Currency vs Brexit: GBP Losses

Status
Not open for further replies.
Indeed, any minister who defies a three line whip should expect to be removed from their position. The question isn't really "why did Corbyn kick them out?" but "why did they make an issue that so many of their MPs (including several members of the front bench) feel very strongly about a 3 line whip to abstain in the first place?"

And yes, anyone who voted for a party/MP because they didn't realise what that party/MP actually stood for, even if the party/MP in question was trying desperately to avoid talking about this (as Labour were over this issue because they knew it could lose them tens if not hundreds of thousands of votes if they did), only has themselves to blame.

I disagree strongly with most of the rest of that post, though.
 
I just want to throw something out there for those who are hung up on Corbyn lost and seemingly confused why many will disagree. Do you remember the Conservative Manifesto? Okay and now do you remember the Queen's Speech? Yeah the Conservatives may have had a larger number of seats but practically nothing May wanted to made it into the Queen's Speech. That is because of Labours and Corbyns seat gains, they stopped that from happening. Reading the headline today about the public sector Pay Cap being scrapped, that is going to be another win for Labour because as we heard from May herself and her stupid magic money tree, supposedly that couldn't be changed. Well seems like those in the Conservatives who want her out because her vision isn't working are pressuring for these changes. They can see the tides turning and that if the Conservatives don't change they will for sure lose the next election. We are only a few weeks into this government and I can't think of a single win the winning party has had, can you?

kuuderes_shadow said:
Sorry, but they needed 64 seats for that. Another 2000 votes, even perfectly placed, could only have gained them 9 of those. Slightly over 100000 perfectly placed votes would have been what it took for them to get a majority.

The Conservatives could have got a majority with 794, or 786 and good luck with coin tosses.
Click to expand...

Yeah I misremembered that. It was 2000 votes from a Coalition government. My bad.
 
Blaize said:
I just want to throw something out there for those who are hung up on Corbyn lost and seemingly confused why many will disagree. Do you remember the Conservative Manifesto? Okay and now do you remember the Queen's Speech? Yeah the Conservatives may have had a larger number of seats but practically nothing May wanted to made it into the Queen's Speech. That is because of Labours and Corbyns seat gains, they stopped that from happening. Reading the headline today about the public sector Pay Cap being scrapped, that is going to be another win for Labour because as we heard from May herself and her stupid magic money tree, supposedly that couldn't be changed. Well seems like those in the Conservatives who want her out because her vision isn't working are pressuring for these changes. They can see the tides turning and that if the Conservatives don't change they will for sure lose the next election. We are only a few weeks into this government and I can't think of a single win the winning party has had, can you?
Click to expand...
your forgetting the part where Corbyn has no power, even with all the other liberal parties combined they still have less seats ( seats = votes) than the Tories. The only reason May had to remove things from the queens speech is because some of her party refused to back them. That combined with everything else I've been seeing shows the next conservative leader will be taking a softer stance on austerity, which isn't good for someone like Corbyn, Mays Dickensian Manifesto/vision for the country was the only thing he had going for him, without that he's just another crazy socialist.
 
Watanabe Ken said:
your forgetting the part where Corbyn has no power, even with all the other liberal parties combined they still have less seats ( seats = votes) than the Tories. The only reason May had to remove things from the queens speech is because some of her party refused to back them. That combined with everything else I've been seeing shows the next conservative leader will be taking a softer stance on austerity, which isn't good for someone like Corbyn, Mays Dickensian Manifesto/vision for the country was the only thing he had going for him, without that he's just another crazy socialist.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure a softer stance on Austerity is good for us, you know the people. And it wouldn't have happened without Corbyn's led Labour taking away the Conservative Majority. It's that simple. What we have seen even at this early stage is the power of a strong opposition. Labour were never going to outright win this election, if you think Corbyn is to blame for that you are wrong. Corbyn is why the Conservatives have no majority. The DUP deal is a bad look for the Conservatives, everything they have had to walk back on is a bad look for the Conservatives. While Labour and Corbyn are currently on the up. The balance of power has begun to shift in Labour's favour. It might not last that I will certainly concede but for now that is what is happening and it's for the better of all of us. If you think ousting Corbyn for some Blairite is somehow going to land Labour a huge lead then I think you are deluded.

Yes seats = votes. Well now the Conservatives have less and Labour have more. So if Conservatives aren't brought in line then they will lose. Even when the Conservatives had a majority because it was small they struggled to get alot done, well now they are going to struggle even more.
 
Last edited:
Watanabe Ken said:
Don't believe I Said it wasn't
Click to expand...

Yeah but you said that that isn't good for Corbyn. I'd say that is a Win for Corbyn and those of us who voted for him. Because if the Cons got their huge majority like they thought they were going to then obviously they wouldn't be softening their stance would they?

I'm just honestly confused as to what you want. Like you want a Labour Government and don't think Corbyn can give us one? Honestly I want a Labour Government too but we don't have that but what we do have now is a Strong opposition which is already making huge dividends. In politics outright winning isn't always the main objective, it's about being able to implement change and right now that is happening in spades.
 
Watanabe Ken said:
An opposition that has to rely on Tories rebels, because it doesn't have the numbers to do anything bye themselves.
Click to expand...

Okay your just being stubborn. You didn't answer my question as to what you want exactly so I'm just not interested anymore. I've made my points as to why Labour have made big strides.

Watanabe Ken said:
I think it's more his policies than the person himself.
Click to expand...

Okay that is something resembling an answer though it still doesn't say what you want as an alternative? Milliband is the only Labour alternative available, that is the only type of politician they have outside of the Corbyn socialists. If you think that would have made a difference recent history will prove you otherwise. As for his policies they were strong and reaching hence why Labour made gains in the Election and continue to in the polls. If you think it's about promising too much I would argue thats not the case. The DUP deal proved the money is there because of course it is, the UK is one of the largest Economies in the world.

Honestly I'm done, no offence to you it's just clearly in the long run we both want the same thing i.e A Labour Government but have different views on how long it'll take to get it and how it should look. : )
 
Blaize said:
Yeah but you said that that isn't good for Corbyn. I'd say that is a Win for Corbyn and those of us who voted for him. Because if the Cons got their huge majority like they thought they were going to then obviously they wouldn't be softening their stance would they?

I'm just honestly confused as to what you want. Like you want a Labour Government and don't think Corbyn can give us one? Honestly I want a Labour Government too but we don't have that but what we do have now is a Strong opposition which is already making huge dividends. In politics outright winning isn't always the main objective, it's about being able to implement change and right now that is happening in spades.
Click to expand...
I want a Labour government who can actually win, I don't think Corbyn can his policies don't ad up. A lot of people vote with there head's not there hearts.
 
Blaize said:
Okay that is something resembling an answer though it still doesn't say what you want as an alternative? Milliband is the only Labour alternative available, that is the only type of politician they have outside of the Corbyn socialists
Click to expand...
Hilary Benn, Stephen Kinnock, Dan Javis, Lisa Nandy to name a few, but honestly it's the policies that are most important.
 
Blaize said:
Honestly I'm done, no offence to you it's just clearly in the long run we both want the same thing i.e A Labour Government but have different views on how long it'll take to get it and how it should look. : )
Click to expand...
No offence taken, your clearly very passionate about your political views and I respect that and them.
 
Labour will support Theresa May on the Great Repeal Bill, chief Brexit spokesperson says

This is your glorious leader is it, Corbyn fans? A man who will vote with the Tories every time on the most damaging stuff?

I know I'm in the minority here but I can't believe the hoops people jump through to defend him, nor how you could be for Remain but now eat up his "worker's Brexit" ****. Tories and Labour have both been compromised by Eurosceptics and any time he does anything wrong his fans twist themselves into knots defending him.
 
This is not parliamentarian speaking and if labour did vote for this bill he would be defying his own manifesto. Cos you know what I prefer the commons over the lords. And technically Corbyn has no control over the lords look at how many tory lord defied May in March over article dont blame Corbyn and enjoy your 74 yo leader. At least Labour is more electable than the joke of the Lib Dems
 
So we're reduced to this level of tribalism bollocks, are we? I didn't even mention Lib Dems.
 
Last edited:
HellCat said:
So we're reduced to this level of tribalism bollocks, are we? I didn't even mention Lib Dems.
Click to expand...
Really? You're playing innocent?

You've repeatedly attacked Corbyn and his supporters over quite frankly trivial nonsense that you're deliberately spinning to criticise them. It's rather rich of you to suggest others lowered the tone.
 
Politics is tribalistic who else is there apart from labour oh the tories who do want the repeal bill do want to gamble citizens rights.
 
Buzz201 said:
Really? You're playing innocent?

You've repeatedly attacked Corbyn and his supporters over quite frankly trivial nonsense that you're deliberately spinning to criticise them. It's rather rich of you to suggest others lowered the tone.
Click to expand...

And you've constantly spun like a fidget spinner to deflect any criticism I offer against him.

I'm not "playing innocent". I specifically criticised Labour for something Labour is doing. Didn't mention LDs but for some reason got "lulz, enjoy your **** unelectable leader!" in a response.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top