merse
TFF member
Posts: 2,684
|
Post by merse on Sept 25, 2010 22:26:25 GMT
I started this thread in order that we could keep politics out of a bloody & ruddy good Train spotting thread.  Then you had your chance to tip the gravy boat over Keyberrygull today for doing just that when he started having a pop at Bob Crowe.................... it was 'im wot did it! |
|
keyberrygull
TFF member
Posts: 994
Favourite Player: Steve Cooper
|
Post by keyberrygull on Sept 25, 2010 22:51:37 GMT
There's no need to be easily offended Phil, I'm merely defending the right of people to discuss what they wish, when they wish as this site so proudly proclaims. [glow=red,2,300]Perhaps those fortunate enough to be able to go and see a match at Plainmoor [/glow]might be able to come home and find it already being discussed in an intelligent manner if there was a semblance of coherent and technically reliable coverage to follow it on from afar. Perhaps there would be more in-match interest if there was a semblance of coverage of LAST SATURDAY'S game on the HE site ~ but no, there was nothing; so what does Dave expect whilst a game is going on, people to hang on every word from a dribbling incoherent "commentator" whilst they anticipating the link being lost yet again? Your 'avin a larf mate!  No No No ............Those who decide. |
|
tufc01
TFF member
Posts: 1,179
|
Post by tufc01 on Sept 25, 2010 23:08:59 GMT
That they have tonight announced that Ed Miliband rather than his brother David will be the new leader interests me and almost certainly means they will have my vote in the next General Election as his surprising (to me) selection by the party membership signals that the era of "New" Labour is at long last over. I was sure that David Miliband would get the vote, and to be honest I think the UK electorate would still at the moment be more likely to return the party to power under him than Ed. Ed Miliband owes his success to the backing of the Trades Unions who remain as a very real part of the Labour movement and the rank and file membership who subscribe to party funds................ NOT the MPs who clearly wanted his brother David and NOT the fashionista "Islingtonite Factor" who are little better than Tories themselves. You will now have your proper choice to make when the next election is called which I reckon will be in little over a year once this Lame Duck Coalition falls apart. I think it was a surprise to most people, even the bookies thought David was a shoe in. I got the impression beforehand that if Ed got in it would be more likely to divide the party than reunite it. Do you believe this to be true?? Weren't the majority of MP's behind his brother?? in fact wouldn't he have finished third if it were purely down to MP's votes and that it was only the Trade Union votes that got him through by the smallest of majorities. So if he didn't have the support of the majority of his fellow labour MP's how is he going to reunite them. And with the majority of labour MP's lurking towards the centre is it not asking a lot of him to 'drag' them back to the left?? Surely a labour party, already suffering the fall out from the Blair and Brown years, wouldn't want to go to far to the left and possibly alienate themselves further from the more mainstream voter. I would have thought this played into the hands of the conservatives right now and even if there is an election in say 18 months time I would have thought we might actually see a conservative majority on their own. But like i said in a previous post where I ventured into politics, whilst I may lack of persuasion to any particular political party, i would be unlikely to vote for a left wing party that is likely to be influenced at some time by trade unions. But with the present voting system we have at the moment it doesn't matter who i vote for as I am in such a safe conservative seat that my vote doesn't really mean that much at all. |
|
|
|
Post by lambethgull on Sept 25, 2010 23:57:39 GMT
It will be interesting to see how Ed Milliband sets about his task, but I can't see him living up to his 'Red Ed' moniker . He will run a largely centrist opposition and will do so with the support of his party.
Nobody knows what's around the corner, but I can't see there being an election in 18 months. I'm not sure Labour realise how much they are disliked after their period in government, and I find it frankly incredible that anyone thinks there is a realistic prospect of them waltzing back into office after just two years in opposition.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2010 2:50:03 GMT
Dennis Thatcher........described the BBC as being "run by poofs and Trots...."He was bang on with that observation, though.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2010 3:00:59 GMT
It will be interesting to see how Ed Milliband sets about his task, but I can't see him living up to his 'Red Ed' moniker . He will run a largely centrist opposition and will do so with the support of his party. Nobody knows what's around the corner, but I can't see there being an election in 18 months. I'm not sure Labour realise how much they are disliked after their period in government, and I find it frankly incredible that anyone thinks there is a realistic prospect of them waltzing back into office after just two years in opposition. I'm not sure that Ed m is the right leader. He is only there because of the unions. To me that means that he will have to appease their wishes. Now anyone voting for Labour is fine by me but the problem is that although Labour may be democratically elected into government, once in, the TUC's block vote dictates Labour policy. Now where is the democratic process that put the TUC in that position? No member of the electorate voted for them politically, but there they are. I'm not against unions, especially as they were brilliant at getting my dad's redundancy pay increased when he (along with many others) was cut loose by the council, back in the 90's. I do have a problem with Unite, which has grown to an enormous size and could cripple the country, if it so desired. That is why I am not sure about Ed m being 'voted' in as the new Labour leader. |
|
merse
TFF member
Posts: 2,684
|
Post by merse on Sept 26, 2010 7:25:56 GMT
I thought you had uttered your "last word" on this thread Flo', but I'm pleased you haven't................stay onboard. First of all there wasn't a "TUC Bloc Vote" ~ there is no such thing; each union has it's own number of votes commensurate with it's contributing members................that's called democracy. The Labour Electoral College is set up in such a way that democracy prevails. Why should those elected by the people (MPs) have a more influencial and disproprtionate number of votes than those people? Who else but those contributing to a cause and signed signatories to a cause (party members) have an active say in it's selection of leader? I agree that the election of Ed Miliband takes Labour further to the left, and also agree it might make it rather less "electable" in the short term. But I feel it is important that we have a proper left of centre political choice to vote for and look to in fighting for the rights of those dis advantaged by the centre right and further right policies of the last three decades and maybe longer. As I said yesterday, electing a leader is not primarily about winning a General Election ~ that is a very important factor; but the most important factor is that the party returns to representing the political school of thought it always used to and I happen to beliee that a combination of that, having a media savvy and politically acute (rather than opportunistic) leader AND the suitable politics to look after the "little man" will be of huge benfit not only to the Labour Party but to the nation as a whole. Sunday morning dawns and football calls yet again ~ see you all later.
|
|
|
|
Post by lambethgull on Sept 26, 2010 7:55:16 GMT
I'm not sure that Ed m is the right leader. He is only there because of the unions. To me that means that he will have to appease their wishes. Now anyone voting for Labour is fine by me but the problem is that although Labour may be democratically elected into government, once in, the TUC's block vote dictates Labour policy. Now where is the democratic process that put the TUC in that position? No member of the electorate voted for them politically, but there they are. Rubbish. How on earth do you think Tony Blair managed 13 years as Labour leader if that was the case? Labour policy will be determined by its leadership, not the unions, and if the unions mistakenly believe they have a puppet as Labour leader they are in for a disappointment. I'm looking forward to seeing what Ed Milliband does. Will he position Labour as a social democratic party in an attempt to shore up the core Labour vote and attract disaffected Liberal Democrat voters, or will he seek the middle ground in Blairite fashion with one or two sops to the left? Much of his success will depend on how the economy recovers. If the economy continues to grow then Labour will struggle; if on the other hand Ed Ball's predictions come true and we 'do an Ireland' and slip back into recession, then Labour will find itself in a much stronger position. That's the gamble of making Balls shadow chancellor: if Balls is wrong, Labour will look silly; if he's right, Milliband will have failed to have deployed his most effective weapon by not making his shadow chancellor. |
|
chelstongull
TFF member
Posts: 6,759
Favourite Player: Jason Fowler
|
Post by chelstongull on Sept 26, 2010 8:29:26 GMT
I started this thread in order that we could keep politics out of a bloody & ruddy good Train spotting thread. Then you had your chance to tip the gravy boat over Keyberrygull today for doing just that when he started having a pop at Bob Crowe.................... it was 'im wot did it!I would have loved to have gone but was working till 7 hence my grumpy mood and I'm at work now - post made via IPhone |
|
keyberrygull
TFF member
Posts: 994
Favourite Player: Steve Cooper
|
Post by keyberrygull on Sept 26, 2010 8:46:17 GMT
Then you had your chance to tip the gravy boat over Keyberrygull today for doing just that when he started having a pop at Bob Crowe.................... it was 'I'm wot did it! I would have loved to have gone but was working till 7 hence my grumpy mood and I'm at work now - post made via IPhone You should have phoned in sick. I don't think the b**t**ds can sack you if its only one day. I'll give Bob a ring and get back to you.  |
|
Rags
TFF member
Posts: 1,210
|
Post by Rags on Sept 26, 2010 9:44:13 GMT
Dennis Thatcher........described the BBC as being "run by poofs and Trots...."He was bang on with that observation, though. Blimey, I never knew there were so many poofs and Trots hiding out at Oxbridge over the years... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2010 16:37:37 GMT
The Labour Electoral College is set up in such a way that democracy prevails. Why should those elected by the people (MPs) have a more influencial and disproprtionate number of votes than those people? Surely MP's should be the only ones who elect the party leader? They are the only part of the Labour party electoral college who were democratically elected by the people. Or are you saying that Labour voters are only permitted to vote for MP’s but when Labour turns up for government it does so with a whole ‘college’ of people that are beyond the reach and control of the Labour voters but have an inordinate amount of influence and control? That’s not democracy. Having now seen the breakdown of the votes, (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11412544) Ed could not have beaten his brother without the union support, and it appears that Unite were very influential on the spread of union votes. I don’t remember any union being a choice on my ballot paper in May, so at which General Election were they voted in? It seems mighty ironic to me that Blair and Brown wanted to abolish The House of Lords for being ‘an undemocratic institution’, when their own party is full of people who influence its direction and policy, but who have never put themselves forward for election by the people. From no interest in politics in the beginning, I can now feel myself turning into a Conservative. |
|
|
|
Post by lambethgull on Sept 26, 2010 16:52:37 GMT
The Labour Electoral College is set up in such a way that democracy prevails. Why should those elected by the people (MPs) have a more influencial and disproprtionate number of votes than those people? Surely MP's should be the only ones who elect the party leader? They are the only part of the Labour party electoral college who were democratically elected by the people. Or are you saying that Labour voters are only permitted to vote for MP’s but when Labour turns up for government it does so with a whole ‘college’ of people that are beyond the reach and control of the Labour voters but have an inordinate amount of influence and control? That’s not democracy. Having now seen the breakdown of the votes, (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11412544) Ed could not have beaten his brother without the union support, and it appears that Unite were very influential on the spread of union votes. I don’t remember any union being a choice on my ballot paper in May, so at which General Election were they voted in? It seems mighty ironic to me that Blair and Brown wanted to abolish The House of Lords for being ‘an undemocratic institution’, when their own party is full of people who influence its direction and policy, but who have never put themselves forward for election by the people.From no interest in politics in the beginning, I can now feel myself turning into a Conservative.Neither have the likes of Lord Ashcroft, Lord Black or David Rowland when they bankroll and hold positions within the Conservative Party. |
|
|
|
Post by lambethgull on Sept 26, 2010 17:00:37 GMT
The Labour Electoral College is set up in such a way that democracy prevails. Why should those elected by the people (MPs) have a more influencial and disproprtionate number of votes than those people? Surely MP's should be the only ones who elect the party leader? They are the only part of the Labour party electoral college who were democratically elected by the people. This shows a total lack of knowledge of how the political system works in this country. Using your logic, how does a political party with no MPs that stands in a General Election elect its leader then? |
|
|
|
Post by stefano on Sept 26, 2010 17:47:01 GMT
Surely MP's should be the only ones who elect the party leader? They are the only part of the Labour party electoral college who were democratically elected by the people. I hadn't realised that the political system did work in this country |
|
