[Politics] Next leader of the Labour party

[wellquickwoody]

Much better have a racist, misogynist, homophobic, anti-Semitic, xenophobic a**hole as PM - rather than a principled politician.

So easily riled to throw insults around like confetti like so many on the left, very very childish. Giving power to these guys would be like giving matches to a 4 year old and advising them not to burn themself.

 

[Simster]

Much better have a racist, misogynist, homophobic, anti-Semitic, xenophobic a**hole as PM - rather than a principled politician.

What's so principled about cavorting with IRA terrorists? He wasn't even particularly even-handed with his time with members of the British military.

None of which outrages me as much as some would argue it should, but those people who were outraged had damn good reason NEVER to vote for him IMO.

 

[Deleted member 2719]

Lisa Nandy’s a confident women, with personality and a glint in her eye. You would.

So would Boris in all likelihood


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I can see the headline now, randy Nandy licks Boris candy.

It’s not a dream. I said either on this thread or the Brexit thread that the last thing I want is for people to suffer and therefore, perversely, I hope he makes a success of it.

I just don’t think that a man who Ken Clarke said “couldn’t run a whelk stalk” and who needed a permanent “pooper scooper” civil servant attached to him as Foreign Secretary to undo his mess, is going to do a bang up job.

Corbyn wouldn’t have either.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think I know you don't wish people to suffer, just to meet your political view, I think some on here would though.

Ken Clarke may not like Boris or respect him, but like him or loathe him he 'gets stuff done' and when in negotiating with other countries, we need his unpredictability and likability to win through IMO.

I see you are still needy then Mouldy Boots...
for Johnston as well as yourself now......

I love the mental picture I have of you........................please never spoil it.

 

[Guinness Boy]

I can see the headline now, randy Nandy licks Boris candy.

A thumbsup for that.

Do you work for The Sun?

 

[Lever]

I can see the headline now, randy Nandy licks Boris candy.




I think I know you don't wish people to suffer, just to meet your political view, I think some on here would though.

Ken Clarke may not like Boris or respect him, but like him or loathe him he 'gets stuff done' and when in negotiating with other countries, we need his unpredictability and likability to win through IMO.



I love the mental picture I have of you........................please never spoil it.

Haha
You seem aroused... are you?
Instead of immersing yourself in tabloid newspaper jargon and trying to create a 'Sun'-like headline, why not learn how to use spellcheck?
'Likeability' is not difficult to spell...... or were you trying to write 'lickability'.
Either way, you are not very good at conveying intellectual rigour and thoughtfulness.
Speculation about the Royal Family would be a better option for you.

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

With 5 years until the next GE, there's a case for selecting someone who will grow into the role. I started as a bit of a Starmer fan but am warming to the idea of Nandy. There is a certain 'straight-talking' aspect to her which would make a nice change and of course a TOTAL contrast to Johnson. (The same is also true of Jess Phillips, but I just think she'd chin someone at some stage.)

 

[Jolly Red Giant]

With 5 years until the next GE, there's a case for selecting someone who will grow into the role. I started as a bit of a Starmer fan but am warming to the idea of Nandy. There is a certain 'straight-talking' aspect to her which would make a nice change and of course a TOTAL contrast to Johnson. (The same is also true of Jess Phillips, but I just think she'd chin someone at some stage.)

There is no guarantee this parliament will last 5 years - plenty of banana skins ahead - and Johnson and the Tories will create a few of their own on the way.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Next GE won't be 5 years as it won't be held in December again unless it's forced to. Likely it will run to about 4 years 5 months.

 

[Jolly Red Giant]

What's so principled about cavorting with IRA terrorists? He wasn't even particularly even-handed with his time with members of the British military.

He no more cavorted with IRA terrorists than the Tories did - he had a different view of what should happen in the North than the Tories (one I don't agree with) - but both were talking with SF - in fact the Tories were in direct talks with the IRA which Corbyn never did.

None of which outrages me as much as some would argue it should, but those people who were outraged had damn good reason NEVER to vote for him IMO.

The smears about supporting terrorism were false and nothing to do with what Corbyn actually did - it had everything to do with the fact that he proposed making the rich pay more tax (or in some cases making them pay some tax because they aren't paying any) - it was a big fictitious stick to beat him with because he had a different economic and political outlook to the interests of the elites.

 

[Jolly Red Giant]

So easily riled to throw insults around like confetti like so many on the left, very very childish. Giving power to these guys would be like giving matches to a 4 year old and advising them not to burn themself.

There is plenty of actual evidence that Johnson is a racist, misogynist, homophobic, anti-Semitic, xenophobic a**hole.

 

[schmunk]

There is plenty of actual evidence that Johnson is a racist, misogynist, homophobic, anti-Semitic, xenophobic a**hole.

He wrote down much of it himself!

 

[wellquickwoody]

There is plenty of actual evidence that Johnson is a racist, misogynist, homophobic, anti-Semitic, xenophobic a**hole.

So do something to stop him being in government rather than just sitting there like a baby crying wah, wah, wah! You could.........................looks over shoulder to see if Momentum twats are listening..................(whisper) try moving to the centre left.

Just a thought like.

 

[ac gull]

assuming Fixed Term Parliament Act is not deleted (which it may be at some point) then next election is due on the first Thursday in May in fifth calendar year after last election - so that is May 2024

 

[Deleted member 2719]

A thumbsup for that.

Do you work for The Sun?

I am open to offers.

Haha
You seem aroused... are you?
Instead of immersing yourself in tabloid newspaper jargon and trying to create a 'Sun'-like headline, why not learn how to use spellcheck?
'Likeability' is not difficult to spell...... or were you trying to write 'lickability'.
Either way, you are not very good at conveying intellectual rigour and thoughtfulness.
Speculation about the Royal Family would be a better option for you.

I think you may have just turned me Lever.

I love your fantastic ability to use spell check, I see you as a headteacher with your cane firmly in your palm.
By the way, it's Johnson, not Johnston, I to can be pedantic if you like.

 

[Lever]

I am open to offers.



I think you may have just turned me Lever.

I love your fantastic ability to use spell check, I see you as a headteacher with your cane firmly in your palm.
By the way, it's Johnson, not Johnston, I to can be pedantic if you like.

...but you can't use 'too' appropriately....
I don't use spellcheck but you should; the name of our aberrant Prime Minister doesn't really count. I am pleased you spell 'pedantic' accurately though.
What do you mean 'turned you'? What are you suggesting?

aroused: to cause someone to have a particular feeling:
It's a subject that has aroused a lot of interest.
Our suspicions were first aroused when we heard a muffled scream.

I suspect you have a bit of a potty mind.......

 

[amexer]

Can someone explain why whoever is elected doesnt choose own deputy. Also why those that are not elected are not considered for deputy leader

 

[kemptown kid]

So do something to stop him being in government rather than just sitting there like a baby crying wah, wah, wah! You could.........................looks over shoulder to see if Momentum twats are listening..................(whisper) try moving to the centre left.

Just a thought like.

Which policies in the Labour manifesto would you abandon?

 

[Jolly Red Giant]

So do something to stop him being in government rather than just sitting there like a baby crying wah, wah, wah! You could.........................looks over shoulder to see if Momentum twats are listening..................(whisper) try moving to the centre left.

Just a thought like.

I don't cry - I organise - have been ding so for many years.

As for moving to centre left (there isn't actually such a thing) - well Brown failed with that and so did Miliband - and Corbyn got more votes than each of them in both elections.

A 'centre-left' LP pretty much guarantees a Tory victory at the next election unless the Tories f*ck up in a dramatic fashion.

 

[Dr Bandler]

Many thanks for your thoughts. I do find them interesting.

If I may jump to your summation (above), this is where you and I part company. I'm 61. I have been involved in 'politics' as it pertains to my scientific discipline for nearly 30 years (journal editorial boards, society committees, departmental and university committees). Taking your aphorism (about the electorate) to my sector, we can consider all my academic colleagues, committee members, editorial board members as my sector's equivalent of The Electorate. I would also say that they are already very much empowered to think for themselves where our ethos, practice, agendas, goals and direction of travel are concerned. However....do my colleagues use their freedom to 'think for themselves, to inquire, to investigate, to debate, to discuss, to act'? Largely, no. I won't bore you with all the detail but it is clear to me that even the so called leaders in my sector do not understand even the basic meaning of many of the words that underpin our science (for example, the difference between specificity and selectivity, and the inferences one can make about potency). Do they inquire? No, they don't. Do the investigate? No. Do they debate? Well, of a fashion, but the outcomes are often uninformed compromises (a recent editorial board meeting I attended, that reduced to a Trump-style propaganda session for the editor in chief springs to mine). Do they act? Again, not often, not often coherently.

In my institution working out a rubric for assessing the 'resit' work of a student who fails a course unit has been beyond the capabilities of the various committees (here I will give an example: a student passed the coursework that contributed 50% to the final mark, but failed the exam horribly, and just failed the course overall. She was asked to resit the exam, with a final mark capped at the pass mark. She failed the exam again but doubled her mark. In calculating her final mark, the rubric stated that the coursework mark is not carried over, in case the coursework had been failed (it was passed in this case). So this student's final mark was judged entirely on her resit exam. She would have passed the course esaily if her coursework had been carried over, but with only 35% in the exam (up from around 18%) she was failed. Next year the rules have changed; failed components are resat but the passed component marks will be carried over - bleeding obvious to me but it was changed only after I caused a massive row with colleagues (resulting in my being summoned by a senior colleague for a talking-to about upsetting colleagues).

Thus, I know that we don't apply rigorous assessment, and we don't teach to rigorous standards, and we don't do research using the best (indeed necessary) practices (blinding, randomization, methods validation). And 'we' have the power to change things.....we just....don't.

Meanwhile our academic life has been undermined by bean counting, target management, use of grant income and journal impact factors (JIF) as the sole arbiters of 'performance'. Our response has been to collude with senior management, for example, seeking and obtaining 'credit' for sitting on management committees etc....I was lucky to do my PhD in Canada at a time when science was like Nabokov's description of art: 'a cleaner room on a quieter floor'; consequently I always regarded my job as a privilage, and with that came responsibilities. It was only when I became an academic in the UK that I realised to my horror that most of my colleagues were either craven jobsworths, keeping their head down, or psychopaths feeding on the weaknesses of their colleagues.

This is my long-winded way of showing that leading academics in a leading university, and national and international leading academics in research societies and journal editorial boards are 'keeping their heads down' and not engaging properly with their own disciplines, institutions or colleagues. Very few are actively trying to make things better. The major slice of the rewards (salaries over £120K, 'freedom' to not have to do teaching) is handed to 'research superstars', all of whom are on the psychopathic spectrum, treating PhD students and post-docs as data-generating fodder at the better end, and actively fabricating data at the worse end.

My point? If the so-called intellectual cream cannot and will not engage with its own politics to make the workplace better for their colleagues and students, is ready to make craven deals with management over 'performance', and demonstrates a fundamental disinterest in what they should be bloody well doing as academics, what chance the electorate at large (many of whom a nastier, dimmer, and more lazy-minded than the worst of the cockwombles on NSC that I have on ignore) will see the error of their ways and join the socialists? None, my friend. None.

That's why I favour compromise with the electorate. Neither your nor I are actual politicians, and politics is the art of the possible. My vote will go to those (on the left) I consider have some chance of delivering something. That means being electable by the current electorate, not a fantasy electorate of self-educated active citizens.

Harry,

I found this post of yours very impactful and thought-provoking. Sorry this reposnse took several days, but I didnt have the time to reply suitably before.

I think the situation you describe in your profession is one many of us can relate to in other fields, and it is quite discouraging and depressing. I wonder if the explanation is the inherent nature of people to eventually subvert any institution or profession for their own selfish and egotistical desires. It can be seen over and over again in every sphere and every culture; it is probably just more covert and better hidden in English academia than, for example, in a corrupt third world government. I think Jordan Peterson has a point when he says wherever humans come together in the pusuit of value, a hierarchy forms. I would add to this that eventually entropy, corruption and selfishness set in and damage anything that was originally meritorious about that hierarchy. The only way to fight it is to keep the institiution fresh, so that it keeps re-inventing itself, thereby keeping people on their toes, but this rarrely happens.

I really agree with how you extrapolate this out onto our electorate and the worrld of politics. We have to take on board the way people are, the way institutions are, and do the best we can with that reality. Momentum have a grip of the Labour Party at the moment, and keeping that seems to be more of an aim for them than winning power and changing the country for the better. The longer they maintain this situation the more embedded this nonsese will become, as they reinforce their view of the world to each other in their weird echo chamber. Tony Blair said something like "when the Labour Party learn to love Peter Mandelson they will learn to love power". Well they are a long way from that at the moment. My own conclusion is that I would happily take Tony Blair back as leader of the Labour Party. If that means forgiving the Iraq war mistake, then that is a price I would pay. Look at the current alternatives - Boris Johnson v Jeremy Corbyn; so poor it sends a shudder down my spine. And it leaves all the moderate Labour supporters with a grudging, vague hope that Keir Starmer will become leader; not because of his own innate worth, but becuase he is not one of them. We should do better.

 

[portslade seagull]

Which policies in the Labour manifesto would you abandon?

Most of them seeing as they got their arses kicked with that one. Keep them get it kicked again next time