UK and Europe World • Page 17

The problem with our FPTP system is that a narrow victory can give a massive majority OR a hung parliament. Hard to predict.

 

Another car-crash interview by Diane Abbott:

Funny how this excuse happens (again):

 

@emeryk3 wait so you think

Fascist former EDL leader Tommy Robinson = "reasonably rational"
Diane Abbott = "a stain on the Labour campaign"

Interesting...

Again the response today has been ridiculously disproportionate, you just wouldn't get this reaction with a white male Tory MP (for example, when Philip Hammond got the cost of HS2 wrong by £20bn a few weeks ago there was barely a whimper from the press). The interview last night definitely wasn't a "car crash" anyway, the interviewer was just trying to catch her out. Interviews like that are so worthless. Now I'm not saying Abbott is perfect (who is???), but instead of playing a game of "gotcha!" it would be better if they actually had a nuanced discussion about the issues. I doubt the interviewer in that video would treat senior Tory politicians with such contempt, I mean you can literally see him smirking throughout the whole thing. I genuinely can't stand anyone whose politics basically amounts to "Diane Abbott is bad!!", like seriously just fuck off. Go read a book.

 

Why are you still mentioning me after your apparent 'block'? Fuck off.

Unlike you, I can address points from both sides. Just because I'm a Labour supporter doesn't mean I confine myself to a pathetic echo chamber and dismiss any arguments from other sides.

Tommy Robinson addressed a good point about how jihadi extremists are being housed locally in communities, even near schools. How about addressinf his points and not his character?

Diane Abbott is absolutely a stain on the Labour campaign. I want Labour to fucking win, in order to not live in yet more austerity under a Tory government. She's proving to be a liability in every appearance she makes.

You're doing the whole tweets thing again from complete nobodies. Fucking LOL. You haven't got a point. You're scrapping the fycking barrel to excuse her inept role as Home Secretaey and dismiss ANY criticisms as racism. Even Labour supporters (like myself) are embarrassed of her.

Literally, fuck off yourself. Stop calling bluff with your pathetic 'block' lies and leave me the fuck alone before constantly replying and throwing insults. People like you turn already Labour voters away from the party. Go read a book yourself, try 'The Boy Who cried Wolf'.

 

Again, Boris Johnson is trending after being mocked:

 

I think with that interview the thing that irks me is that he's clearly trying to quiz her, not for the sake of finding a response and to actually act on the recommendation of the report but so there's something else she can get wrong. She's being held to a much higher standard than other politicians as you said and it's because people want her to fail. Whether at this point that's because of race or because she is now seen to have a track record of perceived incompetence is irrelevant. If the same standard isn't being asked of Amber Rudd then these interviews are basically partisan.

 

So let's get this straight, you could rally behind David Cameron who is responsible for: the disastrous Libya intervention, the bedroom tax, tripling tuition fees, 1 million people needing to use food banks and many more terrible things. Yet you can't get behind Diane Abbott, the first black woman ever elected to parliament, who has an almost identical voting record to Jeremy Corbyn? If anyone needs to fuck off, it's you.

 

Thread:

 

What the fuck are you on about? I applauded Cameron in regards to his leadership, charisma and overall campaign skills - NOT his policies. I've never even voted Tories so why even pretend I'm applauding their policies? That said, EVERY prime minister is responsible for some mistakes. You going to pretend Tony Blair made none? Lol.
PS: Tuition fees were brought in by Labour. The actual rise in the fees was also suggested by Labour. But of course your own echo chamber would never acknowledge facts like that.

Dianne Abbott absolutely deserves all the credit for her background and rise as an MP but that doesn't make her automatically competent as Home Secretary?? Stop using that as excuse to push her to roles she isn't best suited at. Corbyn was a divisive party leader that split his party in two, thereby reducing the pool of skilled politicians by half and excluding those with the real skills to take on such a challenging role. Abbott appears unfit for THIS role.

Now leave me alone and stop intentionally misinterpreting my words.

 

Cameron was an awful campaigner, he's a big part of the reason why the remain campaign during the EU referendum was so bad. I never thought I would see the day when someone described Cameron as "charismatic", lmao.

I despise Tony Blair. I know tuition fees were brought in by Labour, I'm not sure what your point is. I personally disagree with tuition fees so I disagree with anyone who supports them. My point is that you admire the leadership skills of a man who forced hundreds of thousands into poverty, who is partly responsible for the chaos in Libya and who took us out of the EU. Therefore, you clearly aren't holding him to the same standard as you do with Abbott.

Go on then, tell me which policies you disagree with that Abbott has put forward during her time as shadow home secretary. Performance in interviews is a useless way to measure how effective someone will be in government.

Again, I have to ask why you aren't holding May to the same standard that you do with Abbott. Theresa May literally U-turned on social care during the course of this election campaign. That's unprecedented. She also U-turned several times during her short stint as PM before this election. You seriously think she will be strong and stable during negotiations? Also, look at how badly she's messed up this campaign. Her poll lead has dropped by 16 points in the space of a month. It doesn't bode well for the Brexit negotiations.

I just seriously question why you have such a problem with Abbott in particular, especially when your only criticism seems to be "look everyone!! she said the wrong thing in an interview!!".

 

Well the numberis obviously is going to be lower if blacks only make up 3% of the population???

Ethnic groups:
white 87.2%,
black/African/Caribbean/black British 3%, Asian/Asian British: Indian 2.3%,
Asian/Asian British: Pakistani 1.9%,
mixed 2%,
other 3.7% (2011 est.)
United Kingdom Demographics Profile 2016

But that's a different topic entirely. This isn't about her MP credentials but about her role as HOME SECRETARY and how she's running a BAD CAMPAIGN that can influence votes and make us all suffer more years of Tories. So excuse me if I don't bait your bs excuse to call every critic "racist" because labelling any conservative/right-winger as that worked wonders for Brexit.

 

Labour are polling at 40%, I think it's just dudes like you who are that bothered by Abbott

 

Corbyn is divisive because he's breaking with the common sense of the Blairites. They, for far too long, have had hegemony over the party and shifted it to the far economic right. Corbyn, by contrast, is trying the implement a modest social democratic program. Precisely because this runs against the interests of finance capital the Blairites have undermined him at every turn.

 

Also, a toxic concoction means women of colour are hit hardest by austerity. "Low-income black and Asian women are paying the highest price for austerity. By 2020 they will have lost nearly double the amount of money poor white men have. You wouldn’t know any of this from the current discourse around austerity, poverty and Brexit Britain: women of colour are consistently written out of the picture." Women of colour are disproportionately hit by austerity so maybe they should have more of a voice in parliament? Just a thought.

 

He won his 2 elections. He was better than his opponents; I personally liked him more than Ed Milliband (again, policies aside). Where was Jeremy Corbyn's campaign to remain in the EU referendum? He received a LOT of criticism for his completely lukewarm, poor performance in rallying to "remain". It's only during this election has Corbyn really stepped up. If only this thread was here before this campaign, otherwise you'd have seen me vouching Corbyn to be removed too.

Good. You're not a complete dick. You brought up the 'rise in tuition fees' as to mock Cameron. I was simply pointing out that Labour had a big hand in getting that whole ball rolling in the first place.

Purely for his campaigning skills - not his actual policies. He was a charismatic leader that can rally up support, regardless how shit the Tories policies were. I can separate the two. It's like admitting a good sports player on the opposing team. He was good, May isn't. That said, Labour governments have given us a lot of shit too: the ridiculous deficit that obviously results in inevitable cuts, the Iraq war, brought in tuition fees, unreliability to cap immigration, etc. A Prime Minister is obviously going to have a bigger backlog of a backlash than any other MP. I've given Cameron a LOT more shit than Abbott.

She hasn't even been Shadow Home Secretary for long (since last 2016?), so the onus is on YOU to find what good she DID do. I'm criticising her potential role as Home Secretary, which appears to be rationale considering her inept capability of knowing the correct figures - ie on police funding. Plus her constant lies about it. This isn't a case of someone having the jitters, but someone who doesn't seem fit for the role.

Except it's not useless in how that someone gets votes is it? When you got people like Donald Trump winning campaigns with no legitimate previous political experience, you know that campaigning is a significant part of a vote.

I'm a Labour supporter. Why are you assuming I don't criticise May? I agree with all you're saying there. I don't like May and I've been rallying behind Corbyn (this election). You just can't seem to differentiate that a supporter can criticise members of their own partisan. Again, like in a sports team, if a player was performing badly, I'd want them substituted.

Simple: I want Labour to win the election and find her a liability. I viewed Corbyn the same until THIS campaign. The Tories were predicted to win by a landslide until Corbyn got his act together. If Abbott can do the same, then I'd rally behind her.

 

On this point, I think the attitude Owen Jones takes is the example that needs to be followed in general. As much as he was a fan of Corbyn, he criticised him following the second leadership campaign for not really offering the electability that labour, and particularly the left of the party needed to not be cast aside if we incurred a loss. When the election came around though, he brought himself 100% back onside publicly specifically because publicising faults is harmful to the party. My view is generally speaking airing out faults, doubts and criticisms of the party is fine but it needs to be kept in the right forum (literal forum rather than internet forum). You can have your doubts but it does nothing to hurt the cause until it's made public. I'm not saying you do express these doubts in public, but it's why people get particularly frustrated with the right of the party doing this so publicly because no matter what, it's hurting all of our chances to shape the governance of the country in the way that we'd like to.

 

I've supported Corbyn since the first leadership election in 2015. Corbyn supporters have been vindicated by how well Labour have done during this campaign. If Owen Smith had won the leadership contest, Labour would be finished right now. The offer of a 2nd EU referendum is apparently not something the British public find appealing, as the Lib Dems have been stuck at about 7% in the polls for this entire campaign.

You seem to have bought into all the Tory lies about the economy. Have a read of this:

"The first is that there is an inherent virtue in balancing the books. Conservatives still cling to the idea of eleminating the budget deficit, even if it is with a 10-year delay (2025, as opposed to George Osborne's original goal of 2015). The budget-balancing myth is so powerful that Labour feels it has to cost its new spending pledges down to the last penny, lest it be accused of fiscal irresponsibility.

However, as Keynes and his followers told us, whether a balanced budget is a good or a bad thing depends on the circumstances. In an overheating economy, deficit spending would be a serious folly. However, in today’s UK economy, whose underlying stagnation has been masked only by the release of excess liquidity on an oceanic scale, some deficit spending may be good – necessary, even."

I definitely agree that the last Labour government did a lot of terrible stuff tho.

All I'm asking is for you to point to any policies or parliamentary actions she's carried out that justify your reasoning for claiming that she's incompetent. It's almost as if you don't have any actual evidence to support your claim that she is unfit for the role.

My point still stands in that judging someone on how effectively they deliver a speech or how they perform in a television interview is a useless way to determine how effective they will be in government. Based on the polls, Abbott's error on radio a few weeks ago hasn't had any effect at all. She's human, we all make mistakes. I know I have. You have. Everyone does. It doesn't mean they're incompetent.

You've spent a lot of time in this thread attacking Abbott and it just seems uncalled for, especially considering all the abuse she gets from racist dickheads on social media anyway. Why would you want to add to that?

Corbyn has always been this great. I've posted this article before, but it's spot on. Labour have surged in the polls not only because they've had a great campaign, but also because they're finally getting a fair hearing (well, kinda):

"The public tends to only engage with politics during a general election campaign. Very few people follow all the twists and turns of Westminster in their day to day lives. They might pick up the odd bit of information, often through the prism of a right wing tabloid press which usually sets the agenda, but as we near 8 June and people have to make their minds up about who to vote for, a lot more attention will be paid to what the parties are saying. This is why a link to Labour’s very popular manifesto went viral on Facebook last week.

It is also interesting how Labour’s poll bounce coincides with general election broadcast rules kicking in. The public are finally seeing that Jeremy Corbyn is not the person he has been portrayed as in sections of the right wing press, although some broadcasters still insist on using the pejorative term “hard left”, which is somewhat at odds with polling that indicates the public supports the policies in the Labour manifesto."

 

I like Owen Jones and I think he writes a lot of really good stuff. However, I think he was wrong to publicly criticise Corbyn. He's one of the only recognisable voices on the left in the media, so he played right into the hands of Corbyn's opponents by openly asking for him to stand down, because then they could say "oh look, even Corbyn's biggest supporters want him gone". With hindsight, his intervention was even worse because it was only a month or two before a general election. Also, the key thing here is that he was completely wrong about Corbyn's electability- Labour are now polling at 40%. Idk, Owen Jones' public criticism just seems a bit snakey to me, especially when you consider that John McDonnell has invited Jones to advise Labour multiple times but he's refused. He had the opportunity to voice his criticism behind closed doors but he instead chose to go live on the Daily Politics to voice his complaints. It's just not cool imo.

Edit: I do agree that Jones has been mostly good during this campaign tho

 

But to not publicise the faults is surely just being dismissive on how to improve and it also seems ignorant to not engage with opposing views/arguments. I like the idea of keeping a thread balanced with views from opposing partisans. This thread is 'UK and Europe', so why should everything be solely pro-Labour? That just presents partial and arguably unreliable news because everything comes across with strict left-wing bias. If more news were posted about pro-Tory sentiments then I'd know the best approach for counter-arguments. Letterbomb is making a point that Abbott gets too much criticism, but that depends on where. Definitely not in this thread because any centrist or right-fielded views aren't allowed to thrive - whilst you can guarantee similar smear campaigns would be held against the Tories.

To compare, it's like Arsenal fans and their whole "Wenger Out" movement. They're disgruntled fans because they expect more from the team and want to finish higher. The fans will highlight their faults in hopes they take decisive action to improve - whether that's the board of directors or the management itself. I want a party that can win. If Labour win enough seats, hell, I'd happily buy Letterbomb31 a beer. Because we [all] both would get what we want. But Labour has lost the last two elections. That's unacceptable. I routinely engage with Tory supporters to understand what's motivating their votes rather than staying in a leftist bee-hive thread. There are policies on Labour's current manifesto that I don't agree with, mainly their economics (ie raising the minimum wage will reportedly backfire with increased prices; or the risks of higher corporate tax with firms moving offshore to tax havens, ie Ireland with 12.5% corp tax).

Look at Reddit's UKPolitics sub and check this thread on Abbott:
BREAKING Diane Abbott pulls out of @BBCRadio4 Woman's Hour this morning. Labour has told the BBC she is "unwell". • r/ukpolitics
The sub is definitely dominated by more Labour voters than Conservative yet the vast majority find Abbott incompetent for the role. I agree with them. She has simply not had a good campaign. That's not good enough when she's representing millions of people with potential votes and she DOES have an influence. She needs to conduct herself better in interviews.

 

I dunno, obviously it's down to the individual in how they view him honestly but I respect the hell out of him. He's clearly someone who cares very dearly about the left wing cause, and I think he just saw the implications a catastrophic failure from the left of the party could have done to give those beliefs some toxicity in the eyes of the public. I think he made that intervention specifically BECAUSE he thought Labour had another 3 years before an election cycle- if he'd known there'd be an election announcement incoming I don't think he'd have made those remarks.
As for not advising Labour, I actually understand the points he's made against that, precisely for the reasons you think it's wrong to publicly criticise Corbyn. By actively involving himself in government, he effectively becomes a party official which would really remove his voice from the media sphere to an extent. Sure he has a left bias, but being an actual party official means shows like Andrew Marr, newsnight etc. wouldn't call on him to analyse policy in a public forum, where it is best. That removes one of the left voices in the media. Distancing himself allows him to voice his support in a slightly more objective standpoint.
Just watching his interview with Alastair Campbell, he gets picked up for 'not saying what he really thinks' a bit. The rebuttal he makes to that is not that he's trying to hide his feelings, but that he's trying to word things in a way that isn't seeming to attack the cause he represents. As I see it, any criticisms he made of Corbyn weren't meant to be from an angle of genuine criticism but as a means of properly addressing the problems the cause faces. Like I said, if he knew the election was as soon as it was, there's no chance in hell he'd have said those things publicly.

 

I think you can honestly criticize Corbyn. I think Jones' approach was way off, though. He was saying that Corbyn was basically bad in getting his ideas heard, but he had a party that betrayed him at every step. In contrast, he's been effective these past couple of months precisely because he's had a party behind him that advocates his manifesto.

 

The UK has one of the lowest corporation tax rates among the major economies. It's important to understand that the global average corporate tax rate is 27% and the G7 average is 32.8%. Where are these companies going to run to if the UK puts corporation tax back up? Also, to quote the article I posted above again: "Japanese and German companies don’t move out of their countries in droves despite some of the highest corporate income tax rates in the world (31% and 30% respectively) because they get good infrastructure, well-educated workers, strong public support for research and development, and well-functioning administrative and legal systems."

Edit: Also, corporation tax was at 28% in the UK in 2010 before the Tories came in.