgeon would make those 2 look semi competent , so all that leaves is Maggie May , i dont like her but dont really dislike her either. At the moment i feel she is the best of a very very bad bunch

So you are voting Conservative in the 8th of June Westminster parliament elections to prevent Nicola Sturgeon becoming the leader of the country/UK?

[Hibrandenburg]

So you are voting Conservative in the 8th of June Westminster parliament elections to prevent Nicola Sturgeon becoming the leader of the country/UK?

I think he might be in with a shout!

[makaveli1875]

So you are voting Conservative in the 8th of June Westminster parliament elections to prevent Nicola Sturgeon becoming the leader of the country/UK?

That is part of the motivation behind it yes , how i would like this election to pan out is Sturgeon and Corbyn to take such a bad tanking that they both resign . Labour get in a proper leader like David Milliband , who will then bring about a labour resurgence north and south of the border in time to give the tories a proper whopping at the next election and bring this divided country back together.

[ronaldo7]

What did we do that was so bad to end up with Sturgeon.

Labour kept the truth from the people of Scotland, they were then found out. The rest is history.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/how-black-gold-was-hijacked-north-sea-oil-and-the-betrayal-of-scotland-518697.html

[pacoluna]

That is part of the motivation behind it yes , how i would like this election to pan out is Sturgeon and Corbyn to take such a bad tanking that they both resign . Labour get in a proper leader like David Milliband , who will then bring about a labour resurgence north and south of the border in time to give the tories a proper whopping at the next election and bring this divided country back together.
😂

[Moulin Yarns]

That is part of the motivation behind it yes , how i would like this election to pan out is Sturgeon and Corbyn to take such a bad tanking that they both resign . Labour get in a proper leader like David Milliband , who will then bring about a labour resurgence north and south of the border in time to give the tories a proper whopping at the next election and bring this divided country back together.

Is that the same David Milliband that is now in new York as president of international rescue??? Get yer head out of the sand and be realistic for a moment. There is more chance of dr crippen being prime minister.

[OsloHibs]

Good thread.
I find it fascinating that folk vote for parties but don't agree with their policies... What??!!
There's a staunch Hibs socialist on my twitter who is anti EU, but will vote SNP in the elections. Cos he hates Tories alot more than SNP. This to me is pure madness. If you loathe the EU (like I do) how could the SNP get your vote?

[Smartie]

Good thread.
I find it fascinating that folk vote for parties but don't agree with their policies... What??!!
There's a staunch Hibs socialist on my twitter who is anti EU, but will vote SNP in the elections. Cos he hates Tories alot more than SNP. This to me is pure madness. If you loathe the EU (like I do) how could the SNP get your vote?

I don't think I will ever agree 100% with every policy put forward by a party.

I normally vote SNP but disagree with many of their policies. I just tend to agree with more of theirs that the other parties, particularly the big ones.

Most Labour voters will agree with much of what the SNP propose but then disagree with the idea of Scottish Independence, a red line issue so to speak, so will never vote for them in spite of the fact that they probably agree with more of their policies than the other parties. Their call I guess.

If you are left of centre, favour Scottish Independence but don't believe in the EU, the SNP may still be the best bad fit of all of the parties. Maybe his opinions on the EU are not as strong as his other opinions?

Sometimes I even agree with some of what the Tories say. It's never been enough for me to vote for them though.

An unwelcome modern phenomena is that someone will take on all of the beliefs put forward by their party, this is common amongst SNP followers.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I don't think I will ever agree 100% with every policy put forward by a party.

I normally vote SNP but disagree with many of their policies. I just tend to agree with more of theirs that the other parties, particularly the big ones.

Most Labour voters will agree with much of what the SNP propose but then disagree with the idea of Scottish Independence, a red line issue so to speak, so will never vote for them in spite of the fact that they probably agree with more of their policies than the other parties. Their call I guess.

If you are left of centre, favour Scottish Independence but don't believe in the EU, the SNP may still be the best bad fit of all of the parties. Maybe his opinions on the EU are not as strong as his other opinions?

Sometimes I even agree with some of what the Tories say. It's never been enough for me to vote for them though.

An unwelcome modern phenomena is that someone will take on all of the beliefs put forward by their party, this is common amongst SNP followers.

Good analysis. And it also leads to the logical conclusion that a lot of people then opt for the party whose leader is the best bet for PM.

May is uninspiring, but to many that is still preferable than Corbyn.

[HiBremian]

That is part of the motivation behind it yes , how i would like this election to pan out is Sturgeon and Corbyn to take such a bad tanking that they both resign . Labour get in a proper leader like David Milliband , who will then bring about a labour resurgence north and south of the border in time to give the tories a proper whopping at the next election and bring this divided country back together.

Yep, vote Tory to get the Tories out. I've heard a lot of whacky reasons why people are going to vote Tory but this one wins 1st prize hands down. Policy-free politics has a hell of a lot to answer for.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[OsloHibs]

Yep, vote Tory to get the Tories out. I've heard a lot of whacky reasons why people are going to vote Tory but this one wins 1st prize hands down. Policy-free politics has a hell of a lot to answer for.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I dont agree with it either but your politics in UK is so messed up that like many on this page have already said- you pick your no.1 issue and vote for the party that represents that.. Sad, huh.

[lord bunberry]

I dont agree with it either but your politics in UK is so messed up that like many on this page have already said- you pick your no.1 issue and vote for the party that represents that.. Sad, huh.

I don't think it's just that though. People are voting for someone because the other candidate or party is less palatable than the person or party that they voted for. It's sad that politics has come to this. The Tories will probably win a huge majority because May isnt Corbyn. Politics has turned into a popularity contest and for the most part none of them are very popular, so we vote in least unpopular. Policies don't matter.

[OsloHibs]

I don't think it's just that though. People are voting for someone because the other candidate or party is less palatable than the person or party that they voted for. It's sad that politics has come to this. The Tories will probably win a huge majority because May isnt Corbyn. Politics has turned into a popularity contest and for the most part none of them are very popular, so we vote in least unpopular. Policies don't matter.

This is even sadder than I originally thought!!!
Jeez. What an awful mess😓

[hibs#1]

I'm not big on politics but it most certainly comes down to how well liked the leader of each party is.

Ive always said SNP would have got independence if someone other than salmond was leading the campaign.is heard a lot of people getting confused and saying "I'm no voting for that salmond guy I hate him."

[Bristolhibby]

I don't think it's just that though. People are voting for someone because the other candidate or party is less palatable than the person or party that they voted for. It's sad that politics has come to this. The Tories will probably win a huge majority because May isnt Corbyn. Politics has turned into a popularity contest and for the most part none of them are very popular, so we vote in least unpopular. Policies don't matter.

Proof here my friend.

https://youtu.be/W7lsRbDKOXg

Tories in true Blue Guildford actually support Corbyns policies in a blind test.

Mental!

J

[lord bunberry]

Proof here my friend.

https://youtu.be/W7lsRbDKOXg

Tories in true Blue Guildford actually support Corbyns policies in a blind test.

Mental!

J
Because we have such a right wing press most people won't even know what labour policies are. They will be quick enough to call him left wing looney though.

[HiBremian]

Because we have such a right wing press most people won't even know what labour policies are. They will be quick enough to call him left wing looney though.

Interesting watching that, and peoples'reactions towrads the end. There's a kind of panic button when they're told they support Corbyn policies. The demonised symbol (Corbyn) trumps the policies.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[marinello59]

Because we have such a right wing press most people won't even know what labour policies are. They will be quick enough to call him left wing looney though.

It's a good light hearted piece but it proves nothing. Pick a party and cherry pick some of their 'cuddlier' policies and you would get the same results.
Corbyn's main problem is that himself and his front bench totally fail to present a coherent explanation of what their policies actually are. Their failure to provide any leadership at all during the whole Brexit debacle is proof of that. They are very good at telling us what they are against without making it clear what thery would do differently. Is far too easy to blame the press for his failings.

[Pretty Boy]

Proof here my friend.

https://youtu.be/W7lsRbDKOXg

Tories in true Blue Guildford actually support Corbyns policies in a blind test.

Mental!

J

ITV had a show a few years ago where actors presented policies from each parties manifesto but were named as only Party A, Party B and so on. The public then voted blind before the winning party was revealed. The BNP won by some margin.

I though, and hope, that meant nothing then and I don't think the video you have posted means anything now. It's the politcal equivalent of '88% of women prefer Dove' type claims on adverts. A nice snapshot but lacking any control or qualification of the results.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Because we have such a right wing press most people won't even know what labour policies are. They will be quick enough to call him left wing looney though.

I dont think this is true anymore.

The SNP have had no problem getting their message through. And it didnt seem to stop competent labour governments.

Its not the LBCs fault that diane abbott fluffed her lines.

The BbC arent right wing.

Its just an excuse imo.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Interesting watching that, and peoples'reactions towrads the end. There's a kind of panic button when they're told they support Corbyn policies. The demonised symbol (Corbyn) trumps the policies.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I quite like some of Corbyn policies, but i wouldnt trust him for a second to run the country. I would go as far as to say he would be dangerous.

Thats a huge problem for a would-be PM.

[Hibs Class]

I take it you realise this is not a presidential election. In the UK we vote for a party, and the party selects a leader. You could vote for "May" and discover that Davis is leading the party next month. You're right that the Tories have been spinning this as a presidential election to cash in on the weakness of Corbyn.

Just another example of the misdirection game being played by the Tories.


All parties do this, if they think that doing so will give them an advantage. At the last Holyrood election (or maybe the one before that, I'm not quite sure on timing) our ballot paper had an option to "vote for Alex Salmond as First Minister", despite him not being a candidate in either a constituency or on the Lothian list.

[grunt]

. At the last Holyrood election (or maybe the one before that, I'm not quite sure on timing) our ballot paper had an option to "vote for Alex Salmond as First Minister", despite him not being a candidate in either a constituency or on the Lothian list.

Really? I'm surprised at that. I didn't know.

[Hibs Class]

Really? I'm surprised at that. I didn't know.

Just checked - it was actually the 2007 elections (which makes me feel really old!)

[lucky]

I quite like some of Corbyn policies, but i wouldnt trust him for a second to run the country. I would go as far as to say he would be dangerous.

Thats a huge problem for a would-be PM.

Dangerous? In what way? I like his policies and virtually for the first time in my lifetime Labour have policies that I'm totally supportive off. I like the fact he does not like Trident and is unlikely to use it. But then only a madman or woman would want nuclear war

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Dangerous? In what way? I like his policies and virtually for the first time in my lifetime Labour have policies that I'm totally supportive off. I like the fact he does not like Trident and is unlikely to use it. But then only a madman or woman would want nuclear war

Being a lead figure in the CND and Stop the War, he will almost certainly have been exposed to foreign intelligence agencies at some point. That concerns me.

But more than that, having a leader who wants to keeep trident but has said he wouldnt use it is just daft. I think i jabe heard three different positions on tridemt from labour front bemchers (no use, no first strike, would use) iy just seems confused.

If we keep trident wr have to be prepared to use it, if we arent prepared to use it, we should scrap it and save ourselves a lot of money.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Just checked - it was actually the 2007 elections (which makes me feel really old!)

Yeah he got a bit of stick for it at the time. But in typical salmond fashion, he batted it away fairly easily.

[lord bunberry]

I dont think this is true anymore.

The SNP have had no problem getting their message through. And it didnt seem to stop competent labour governments.

Its not the LBCs fault that diane abbott fluffed her lines.

The BbC arent right wing.

Its just an excuse imo.
All the Murdoch papers switched to labour before they came back into power, they then switched back to the tories before they were back in government.
I was referring to the print press, I agree its not LBCs fault that Diane Abbott is incompetent.

[lord bunberry]

It's a good light hearted piece but it proves nothing. Pick a party and cherry pick some of their 'cuddlier' policies and you would get the same results.
Corbyn's main problem is that himself and his front bench totally fail to present a coherent explanation of what their policies actually are. Their failure to provide any leadership at all during the whole Brexit debacle is proof of that. They are very good at telling us what they are against without making it clear what thery would do differently. Is far too easy to blame the press for his failings.
I'm not blaming the press for his failings. I was pointing out that it isn't healthy that so much of our print media is aligned to one party.

[HiBremian]

I quite like some of Corbyn policies, but i wouldnt trust him for a second to run the country. I would go as far as to say he would be dangerous.

Thats a huge problem for a would-be PM.

Do you think a trustworthy Labour leader with strong left-wing policies is possible?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

All the Murdoch papers switched to labour before they came back into power, they then switched back to the tories before they were back in government.
I was referring to the print press, I agree its not LBCs fault that Diane Abbott is incompetent.

But there is a strong school of througt that they switch to follow the popularity, not to lead it.

They also switched to back the SNP didnt they, aroind the tine of their breakthrough?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Do you think a trustworthy Labour leader with strong left-wing policies is possible?

Interesting question.

From the hard-left, pacifist movement probably not (to wider society, im not talking personally).

But someone with left of centre policies, absolutely.

Id say generally the UK wouldn't vote for a hard left or hard right candidate / party.

[AndyM_1875]

Interesting question.

From the hard-left, pacifist movement probably not (to wider society, im not talking personally).

But someone with left of centre policies, absolutely.

Id say generally the UK wouldn't vote for a hard left or hard right candidate / party.

I get what you're saying but some would argue that the UK is about to vote for a hard right government in June, although Scotland will firmly reject this.
The Tories have undoubtedly shifted hard and substantially to the right from David Cameron's brand of business friendly liberal Toryism.

For Labour they have to survive this election, they have no hope of winning but they need to come out the other end as a functioning party. Only then can they rebuild and that means jettisoning Corbyn, Abbott and McDonnell who whilst well meaning have neither the ruthlessness or the ability to present coherently to the country. Many of my friends in England simply will not vote for Labour whilst Corbyn is leading as he's seen as too London, too old and too left wing.

The Tories aren't even trying just now, if they were they could throw 40 years of stupid and ill judged associations at Corbyn. And the fact that Corbyn is actually having a decent campaign and getting out and talking to real people whilst the Tories stage manage everything to keep the abysmal and robotic Theresa away from anything resembling a real person, won't matter.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I get what you're saying but some would argue that the UK is about to vote for a hard right government in June, although Scotland will firmly reject this.
The Tories have undoubtedly shifted hard and substantially to the right from David Cameron's brand of business friendly liberal Toryism.

For Labour they have to survive this election, they have no hope of winning but they need to come out the other end as a functioning party. Only then can they rebuild and that means jettisoning Corbyn, Abbott and McDonnell who whilst well meaning have neither the ruthlessness or the ability to present coherently to the country. Many of my friends in England simply will not vote for Labour whilst Corbyn is leading as he's seen as too London, too old and too left wing.

The Tories aren't even trying just now, if they were they could throw 40 years of stupid and ill judged associations at Corbyn. And the fact that Corbyn is actually having a decent campaign and getting out and talking to real people whilst the Tories stage manage everything to keep the abysmal and robotic Theresa away from anything resembling a real person, won't matter.

Your first point, yeah i was thinking that as i wrote it, but im not sure. On certain issues, they are to the right sure (migration, possibly benefits) but then on other issues May seems to be very muxh in the centre. No pledge not to raise taxes (after an abortive attempt to do that already), interfering in a market with a price cap - real one nation tory policies.

I dont think May is all that ideological, so far to me it seems like she defies easy classification and is instead a bit of a mixed bag - maybe even with a hint of populism.

Shes certainly not hard right, either in the libertarian sense or in the neo-facist sense.

I would also say ahe seems the least neo-liberal leader we have had in a long time. Her industrial strategy approach is very 'mixed economy'.

[lord bunberry]

But there is a strong school of througt that they switch to follow the popularity, not to lead it.

They also switched to back the SNP didnt they, aroind the tine of their breakthrough?

Yes I think that's right, but having their backing certainly helped get the Tories back in power. Labour were always going to win under Blair and Murdoch could see that and jumped ship, but after so many years of Tory government labour were going to win whether the press was with them or not.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Yes I think that's right, but having their backing certainly helped get the Tories back in power. Labour were always going to win under Blair and Murdoch could see that and jumped ship, but after so many years of Tory government labour were going to win whether the press was with them or not.

Yeah its all a bit chicken and egg.

Given social media (the rights on wrongs of which are a wbole different discussion!) I would say papers habe become less important.

However what i have always found strange is why broadcast media still let newspapers set the agenda as much as they do.

I take your point, better to habe them on side than not.

[lord bunberry]

I agree that their influence is what it once was, but apparently the mail online is the most visited newspaper website in the English speaking world. What's that all about?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I agree that their influence is what it once was, but apparently the mail online is the most visited newspaper website in the English speaking world. What's that all about?

I think its all about t&a!

[Holmesdale Hibs]

I dont think this is true anymore.

The SNP have had no problem getting their message through. And it didnt seem to stop competent labour governments.

Its not the LBCs fault that diane abbott fluffed her lines.

The BbC arent right wing.

Its just an excuse imo.

Agree with this. Diane's Abbot knew what she was getting herself into and Nick Ferrari was right to grill her for it. What bothered me more was that all the mainstream media (BBC and Sky) focused on was the gaff and I can't remember anyone reporting what the policy was. Report the gaff by all means because it is newsworthy, but so's the policy.

I find the media like to focus on the most decisive and negative points of any debate, which makes politicians defensive. Someone mentioned above about SNP being aggressive - I agree with this as well and the party would appeal a lot more if Sturgeon wasn't so angry all the time. I'm not saying we shouldn't ask difficult questions or have debates, just that they seem to have such a disrespectful and cynical tone these days they just make you annoyed listening to them and turn off. Maybe it's always been like this but it seems worse after the referendums.

An aside to this, I just saw May and her husband being interviewed on The One Show and it was quite good to hear her giving her views without being interrupted. Thought they both came across quite well.

[Pretty Boy]

I agree that their influence is what it once was, but apparently the mail online is the most visited newspaper website in the English speaking world. What's that all about?

I think a lot of the Mails online traffic is celebrity and lifestyle stuff. All the women in ny work read it and never actually visit the news section. It's all Geordie Shore, Towie, cabbage soup diet and Kim Kardashians erse they talk about.

[HiBremian]

Interesting question.

From the hard-left, pacifist movement probably not (to wider society, im not talking personally).

But someone with left of centre policies, absolutely.

Id say generally the UK wouldn't vote for a hard left or hard right candidate / party.

Yet they voted overwhelmingly for Clem. Clue - definitions of "hard left" have shifted radically to the right. Though I concede he was no pacifist. Maybe retaining the macho Trident would do the trick?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[lord bunberry]

I think a lot of the Mails online traffic is celebrity and lifestyle stuff. All the women in ny work read it and never actually visit the news section. It's all Geordie Shore, Towie, cabbage soup diet and Kim Kardashians erse they talk about.
It's not something I ever look at, but I've noticed when some puts a link up on here there's literally hundreds of links to that sort of **** underneath the story.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Yet they voted overwhelmingly for Clem. Clue - definitions of "hard left" have shifted radically to the right. Though I concede he was no pacifist. Maybe retaining the macho Trident would do the trick?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The end of ww2 must have had some sort affect too.

[Hibrandenburg]

There's been a change in coverage the last few days. I've seen a lot more of Corbyn in the MSM and they're actually running with his politics rather than just pointing out how incredibly inept he is. It probably has something to do with even handed coverage prior to an election but the cynic in me can't help but think if Corbyn was to close the gap it would be the better story.

[Pretty Boy]

There's been a change in coverage the last few days. I've seen a lot more of Corbyn in the MSM and they're actually running with his politics rather than just pointing out how incredibly inept he is. It probably has something to do with even handed coverage prior to an election but the cynic in me can't help but think if Corbyn was to close the gap it would be the better story.

I'm curious to see which of the print media run with Buzzfeeds 'fake news' story today and tomorrow. Corbyn asked, very clearly, if he'll continue as leader if Labour lose, Corbyn gives a clear positive answer, Buzzfeed run the story, Corbyn denies he said it and limits Buzzfeed access to his campaign, Buzzfeed, awkwardly for Corbyn, release the audio of the interview which plays out word for word how they printed it....

It's a story the press would have been all over a week or 2 ago so if there is a softening towards him they may choose to ignore it. On a wider note it shows that whilst people should show a healthy scepticism to the press they should also be aware of politicians screaming 'fake news' when a story doesn't suit them. Trump was/is the master of it.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I'm curious to see which of the print media run with Buzzfeeds 'fake news' story today and tomorrow. Corbyn asked, very clearly, if he'll continue as leader if Labour lose, Corbyn gives a clear positive answer, Buzzfeed run the story, Corbyn denies he said it and limits Buzzfeed access to his campaign, Buzzfeed, awkwardly for Corbyn, release the audio of the interview which plays out word for word how they printed it....

It's a story the press would have been all over a week or 2 ago so if there is a softening towards him they may choose to ignore it. On a wider note it shows that whilst people should show a healthy scepticism to the press they should also be aware of politicians screaming 'fake news' when a story doesn't suit them. Trump was/is the master of it.

Hadnt heard this one. From someone who actually tried to create fake news on the virgin train too.

There is a fine line between spin and media manipulation, whihlch all parties do, and flat out making stuff up, which i think very few do.

But you are right about the politicians using it as an accusation - I've even seen it used on these boards in such a way.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Agree with this. Diane's Abbot knew what she was getting herself into and Nick Ferrari was right to grill her for it. What bothered me more was that all the mainstream media (BBC and Sky) focused on was the gaff and I can't remember anyone reporting what the policy was. Report the gaff by all means because it is newsworthy, but so's the policy.

I find the media like to focus on the most decisive and negative points of any debate, which makes politicians defensive. Someone mentioned above about SNP being aggressive - I agree with this as well and the party would appeal a lot more if Sturgeon wasn't so angry all the time. I'm not saying we shouldn't ask difficult questions or have debates, just that they seem to have such a disrespectful and cynical tone these days they just make you annoyed listening to them and turn off. Maybe it's always been like this but it seems worse after the referendums.

An aside to this, I just saw May and her husband being interviewed on The One Show and it was quite good to hear her giving her views without being interrupted. Thought they both came across quite well.

I think we as a public are to blame also - we expect infallibility, which is ridiculous.

As funny as abbott was, actually she did have mostly the rigt figures, she obviously just muddled them all up.

In a more mature environment, she would have been able to laugh, apologise and say she had muddled them up then go and correct herself.

Instead she got defensive and tried to pretend she hadnt muddled it up. I actually thought Ferrari went quite easy on her considering.

The obvious consequence of this is ultra-robotic politicians like May, or what are in effect actors, like Blair and Cameron, who switxh on the charm in front of the cameras.

[snooky]

A friend of mine said he couldn't believe anyone would vote for SNP with all that is written about them in the press.
There lies his problem. i.e. Using only one source for information.
This applies to any story or report covered in the media.
FWIW, I don't think there ever was a family in Glebe St called the Broons.

[Slavers]

A friend of mine said he couldn't believe anyone would vote for SNP with all that is written about them in the press.
There lies his problem. i.e. Using only one source for information.
This applies to any story or report covered in the media.
FWIW, I don't think there ever was a family in Glebe St called the Broons.

What lies have been told about the SNP in the press?

[Just Alf]

What lies have been told about the SNP in the press?
He's meaning negative press, didn't say anyone was lying?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Bristolhibby]

Cast your net wide folks. Hear a story, look for sources, video. Go on social media.

I cross reference everything with twitter. Obviously that brings a lot of noise, but you can cut through things.

Watch Russia Today, Al Jazeria. Don't rely on one viewpoint. Read the Telegraph, but then read the New Statesman.

Look for the angle, always ask "who benefits from this"? Understand who owns what media outlet. Who do they find?

It's been a slow process from me that started post Iraq in 2004ish. My eyes were firmly opened in 2014 Independence referendum. Brexit and Trump confirmed that we are spoon fed information. The masses are unable to think critically for themselves. As consequence we get sound bite governments and decisions made on gut feelings. And sure as eggs are eggs, the powerful people in society set the agenda to suit themselves.

J

[AndyM_1875]

Your first point, yeah i was thinking that as i wrote it, but im not sure. On certain issues, they are to the right sure (migration, possibly benefits) but then on other issues May seems to be very muxh in the centre. No pledge not to raise taxes (after an abortive attempt to do that already), interfering in a market with a price cap - real one nation tory policies.

I dont think May is all that ideological, so far to me it seems like she defies easy classification and is instead a bit of a mixed bag - maybe even with a hint of populism.

Shes certainly not hard right, either in the libertarian sense or in the neo-facist sense.

I would also say ahe seems the least neo-liberal leader we have had in a long time. Her industrial strategy approach is very 'mixed economy'.

You're definition of hard right and mine differ. Hard right to me isn't neo fascist, although it's not a far distance to travel, but it echoes the sort of blood & soil claptrap that the likes of Tebbit came out with 30 years ago and that Farage has been peddling for the last decade.

I agree with you that May is not ideological but I don't think May is a one nation Tory either.
As a political type they are dying out. The likes of Heseltine or Ken Clarke are the last of that particular breed. Heseltine would never have put the interests of his Party over the country whereas May and her cohorts have done precisely that. They will do anything to stay in power, whatever it costs. She may not believe she is hard right but she leads a party that has swallowed up UKIP vote and whether she likes it or not the Tories have lurched dramatically to the right. You could never imagine a one nation Tory making the sort of excruciating speech that Amber Rudd came out with at the Tory Conference. Nor would a one nation Tory have welcomed some of the jokers who won council seats for the Tories in Scotland.

With the useless Corbyn as her opponent the centre ground of UK politics is occupied only by the SNP in Scotland (the Lib Dems are useless) and empty of a big beast but as Monsieur Macron has shown it is still possible to win with a centrist progressive agenda, something that the camps of May and Corbyn both lack.

[Slavers]

He's meaning negative press, didn't say anyone was lying?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

Oh right, well in that case is friend is quite right. If the negative press is truthful then the SNP have only themselves to blame for example the education headlines today, SNP 10 years in power and standards continue to fall.

Unless the suggestion is to bury any negative stories related to the SNP.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

You're definition of hard right and mine differ. Hard right to me isn't neo fascist, although it's not a far distance to travel, but it echoes the sort of blood & soil claptrap that the likes of Tebbit came out with 30 years ago and that Farage has been peddling for the last decade.

I agree with you that May is not ideological but I don't think May is a one nation Tory either.
As a political type they are dying out. The likes of Heseltine or Ken Clarke are the last of that particular breed. Heseltine would never have put the interests of his Party over the country whereas May and her cohorts have done precisely that. They will do anything to stay in power, whatever it costs. She may not believe she is hard right but she leads a party that has swallowed up UKIP vote and whether she likes it or not the Tories have lurched dramatically to the right. You could never imagine a one nation Tory making the sort of excruciating speech that Amber Rudd came out with at the Tory Conference. Nor would a one nation Tory have welcomed some of the jokers who won council seats for the Tories in Scotland.

With the useless Corbyn as her opponent the centre ground of UK politics is occupied only by the SNP in Scotland (the Lib Dems are useless) and empty of a big beast but as Monsieur Macron has shown it is still possible to win with a centrist progressive agenda, something that the camps of May and Corbyn both lack.

Ok, i agree we have different definitions.

Im not going to start defending May, i dont know quite what to make of her yet. And i agree that the centre ground of the UK has moved right since the 70s - i just think hard right is a very loaded term that is not helpful. A bit like calling corbyn a communist.

Ive been thinking about your post though, and to me, as someone who is not a natural left voter but is persuadable, what you highlighted about atlee is really the crux of my disappointment with the modern left.

Atlee and his pals had genuine vision, and brought in radical policies that fundamentally changed the shape of the UK for thr better.

Where is that sort of leadership now? Where is that visiob, adjusted for the 21st century?

Atlee's plans were tge right plans at the right time - a nation that had just endured 6 years of pverty fpr the war effort, a large working class, with little property ownership and poor record on infectious disease and few social safety nets.

To me it seems that the left has not managed to adjust to our changed circumstamces as a society. Benefits were supposed to be temporary, the NHS was a system that was desigbed to cure illness, council housing worked, at least to an extent and poverty as it was understood on those days has been eradicated.

But other than housing, those issues dont exist or have evolved into separate issues. Benefits as a lifestyle, nhs being asked to care for chronic disease for decades per patient, relative poverty is not the same as absolute poverty and economies and economic systems are completely different. To me it seems that the left (or hard left, depending on your preference) have few ideas other than tax rises.

To appeal again, the left needs practical, non-punative ideas that help solve those problems, and stop fighting the battles of forty years ago, imo.

Blair got close, but was not radical enough in his first two terms imo.