Independent Leyton Orient Forum

ComeOnYouOs wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 10:00 am Personally, i would like to see the big unions stop funding Labour. Len Mcluskey mentioned something about this a few weeks ago.
Labour is moving right at alarming speed, and certainly isnt a party for socialists now

The Labour Party hasn't been a party for socialists for seventy years !

PutneyO wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 12:31 pm

ComeOnYouOs wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 10:00 am Personally, i would like to see the big unions stop funding Labour. Len Mcluskey mentioned something about this a few weeks ago.
Labour is moving right at alarming speed, and certainly isnt a party for socialists now

The Labour Party hasn't been a party for socialists for seventy years !

Correct...until now!!!!

Max B Gold wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 11:28 am Mainstream party you say.

Is that one which accepts a grossly unequal society and all the horrors that produces and worships the "free" market?

If so, what would differentiate them from any of the other parties?

Aren't voters allowed a choice.

Parties are free to position themselves wherever they want. Differentiate to use your word and differentiate by wide margins if that’s what they believe. It’s a free country.

Then put that choice to the electorate. Seek the opinions of the Population at large.

Parties are free to create their manifesto, people are free to vote for whatever clown they choose. And we end up with a Tory Government. All that ranting about the horrors of a free market, unequal society etc count for nothing if the party don’t get elected. By mainstream I mean a party with broad appeal to voters. If you don’t do that, all else counts for zilch.

Work within the real world or stay on the fringes protesting away. Tony Blair understood that clearly and got elected. Milliband and Corbyn didn’t and are consigned to the dustbin of historical failures.

That’s the way it is.

Dohnut wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 1:24 pm

Max B Gold wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 11:28 am Mainstream party you say.

Is that one which accepts a grossly unequal society and all the horrors that produces and worships the "free" market?

If so, what would differentiate them from any of the other parties?

Aren't voters allowed a choice.

Parties are free to position themselves wherever they want. Differentiate to use your word and differentiate by wide margins if that’s what they believe. It’s a free country.

Then put that choice to the electorate. Seek the opinions of the Population at large.

Parties are free to create their manifesto, people are free to vote for whatever clown they choose. And we end up with a Tory Government. All that ranting about the horrors of a free market, unequal society etc count for nothing if the party don’t get elected. By mainstream I mean a party with broad appeal to voters. If you don’t do that, all else counts for zilch.

Work within the real world or stay on the fringes protesting away. Tony Blair understood that clearly and got elected. Milliband and Corbyn didn’t and are consigned to the dustbin of historical failures.

That’s the way it is.

But can you see ways in which that "freedom" can be made meaningless ?

ComeOnYouOs wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 1:00 pm

PutneyO wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 12:31 pm

ComeOnYouOs wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 10:00 am Personally, i would like to see the big unions stop funding Labour. Len Mcluskey mentioned something about this a few weeks ago.
Labour is moving right at alarming speed, and certainly isnt a party for socialists now

The Labour Party hasn't been a party for socialists for seventy years !

Correct...until now!!!!

"National Socialist ? "

Dohnut wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 1:24 pm

Max B Gold wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 11:28 am Mainstream party you say.

Is that one which accepts a grossly unequal society and all the horrors that produces and worships the "free" market?

If so, what would differentiate them from any of the other parties?

Aren't voters allowed a choice.

Parties are free to position themselves wherever they want. Differentiate to use your word and differentiate by wide margins if that’s what they believe. It’s a free country.

Then put that choice to the electorate. Seek the opinions of the Population at large.

Parties are free to create their manifesto, people are free to vote for whatever clown they choose. And we end up with a Tory Government. All that ranting about the horrors of a free market, unequal society etc count for nothing if the party don’t get elected. By mainstream I mean a party with broad appeal to voters. If you don’t do that, all else counts for zilch.

Work within the real world or stay on the fringes protesting away. Tony Blair understood that clearly and got elected. Milliband and Corbyn didn’t and are consigned to the dustbin of historical failures.

That’s the way it is.

I think your 'if you're not in power you are powerless' stance is a little off the money. I get the point you're trying to make but it isn't always a winner takes all issue. That is why fighting for causes you believe in are just as important as voting for them. Protest or activism are not dirty words.

An example being austerity, I'm not saying we are completely past that idea in general - but particularly up til the pandemic, the common consensus had changed on austerity and many people had woken up to maybe it not being the best move, including many on the left. In 2015 you had a decent amount of Labour MP's that still felt it was the right move, cut to 2020 and that's a very different opinion. The whole period of austerity, those fighting against it were out of power. But they made a big enough noise to make a social change, albeit not yet enough.

Max B Gold wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 11:28 am Mainstream party you say.

Is that one which accepts a grossly unequal society and all the horrors that produces and worships the "free" market?

If so, what would differentiate them from any of the other parties?

Aren't voters allowed a choice.

They were last December. They rejected Marxism overwhelmingly.

Get over it.

Renationalising the trains and rolling out broadband across the country is not Marxism you absolute fud.

https://www.google.com/search?source=hp ... gws-wiz-hp


Even the Story Party thinks rail nationalisation is a good thing .

Of course it is Tuffers, the Torres are reversing in my eyes their original mistake. Just a shame that when Blair got in the toad that is two jags bottled reversing it despite telling he world that’s what they would do!

However, what is abundantly clear is the rail network is in a far better place than it was or has ever been in the last 50 years. It’s just a shame that fares have risen exponentially faster as the government asks passengers to pay a higher cost to use it. Hopefully whilst the government runs it as a business all monies can be reinvested back in to the infrastructure rather than profits and or subsidies in to the pockets of shareholders.

Thor wrote: ↑Sat Oct 31, 2020 7:46 am Of course it is Tuffers, the Torres are reversing in my eyes their original mistake. Just a shame that when Blair got in the toad that is two jags bottled reversing it despite telling he world that’s what they would do!

However, what is abundantly clear is the rail network is in a far better place than it was or has ever been in the last 50 years. It’s just a shame that fares have risen exponentially faster as the government asks passengers to pay a higher cost to use it. Hopefully whilst the government runs it as a business all monies can be reinvested back in to the infrastructure rather than profits and or subsidies in to the pockets of shareholders.

What are your feelings on the Tory Government releasing details to
the press about a National Lockdown thory ?

Especially after the Sahdow Labour Cabinet have been telling them to implement
A National circuit break.for the last 2 weeks .

Boris said itd be like turning out the lights .

I.have posted them in all the Conservative party threads but i know
You dont like going into those

Ronnie Hotdogs wrote: ↑Sat Oct 31, 2020 12:25 am Renationalising the trains and rolling out broadband across the country is not Marxism you absolute fud.

Give it up mate - they’re not listening - too busy laughing along with Matt Forde and celebrating at the Tory lite altar that Starmers clearly preparing.

Admin wrote: ↑Sat Oct 31, 2020 9:53 am

Ronnie Hotdogs wrote: ↑Sat Oct 31, 2020 12:25 am Renationalising the trains and rolling out broadband across the country is not Marxism you absolute fud.

Give it up mate - they’re not listening - too busy laughing along with Matt Forde and celebrating at the Tory lite altar that Starmers clearly preparing.

It's a close call but I'd probably take that over a party that results in a massive Tory majority or that engages in racist discrimination and harassment and whose leadership office interferes with complaints about said racist discrimination and harassment

But then I think massive Tory majorities and racism are bad things so....

PoliticOs wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 2:33 pm

Dohnut wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 1:24 pm

Max B Gold wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 11:28 am Mainstream party you say.

Is that one which accepts a grossly unequal society and all the horrors that produces and worships the "free" market?

If so, what would differentiate them from any of the other parties?

Aren't voters allowed a choice.

Parties are free to position themselves wherever they want. Differentiate to use your word and differentiate by wide margins if that’s what they believe. It’s a free country.

Then put that choice to the electorate. Seek the opinions of the Population at large.

Parties are free to create their manifesto, people are free to vote for whatever clown they choose. And we end up with a Tory Government. All that ranting about the horrors of a free market, unequal society etc count for nothing if the party don’t get elected. By mainstream I mean a party with broad appeal to voters. If you don’t do that, all else counts for zilch.

Work within the real world or stay on the fringes protesting away. Tony Blair understood that clearly and got elected. Milliband and Corbyn didn’t and are consigned to the dustbin of historical failures.

That’s the way it is.

I think your 'if you're not in power you are powerless' stance is a little off the money. I get the point you're trying to make but it isn't always a winner takes all issue. That is why fighting for causes you believe in are just as important as voting for them. Protest or activism are not dirty words.

An example being austerity, I'm not saying we are completely past that idea in general - but particularly up til the pandemic, the common consensus had changed on austerity and many people had woken up to maybe it not being the best move, including many on the left. In 2015 you had a decent amount of Labour MP's that still felt it was the right move, cut to 2020 and that's a very different opinion. The whole period of austerity, those fighting against it were out of power. But they made a big enough noise to make a social change, albeit not yet enough.

What you say is quite sensible. I’ve always spoken for the need of a strong opposition so yes, not being in power can Weald influence. But it remains just that, influence. Not the ability to make decisions. It is the ability to make decisions that I am referring to. The current situation is a case in point, BoJo can do pretty much what he wants. Starmer in reality can do nothing. Even hard for him to exert influence. To my mind that is not a healthy situation. A situation that will not exist following the next GE.

I remain convinced that if we are to ever get a Labour Government, it will be achieved, not by the Corbyn style but by the Starmer style. In my opinion the majority of people are middle of the road, maybe slightly left or right and who have little time for those at either extreme. People who just want to get on with their lives.

The battleground is the middle ground.

What about Gangnam Style would that have a chance of winning.

Max B Gold wrote: ↑Sat Oct 31, 2020 10:41 am What about Gangnam Style would that have a chance of winning.

No Corbyn failed with that already. His Hamgang got it the wrong way round.

Dohnut wrote: ↑Sat Oct 31, 2020 12:09 pm

Max B Gold wrote: ↑Sat Oct 31, 2020 10:41 am What about Gangnam Style would that have a chance of winning.

No Corbyn failed with that already. His Hamgang got it the wrong way round.

Almost as pathetic as your previous post. Totally vacous content free drivel that shows zero political understanding.

Good day to you sir.

Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: ↑Sat Oct 31, 2020 10:18 am

Admin wrote: ↑Sat Oct 31, 2020 9:53 am

Ronnie Hotdogs wrote: ↑Sat Oct 31, 2020 12:25 am Renationalising the trains and rolling out broadband across the country is not Marxism you absolute fud.

Give it up mate - they’re not listening - too busy laughing along with Matt Forde and celebrating at the Tory lite altar that Starmers clearly preparing.

It's a close call but I'd probably take that over a party that results in a massive Tory majority or that engages in racist discrimination and harassment and whose leadership office interferes with complaints about said racist discrimination and harassment

But then I think massive Tory majorities and racism are bad things so....

Of course you do.

Dohnut wrote: ↑Sat Oct 31, 2020 10:32 am

PoliticOs wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 2:33 pm

Dohnut wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 1:24 pm

Parties are free to position themselves wherever they want. Differentiate to use your word and differentiate by wide margins if that’s what they believe. It’s a free country.

Then put that choice to the electorate. Seek the opinions of the Population at large.

Parties are free to create their manifesto, people are free to vote for whatever clown they choose. And we end up with a Tory Government. All that ranting about the horrors of a free market, unequal society etc count for nothing if the party don’t get elected. By mainstream I mean a party with broad appeal to voters. If you don’t do that, all else counts for zilch.

Work within the real world or stay on the fringes protesting away. Tony Blair understood that clearly and got elected. Milliband and Corbyn didn’t and are consigned to the dustbin of historical failures.

That’s the way it is.

I think your 'if you're not in power you are powerless' stance is a little off the money. I get the point you're trying to make but it isn't always a winner takes all issue. That is why fighting for causes you believe in are just as important as voting for them. Protest or activism are not dirty words.

An example being austerity, I'm not saying we are completely past that idea in general - but particularly up til the pandemic, the common consensus had changed on austerity and many people had woken up to maybe it not being the best move, including many on the left. In 2015 you had a decent amount of Labour MP's that still felt it was the right move, cut to 2020 and that's a very different opinion. The whole period of austerity, those fighting against it were out of power. But they made a big enough noise to make a social change, albeit not yet enough.

What you say is quite sensible. I’ve always spoken for the need of a strong opposition so yes, not being in power can Weald influence. But it remains just that, influence. Not the ability to make decisions. It is the ability to make decisions that I am referring to. The current situation is a case in point, BoJo can do pretty much what he wants. Starmer in reality can do nothing. Even hard for him to exert influence. To my mind that is not a healthy situation. A situation that will not exist following the next GE.

I remain convinced that if we are to ever get a Labour Government, it will be achieved, not by the Corbyn style but by the Starmer style. In my opinion the majority of people are middle of the road, maybe slightly left or right and who have little time for those at either extreme. People who just want to get on with their lives.

The battleground is the middle ground.

The problem with the following the middle ground route is that it changes. The middle ground in 2020 is not the middle ground in 2010. Imagine what was considered 'hard left' in 1997, and what it is now? Pivoting to be in the middle ground so quickly is difficult. If there are 2 years to a general election and you aim for it, you might miss as times change.

Its why you do need to put some anchors on positions down and hope you get enough people flock to it. And just perception really too. Starmer has become leader honouring most of Corbyn's manifesto itself but people consider Corbyn unrealistic and unachievable but Starmer the opposite, yourself included. It shows how people just decide on hard to measure metrics like 'are they Prime Ministerial'. So sometimes it really is just about the face fitting.

Also, you say 'people that just want to get on with their lives' and that's a teller really. You might not be massively affected by who is in number 10, but people go towards extremes because they see change in it and think the middle ground and 'just getting on with it' won't make meaningful change happen. We always here people say 'but that was bad under Labour too!' and that shows why people moved towards a stronger/more extreme position, because they agreed and felt quicker, harder action was required. It isn't all raving looneys, including much of Momentum.

Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: ↑Sat Oct 31, 2020 10:18 am

Admin wrote: ↑Sat Oct 31, 2020 9:53 am

Ronnie Hotdogs wrote: ↑Sat Oct 31, 2020 12:25 am Renationalising the trains and rolling out broadband across the country is not Marxism you absolute fud.

Give it up mate - they’re not listening - too busy laughing along with Matt Forde and celebrating at the Tory lite altar that Starmers clearly preparing.

It's a close call but I'd probably take that over a party that results in a massive Tory majority or that engages in racist discrimination and harassment and whose leadership office interferes with complaints about said racist discrimination and harassment

But then I think massive Tory majorities and racism are bad things so....

I’m referring to policies. But you know that anyway

Chris williamson calls for a new party to be formed possibly called “old labour” and corbyn hard left backers vow to make it happen.

So that’s labour’s vote split, Tories get another 5 years.

So max who will you vote for?
Hotdogs with his privately educated children who will you vote for?
EU10 who will you vote for?
Dis who will you vote for?
Coyos who will you vote for?
Donut you’ll march back to the Torres right?

I see David Milliband earned over $1m last year some funded by tax payer money. What do the labour supporters think on here about such rewards?

Thor wrote: ↑Sun Nov 01, 2020 8:06 am Chris williamson calls for a new party to be formed possibly called “old labour” and corbyn hard left backers vow to make it happen.

So that’s labour’s vote split, Tories get another 5 years.

So max who will you vote for?
Hotdogs with his privately educated children who will you vote for?
EU10 who will you vote for?
Dis who will you vote for?
Coyos who will you vote for?
Donut you’ll march back to the Torres right?

What have you got against private schools?

Thor wrote: ↑Sun Nov 01, 2020 8:10 am I see David Milliband earned over $1m last year some funded by tax payer money. What do the labour supporters think on here about such rewards?

Is a Jewish Man not allowed to earn a £ Million quid Thory ?

Is that your anti- semetism coming out ?

Arthur Scargill ( remember him? ). Set up a new proper left wing socialist party. That did really well didn't it?