Fuel shortages, a return to autumn 2000?

[normal rules]

Mp Tobias Elwood has suggested utilising hundreds of Afghan refugees who drove lorries in their own country to drive UK HGV’s.
He has obv never driven in Afghanistan.

[tyke1962]

I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.

There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .

Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .

You own it now lock , stock and barrel .

It seems tribal positions are working both ways, heres a novel idea, how about meeting in the middle?

Done that most of my life Filo but not with the current leader , once bitten and all that .

Get a new leader in who isn't shyte scared of wanting real change in this country and I'll get on board .

Rayner could very well tempt me back .

And in the meantime you'd rather have the worst of the two evils?  Ah, the high price of principles!

Depends what your view of two evils is .

As far as principles are concerned it's simply a case of not supporting something I fundamentally disagree with .

If principles are to be judged by not giving Starmer a blank cheque then so be it .

If I support something that means I agree with it and I don't agree with the direction Starmer is taking the party .

'Evil' in this case is what is worst for the country as a whole. Can you seriously say that the county, as a whole, is better off under a Johnson led government than a Starmer led one?  If so then yes, your principles can be judged by you giving Johnson a blank check to lie, cheat and look after his 'mates' at the expense of what would be less worse for the country.  If not then..............
 
You don't like the way the Labour Party is going.  Tell you something, neither do I right now.  But you won't fix that by putting a Tory Government with 'populist policies', (which they don't actually put in place), in power who then openly lie and blame others to cover their mistakes  - particularly given the backing they get from an equally corrupt MSM.  No, you do that from within.  You do that through persuasive argument and discussion.
 
And you do it by accepting that, in the short term, things will not be as good as they should be; but they will be a site better than the alternative.
 
The above I know from personal practical experience.

My take is that supporting a Tory government is to vote for one at elections and something I've never done or will do .

The Labour Party will have to work for my vote and it's no longer a given .

I'm particularly keen to avoid what Mandelson described as " they haven't anywhere else to go " .

I simply refuse to give the Labour Party with the direction it's taking a blank cheque .

I'm comfortable in my skin with my stance .

[Not Now Kato]

I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.

There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .

Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .

You own it now lock , stock and barrel .

It seems tribal positions are working both ways, heres a novel idea, how about meeting in the middle?

Done that most of my life Filo but not with the current leader , once bitten and all that .

Get a new leader in who isn't shyte scared of wanting real change in this country and I'll get on board .

Rayner could very well tempt me back .

And in the meantime you'd rather have the worst of the two evils?  Ah, the high price of principles!

Depends what your view of two evils is .

As far as principles are concerned it's simply a case of not supporting something I fundamentally disagree with .

If principles are to be judged by not giving Starmer a blank cheque then so be it .

If I support something that means I agree with it and I don't agree with the direction Starmer is taking the party .

'Evil' in this case is what is worst for the country as a whole. Can you seriously say that the county, as a whole, is better off under a Johnson led government than a Starmer led one?  If so then yes, your principles can be judged by you giving Johnson a blank check to lie, cheat and look after his 'mates' at the expense of what would be less worse for the country.  If not then..............
 
You don't like the way the Labour Party is going.  Tell you something, neither do I right now.  But you won't fix that by putting a Tory Government with 'populist policies', (which they don't actually put in place), in power who then openly lie and blame others to cover their mistakes  - particularly given the backing they get from an equally corrupt MSM.  No, you do that from within.  You do that through persuasive argument and discussion.
 
And you do it by accepting that, in the short term, things will not be as good as they should be; but they will be a site better than the alternative.
 
The above I know from personal practical experience.

My take is that supporting a Tory government is to vote for one at elections and something I've never done or will do .

The Labour Party will have to work for my vote and it's no longer a given .

I'm particularly keen to avoid what Mandelson described as " they haven't anywhere else to go " .

I simply refuse to give the Labour Party with the direction it's taking a blank cheque .

I'm comfortable in my skin with my stance .

If you understand democracy then you'll accept that an abstention effectively counts for the majority vote, not the minority.  If you abstain then you are giving a blank cheque to whoever wins.  In the case of the last election, that's the Tories; however, it equally could have been Labour, which kind of defeats your argument.
 
I'm not sure I'd be comfortable in MY skin being responsible for bestowing the current Tory government on the people of this country when you had the opportunity to do otherwise!

[tyke1962]

I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.

There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .

Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .

You own it now lock , stock and barrel .

It seems tribal positions are working both ways, heres a novel idea, how about meeting in the middle?

Done that most of my life Filo but not with the current leader , once bitten and all that .

Get a new leader in who isn't shyte scared of wanting real change in this country and I'll get on board .

Rayner could very well tempt me back .

And in the meantime you'd rather have the worst of the two evils?  Ah, the high price of principles!

Depends what your view of two evils is .

As far as principles are concerned it's simply a case of not supporting something I fundamentally disagree with .

If principles are to be judged by not giving Starmer a blank cheque then so be it .

If I support something that means I agree with it and I don't agree with the direction Starmer is taking the party .

'Evil' in this case is what is worst for the country as a whole. Can you seriously say that the county, as a whole, is better off under a Johnson led government than a Starmer led one?  If so then yes, your principles can be judged by you giving Johnson a blank check to lie, cheat and look after his 'mates' at the expense of what would be less worse for the country.  If not then..............
 
You don't like the way the Labour Party is going.  Tell you something, neither do I right now.  But you won't fix that by putting a Tory Government with 'populist policies', (which they don't actually put in place), in power who then openly lie and blame others to cover their mistakes  - particularly given the backing they get from an equally corrupt MSM.  No, you do that from within.  You do that through persuasive argument and discussion.
 
And you do it by accepting that, in the short term, things will not be as good as they should be; but they will be a site better than the alternative.
 
The above I know from personal practical experience.

My take is that supporting a Tory government is to vote for one at elections and something I've never done or will do .

The Labour Party will have to work for my vote and it's no longer a given .

I'm particularly keen to avoid what Mandelson described as " they haven't anywhere else to go " .

I simply refuse to give the Labour Party with the direction it's taking a blank cheque .

I'm comfortable in my skin with my stance .

If you understand democracy then you'll accept that an abstention effectively counts for the majority vote, not the minority.  If you abstain then you are giving a blank cheque to whoever wins.  In the case of the last election, that's the Tories; however, it equally could have been Labour, which kind of defeats your argument.
 
I'm not sure I'd be comfortable in MY skin being responsible for bestowing the current Tory government on the people of this country when you had the opportunity to do otherwise!

It's down to the Labour Party to attract me enough to vote for them .

They have absolutely no right to my vote otherwise .

No amount of guilt tripping will work on me .

[Not Now Kato]

I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.

There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .

Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .

You own it now lock , stock and barrel .

It seems tribal positions are working both ways, heres a novel idea, how about meeting in the middle?

Done that most of my life Filo but not with the current leader , once bitten and all that .

Get a new leader in who isn't shyte scared of wanting real change in this country and I'll get on board .

Rayner could very well tempt me back .

And in the meantime you'd rather have the worst of the two evils?  Ah, the high price of principles!

Depends what your view of two evils is .

As far as principles are concerned it's simply a case of not supporting something I fundamentally disagree with .

If principles are to be judged by not giving Starmer a blank cheque then so be it .

If I support something that means I agree with it and I don't agree with the direction Starmer is taking the party .

'Evil' in this case is what is worst for the country as a whole. Can you seriously say that the county, as a whole, is better off under a Johnson led government than a Starmer led one?  If so then yes, your principles can be judged by you giving Johnson a blank check to lie, cheat and look after his 'mates' at the expense of what would be less worse for the country.  If not then..............
 
You don't like the way the Labour Party is going.  Tell you something, neither do I right now.  But you won't fix that by putting a Tory Government with 'populist policies', (which they don't actually put in place), in power who then openly lie and blame others to cover their mistakes  - particularly given the backing they get from an equally corrupt MSM.  No, you do that from within.  You do that through persuasive argument and discussion.
 
And you do it by accepting that, in the short term, things will not be as good as they should be; but they will be a site better than the alternative.
 
The above I know from personal practical experience.

My take is that supporting a Tory government is to vote for one at elections and something I've never done or will do .

The Labour Party will have to work for my vote and it's no longer a given .

I'm particularly keen to avoid what Mandelson described as " they haven't anywhere else to go " .

I simply refuse to give the Labour Party with the direction it's taking a blank cheque .

I'm comfortable in my skin with my stance .

If you understand democracy then you'll accept that an abstention effectively counts for the majority vote, not the minority.  If you abstain then you are giving a blank cheque to whoever wins.  In the case of the last election, that's the Tories; however, it equally could have been Labour, which kind of defeats your argument.
 
I'm not sure I'd be comfortable in MY skin being responsible for bestowing the current Tory government on the people of this country when you had the opportunity to do otherwise!

It's down to the Labour Party to attract me enough to vote for them .

They have absolutely no right to my vote otherwise .

No amount of guilt tripping will work on me .

And, by default, the Tories do?
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkZSeJ6-Gu4
 

[tyke1962]

I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.

There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .

Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .

You own it now lock , stock and barrel .

It seems tribal positions are working both ways, heres a novel idea, how about meeting in the middle?

Done that most of my life Filo but not with the current leader , once bitten and all that .

Get a new leader in who isn't shyte scared of wanting real change in this country and I'll get on board .

Rayner could very well tempt me back .

And in the meantime you'd rather have the worst of the two evils?  Ah, the high price of principles!

Depends what your view of two evils is .

As far as principles are concerned it's simply a case of not supporting something I fundamentally disagree with .

If principles are to be judged by not giving Starmer a blank cheque then so be it .

If I support something that means I agree with it and I don't agree with the direction Starmer is taking the party .

'Evil' in this case is what is worst for the country as a whole. Can you seriously say that the county, as a whole, is better off under a Johnson led government than a Starmer led one?  If so then yes, your principles can be judged by you giving Johnson a blank check to lie, cheat and look after his 'mates' at the expense of what would be less worse for the country.  If not then..............
 
You don't like the way the Labour Party is going.  Tell you something, neither do I right now.  But you won't fix that by putting a Tory Government with 'populist policies', (which they don't actually put in place), in power who then openly lie and blame others to cover their mistakes  - particularly given the backing they get from an equally corrupt MSM.  No, you do that from within.  You do that through persuasive argument and discussion.
 
And you do it by accepting that, in the short term, things will not be as good as they should be; but they will be a site better than the alternative.
 
The above I know from personal practical experience.

My take is that supporting a Tory government is to vote for one at elections and something I've never done or will do .

The Labour Party will have to work for my vote and it's no longer a given .

I'm particularly keen to avoid what Mandelson described as " they haven't anywhere else to go " .

I simply refuse to give the Labour Party with the direction it's taking a blank cheque .

I'm comfortable in my skin with my stance .

If you understand democracy then you'll accept that an abstention effectively counts for the majority vote, not the minority.  If you abstain then you are giving a blank cheque to whoever wins.  In the case of the last election, that's the Tories; however, it equally could have been Labour, which kind of defeats your argument.
 
I'm not sure I'd be comfortable in MY skin being responsible for bestowing the current Tory government on the people of this country when you had the opportunity to do otherwise!

It's down to the Labour Party to attract me enough to vote for them .

They have absolutely no right to my vote otherwise .

No amount of guilt tripping will work on me .

And, by default, the Tories do?
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkZSeJ6-Gu4

To tell the truth I've seen no evidence Keith and his henchmen even want to defeat the Tories themselves .

They seem more focused on having total control of the party above everything else and even want to load the dice in choosing their successors .

The ex leader who changed the way the party elects it's leader now wants to return to the older model .

And you believe these people are a better option than the Tories ?

The very same people who would sooner throw its elected leader under a bus and plot against him rather than support him at a GE .

These people are supposed to be worth my vote ?

There's the width of a fag paper between Tory and the current Labour party when it comes to fit for government .

[Not Now Kato]

I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.

There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .

Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .

You own it now lock , stock and barrel .

It seems tribal positions are working both ways, heres a novel idea, how about meeting in the middle?

Done that most of my life Filo but not with the current leader , once bitten and all that .

Get a new leader in who isn't shyte scared of wanting real change in this country and I'll get on board .

Rayner could very well tempt me back .

And in the meantime you'd rather have the worst of the two evils?  Ah, the high price of principles!

Depends what your view of two evils is .

As far as principles are concerned it's simply a case of not supporting something I fundamentally disagree with .

If principles are to be judged by not giving Starmer a blank cheque then so be it .

If I support something that means I agree with it and I don't agree with the direction Starmer is taking the party .

'Evil' in this case is what is worst for the country as a whole. Can you seriously say that the county, as a whole, is better off under a Johnson led government than a Starmer led one?  If so then yes, your principles can be judged by you giving Johnson a blank check to lie, cheat and look after his 'mates' at the expense of what would be less worse for the country.  If not then..............
 
You don't like the way the Labour Party is going.  Tell you something, neither do I right now.  But you won't fix that by putting a Tory Government with 'populist policies', (which they don't actually put in place), in power who then openly lie and blame others to cover their mistakes  - particularly given the backing they get from an equally corrupt MSM.  No, you do that from within.  You do that through persuasive argument and discussion.
 
And you do it by accepting that, in the short term, things will not be as good as they should be; but they will be a site better than the alternative.
 
The above I know from personal practical experience.

My take is that supporting a Tory government is to vote for one at elections and something I've never done or will do .

The Labour Party will have to work for my vote and it's no longer a given .

I'm particularly keen to avoid what Mandelson described as " they haven't anywhere else to go " .

I simply refuse to give the Labour Party with the direction it's taking a blank cheque .

I'm comfortable in my skin with my stance .

If you understand democracy then you'll accept that an abstention effectively counts for the majority vote, not the minority.  If you abstain then you are giving a blank cheque to whoever wins.  In the case of the last election, that's the Tories; however, it equally could have been Labour, which kind of defeats your argument.
 
I'm not sure I'd be comfortable in MY skin being responsible for bestowing the current Tory government on the people of this country when you had the opportunity to do otherwise!

It's down to the Labour Party to attract me enough to vote for them .

They have absolutely no right to my vote otherwise .

No amount of guilt tripping will work on me .

And, by default, the Tories do?
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkZSeJ6-Gu4

To tell the truth I've seen no evidence Keith and his henchmen even want to defeat the Tories themselves .

They seem more focused on having total control of the party above everything else and even want to load the dice in choosing their successors .

The ex leader who changed the way the party elects it's leader now wants to return to the older model .

And you believe these people are a better option than the Tories ?

The very same people who would sooner throw its elected leader under a bus and plot against him rather than support him at a GE .

These people are supposed to be worth my vote ?

There's the width of a fag paper between Tory and the current Labour party when it comes to fit for government .

Yes, I believe they are better than the current gang of Tories, I'm surprised you don't.  And as I said earlier, the only way to bring about change is from within. Criticising from the outside will achieve nothing other than the continuation of the status quo.

[SydneyRover]

I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.

There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .

Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .

You own it now lock , stock and barrel .

It seems tribal positions are working both ways, heres a novel idea, how about meeting in the middle?

I accept people are entitled to their tribal position, you cannot argue against a personal opinion but you'll never find where I have used insults instead of an argument, first at any rate.

[SydneyRover]

Tyke you complain a lot about the labour party and you complain about blair a lot, where was the left candidate when blair won the leadership?

This is not to start another endless argument but when you say labour have to 'earn your vote' do you do anything within the labour party, do you canvass for votes to you work within the machine at all?

[tyke1962]

I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.

There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .

Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .

You own it now lock , stock and barrel .

It seems tribal positions are working both ways, heres a novel idea, how about meeting in the middle?

Done that most of my life Filo but not with the current leader , once bitten and all that .

Get a new leader in who isn't shyte scared of wanting real change in this country and I'll get on board .

Rayner could very well tempt me back .

And in the meantime you'd rather have the worst of the two evils?  Ah, the high price of principles!

Depends what your view of two evils is .

As far as principles are concerned it's simply a case of not supporting something I fundamentally disagree with .

If principles are to be judged by not giving Starmer a blank cheque then so be it .

If I support something that means I agree with it and I don't agree with the direction Starmer is taking the party .

'Evil' in this case is what is worst for the country as a whole. Can you seriously say that the county, as a whole, is better off under a Johnson led government than a Starmer led one?  If so then yes, your principles can be judged by you giving Johnson a blank check to lie, cheat and look after his 'mates' at the expense of what would be less worse for the country.  If not then..............
 
You don't like the way the Labour Party is going.  Tell you something, neither do I right now.  But you won't fix that by putting a Tory Government with 'populist policies', (which they don't actually put in place), in power who then openly lie and blame others to cover their mistakes  - particularly given the backing they get from an equally corrupt MSM.  No, you do that from within.  You do that through persuasive argument and discussion.
 
And you do it by accepting that, in the short term, things will not be as good as they should be; but they will be a site better than the alternative.
 
The above I know from personal practical experience.

My take is that supporting a Tory government is to vote for one at elections and something I've never done or will do .

The Labour Party will have to work for my vote and it's no longer a given .

I'm particularly keen to avoid what Mandelson described as " they haven't anywhere else to go " .

I simply refuse to give the Labour Party with the direction it's taking a blank cheque .

I'm comfortable in my skin with my stance .

If you understand democracy then you'll accept that an abstention effectively counts for the majority vote, not the minority.  If you abstain then you are giving a blank cheque to whoever wins.  In the case of the last election, that's the Tories; however, it equally could have been Labour, which kind of defeats your argument.
 
I'm not sure I'd be comfortable in MY skin being responsible for bestowing the current Tory government on the people of this country when you had the opportunity to do otherwise!

It's down to the Labour Party to attract me enough to vote for them .

They have absolutely no right to my vote otherwise .

No amount of guilt tripping will work on me .

And, by default, the Tories do?
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkZSeJ6-Gu4

To tell the truth I've seen no evidence Keith and his henchmen even want to defeat the Tories themselves .

They seem more focused on having total control of the party above everything else and even want to load the dice in choosing their successors .

The ex leader who changed the way the party elects it's leader now wants to return to the older model .

And you believe these people are a better option than the Tories ?

The very same people who would sooner throw its elected leader under a bus and plot against him rather than support him at a GE .

These people are supposed to be worth my vote ?

There's the width of a fag paper between Tory and the current Labour party when it comes to fit for government .

Yes, I believe they are better than the current gang of Tories, I'm surprised you don't.  And as I said earlier, the only way to bring about change is from within. Criticising from the outside will achieve nothing other than the continuation of the status quo.

But I see the Tories and the centre of the Labour Party as the status quo , do you see the problem I have here ?.

Keith has broken every promise he stood on to get elected which makes him no different to Johnson .

Why should I believe a word Keith says anymore than I believe what Johnson spouts ? .

Why should I be encouraged to vote for someone who wanted a second referendum because he didn't much care for the result of the binding first one ? .

I could get on board with Rayner who isn't afraid of using a bit of class warfare to make her point and is extremely authentic as a Labour working class MP .

I can see a significant difference between Tory and Labour under Rayner and that's important to me .

Keith could sit at the side of Johnson and nobody would be surprised .

It's high time Labour elected a women as leader and with her fesitiness she'd connect today .

With her early life she'd attract the vote that feels excluded in politics .

I like her , it goes along way .

[SydneyRover]

I said on the other thread you cannot argue against personal opinion.

[tyke1962]

Tyke you complain a lot about the labour party and you complain about blair a lot, where was the left candidate when blair won the leadership?

This is not to start another endless argument but when you say labour have to 'earn your vote' do you do anything within the labour party, do you canvass for votes to you work within the machine at all?

The candidate on the left to Blair was absolutely non existent .

Blair was a very clever bloke who packaged New Labour very well and was a man of the times .

The problem today is that inequality and the power the establishment have is far far greater than what it was in 1997 .

This country needs massive change and in my opinion the centre of the Labour Party have neither the enthusiasm , the will , the policies or even the vision to change anything of note .

There's little point to them .

You need a pair and some radical policies to drive the change needed .

All I see is Keith getting in to bed with the usual suspects to gain power without clout .

Yes I've campaigned for the party during the Thatcher years .

I was active in the poll tax era including the riots in central London .

I was active at Wapping in the mid 80's also .

I fought the fight of course during the strike .

I've done my bit for the party but was always more trade union minded than anything else which at one time was hand in hand with the Labour movement .

When Blair came on the scene I ceased because I wasn't wanted anymore so I let em get on with it although I voted for him .

I care passionately about working people and it's my opinion the centre of the Labour Party doesn't or hasn't ever done enough for them .

It's done some things but nothing like it should have done .

Hence my distaste for the direction Keith is taking the party .

[Janso]

A lot of messageboards on the motorways coming home saying either no diesel or HGV fuel only for service stations.

[SydneyRover]

Tyke you complain a lot about the labour party and you complain about blair a lot, where was the left candidate when blair won the leadership?

This is not to start another endless argument but when you say labour have to 'earn your vote' do you do anything within the labour party, do you canvass for votes to you work within the machine at all?

The candidate on the left to Blair was absolutely non existent .

Blair was a very clever bloke who packaged New Labour very well and was a man of the times .

The problem today is that inequality and the power the establishment have is far far greater than what it was in 1997 .

This country needs massive change and in my opinion the centre of the Labour Party have neither the enthusiasm , the will , the policies or even the vision to change anything of note .

There's little point to them .

You need a pair and some radical policies to drive the change needed .

All I see is Keith getting in to bed with the usual suspects to gain power without clout .

Yes I've campaigned for the party during the Thatcher years .

I was active in the poll tax era including the riots in central London .

I was active at Wapping in the mid 80's also .

I fought the fight of course during the strike .

I've done my bit for the party but was always more trade union minded than anything else which at one time was hand in hand with the Labour movement .

When Blair came on the scene I ceased because I wasn't wanted anymore so I let em get on with it although I voted for him .

I care passionately about working people and it's my opinion the centre of the Labour Party doesn't or hasn't ever done enough for them .

It's done some things but nothing like it should have done .

Hence my distaste for the direction Keith is taking the party .

Not being smart here but it's difficult to complain about Blair when according you there wasn't another horse in the race?

The problem today is that inequality and the power the establishment have is far far greater than what it was in 1997 .

Agreed, how can you fix this from opposition?

This country needs massive change and in my opinion the centre of the Labour Party have neither the enthusiasm , the will , the policies or even the vision to change anything of note .

Agreed, how can you fix this from opposition?

You need a pair and some radical policies to drive the change needed .

Then you'll probably never get into power.

All I see is Keith getting in to bed with the usual suspects to gain power without clout .

You still haven't said how you are going to get power, politics very rarely jumps from far left to far right or or massively in any direction without a revolution and unfortunately the right have the upper hand atm using a mixture of R & L policies.

I care passionately about working people and it's my opinion the centre of the Labour Party doesn't or hasn't ever done enough for them .

You're not Robinson Crusoe nor the only lefty in the village.

[tyke1962]

Tyke you complain a lot about the labour party and you complain about blair a lot, where was the left candidate when blair won the leadership?

This is not to start another endless argument but when you say labour have to 'earn your vote' do you do anything within the labour party, do you canvass for votes to you work within the machine at all?

The candidate on the left to Blair was absolutely non existent .

Blair was a very clever bloke who packaged New Labour very well and was a man of the times .

The problem today is that inequality and the power the establishment have is far far greater than what it was in 1997 .

This country needs massive change and in my opinion the centre of the Labour Party have neither the enthusiasm , the will , the policies or even the vision to change anything of note .

There's little point to them .

You need a pair and some radical policies to drive the change needed .

All I see is Keith getting in to bed with the usual suspects to gain power without clout .

Yes I've campaigned for the party during the Thatcher years .

I was active in the poll tax era including the riots in central London .

I was active at Wapping in the mid 80's also .

I fought the fight of course during the strike .

I've done my bit for the party but was always more trade union minded than anything else which at one time was hand in hand with the Labour movement .

When Blair came on the scene I ceased because I wasn't wanted anymore so I let em get on with it although I voted for him .

I care passionately about working people and it's my opinion the centre of the Labour Party doesn't or hasn't ever done enough for them .

It's done some things but nothing like it should have done .

Hence my distaste for the direction Keith is taking the party .

Not being smart here but it's difficult to complain about Blair when according you there wasn't another horse in the race?

The problem today is that inequality and the power the establishment have is far far greater than what it was in 1997 .

Agreed, how can you fix this from opposition?

This country needs massive change and in my opinion the centre of the Labour Party have neither the enthusiasm , the will , the policies or even the vision to change anything of note .

Agreed, how can you fix this from opposition?

You need a pair and some radical policies to drive the change needed .

Then you'll probably never get into power.

All I see is Keith getting in to bed with the usual suspects to gain power without clout .

You still haven't said how you are going to get power, politics very rarely jumps from far left to far right or or massively in any direction without a revolution and unfortunately the right have the upper hand atm using a mixture of R & L policies.

I care passionately about working people and it's my opinion the centre of the Labour Party doesn't or hasn't ever done enough for them .

You're not Robinson Crusoe nor the only lefty in the village.

Sydney .

To be left wing is to believe in common ownership , to believe in owning the means of production .

So to not believe in those things in my opinion is to be a believer in super capitalism , super capitalism equates to someone gaining at another person's expense in a game of dog eat dog .

Now bear with me .

The country is not and never will be a socialist state and I understand that perfectly well .

What it can be is a mixed economy which isn't by any means hard left ( your words ) .

You make the argument that certain industries are better value for the citizens of this country , energy and the railways would be perfectly reasonable examples .

Of course you are going to be killed by the Tory press but you present the facts to the electorate that win over the public .

This wouldn't be so difficult to do given the present energy crisis and the ever increasing costs placed on our commuters to deliver shareholder profit .

My compromise with who owns the means of production is to decide that everyone owns it , so if everyone owns it then by definition everyone has a voice .

These are extremely sellable policies given the state of the nation and the ever increasing wealth gap .

That's about as left as I get .

To do nothing from a centrist Labour position is to agree with the status quo , if you can't beat em then join em if you will which seems pretty pointless to me .

I find the centre of the Labour Party a set of lame ducks who settle for the easy ride in order to attempt to gain power .

It could be said that if they agree with super capitalism then they may as well sit on the other side of the house .

The only people at least in my opinion who are driving change are the left and this seems to collide head on with the present owners of the Labour Party .

Do you yourself believe in some common ownership and the means of production owned by everyone Sydney ? .

I'd be interested to know other than what we already know in that you are anti Tory and left wing .

What's your beliefs and convictions ?

[SydneyRover]

Tyke I would regard myself as a political socialist and abhor the sell off of state property to carpet baggers, but unfortunately as in Australia those of us that think this way have been outflanked. But it has been a steady chipping away from the council house sell offs to Royal Mail. I have had to temper and change my view over the years about how to attain government because labour governments are hard to come by and as I said in my post you can do very little from opposition and if you go for the big ticket socialist policies in this climate you'll get smashed.

Eternal vigilance ............... the job will never be completed but you have to start somewhere and you have to get power to do it, standing on your dick and allowing a tory government another term is not the way.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Sydney how strongly do you believe that? Are you a shareholder? Are your pensions invested in companies?

[SydneyRover]

Sydney how strongly do you believe that? Are you a shareholder? Are your pensions invested in companies?

I don't have any pension/s and I haven't drawn a state pension to which I'm entitled to.

[Not Now Kato]

I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.

There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .

Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .

You own it now lock , stock and barrel .

It seems tribal positions are working both ways, heres a novel idea, how about meeting in the middle?

Done that most of my life Filo but not with the current leader , once bitten and all that .

Get a new leader in who isn't shyte scared of wanting real change in this country and I'll get on board .

Rayner could very well tempt me back .

And in the meantime you'd rather have the worst of the two evils?  Ah, the high price of principles!

Depends what your view of two evils is .

As far as principles are concerned it's simply a case of not supporting something I fundamentally disagree with .

If principles are to be judged by not giving Starmer a blank cheque then so be it .

If I support something that means I agree with it and I don't agree with the direction Starmer is taking the party .

'Evil' in this case is what is worst for the country as a whole. Can you seriously say that the county, as a whole, is better off under a Johnson led government than a Starmer led one?  If so then yes, your principles can be judged by you giving Johnson a blank check to lie, cheat and look after his 'mates' at the expense of what would be less worse for the country.  If not then..............
 
You don't like the way the Labour Party is going.  Tell you something, neither do I right now.  But you won't fix that by putting a Tory Government with 'populist policies', (which they don't actually put in place), in power who then openly lie and blame others to cover their mistakes  - particularly given the backing they get from an equally corrupt MSM.  No, you do that from within.  You do that through persuasive argument and discussion.
 
And you do it by accepting that, in the short term, things will not be as good as they should be; but they will be a site better than the alternative.
 
The above I know from personal practical experience.

My take is that supporting a Tory government is to vote for one at elections and something I've never done or will do .

The Labour Party will have to work for my vote and it's no longer a given .

I'm particularly keen to avoid what Mandelson described as " they haven't anywhere else to go " .

I simply refuse to give the Labour Party with the direction it's taking a blank cheque .

I'm comfortable in my skin with my stance .

If you understand democracy then you'll accept that an abstention effectively counts for the majority vote, not the minority.  If you abstain then you are giving a blank cheque to whoever wins.  In the case of the last election, that's the Tories; however, it equally could have been Labour, which kind of defeats your argument.
 
I'm not sure I'd be comfortable in MY skin being responsible for bestowing the current Tory government on the people of this country when you had the opportunity to do otherwise!

It's down to the Labour Party to attract me enough to vote for them .

They have absolutely no right to my vote otherwise .

No amount of guilt tripping will work on me .

And, by default, the Tories do?
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkZSeJ6-Gu4

To tell the truth I've seen no evidence Keith and his henchmen even want to defeat the Tories themselves .

They seem more focused on having total control of the party above everything else and even want to load the dice in choosing their successors .

The ex leader who changed the way the party elects it's leader now wants to return to the older model .

And you believe these people are a better option than the Tories ?

The very same people who would sooner throw its elected leader under a bus and plot against him rather than support him at a GE .

These people are supposed to be worth my vote ?

There's the width of a fag paper between Tory and the current Labour party when it comes to fit for government .

Yes, I believe they are better than the current gang of Tories, I'm surprised you don't.  And as I said earlier, the only way to bring about change is from within. Criticising from the outside will achieve nothing other than the continuation of the status quo.

But I see the Tories and the centre of the Labour Party as the status quo , do you see the problem I have here ?.

Keith has broken every promise he stood on to get elected which makes him no different to Johnson .

Why should I believe a word Keith says anymore than I believe what Johnson spouts ? .

Why should I be encouraged to vote for someone who wanted a second referendum because he didn't much care for the result of the binding first one ? .

I could get on board with Rayner who isn't afraid of using a bit of class warfare to make her point and is extremely authentic as a Labour working class MP .

I can see a significant difference between Tory and Labour under Rayner and that's important to me .

Keith could sit at the side of Johnson and nobody would be surprised .

It's high time Labour elected a women as leader and with her fesitiness she'd connect today .

With her early life she'd attract the vote that feels excluded in politics .

I like her , it goes along way .

Tyke, if you continue to want what you want without being prepared to compromise then you'll NEVER get what you want, nor anything near to it.
 
There are things that I would like to change, that I accept will NEVER change, EVER.  There are things that I would like to change that I can see changing, even under Starmer.  When people see those changes and the benefits they bring to 'the man in the street' then the opportunity will be there for a press for further changes, again for the better.
 
But none of that will happen if people like you keep the Tories in power, EVER!

[tyke1962]

I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.

There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .

Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .

You own it now lock , stock and barrel .

It seems tribal positions are working both ways, heres a novel idea, how about meeting in the middle?

Done that most of my life Filo but not with the current leader , once bitten and all that .

Get a new leader in who isn't shyte scared of wanting real change in this country and I'll get on board .

Rayner could very well tempt me back .

And in the meantime you'd rather have the worst of the two evils?  Ah, the high price of principles!

Depends what your view of two evils is .

As far as principles are concerned it's simply a case of not supporting something I fundamentally disagree with .

If principles are to be judged by not giving Starmer a blank cheque then so be it .

If I support something that means I agree with it and I don't agree with the direction Starmer is taking the party .

'Evil' in this case is what is worst for the country as a whole. Can you seriously say that the county, as a whole, is better off under a Johnson led government than a Starmer led one?  If so then yes, your principles can be judged by you giving Johnson a blank check to lie, cheat and look after his 'mates' at the expense of what would be less worse for the country.  If not then..............
 
You don't like the way the Labour Party is going.  Tell you something, neither do I right now.  But you won't fix that by putting a Tory Government with 'populist policies', (which they don't actually put in place), in power who then openly lie and blame others to cover their mistakes  - particularly given the backing they get from an equally corrupt MSM.  No, you do that from within.  You do that through persuasive argument and discussion.
 
And you do it by accepting that, in the short term, things will not be as good as they should be; but they will be a site better than the alternative.
 
The above I know from personal practical experience.

My take is that supporting a Tory government is to vote for one at elections and something I've never done or will do .

The Labour Party will have to work for my vote and it's no longer a given .

I'm particularly keen to avoid what Mandelson described as " they haven't anywhere else to go " .

I simply refuse to give the Labour Party with the direction it's taking a blank cheque .

I'm comfortable in my skin with my stance .

If you understand democracy then you'll accept that an abstention effectively counts for the majority vote, not the minority.  If you abstain then you are giving a blank cheque to whoever wins.  In the case of the last election, that's the Tories; however, it equally could have been Labour, which kind of defeats your argument.
 
I'm not sure I'd be comfortable in MY skin being responsible for bestowing the current Tory government on the people of this country when you had the opportunity to do otherwise!

It's down to the Labour Party to attract me enough to vote for them .

They have absolutely no right to my vote otherwise .

No amount of guilt tripping will work on me .

And, by default, the Tories do?
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkZSeJ6-Gu4

To tell the truth I've seen no evidence Keith and his henchmen even want to defeat the Tories themselves .

They seem more focused on having total control of the party above everything else and even want to load the dice in choosing their successors .

The ex leader who changed the way the party elects it's leader now wants to return to the older model .

And you believe these people are a better option than the Tories ?

The very same people who would sooner throw its elected leader under a bus and plot against him rather than support him at a GE .

These people are supposed to be worth my vote ?

There's the width of a fag paper between Tory and the current Labour party when it comes to fit for government .

Yes, I believe they are better than the current gang of Tories, I'm surprised you don't.  And as I said earlier, the only way to bring about change is from within. Criticising from the outside will achieve nothing other than the continuation of the status quo.

But I see the Tories and the centre of the Labour Party as the status quo , do you see the problem I have here ?.

Keith has broken every promise he stood on to get elected which makes him no different to Johnson .

Why should I believe a word Keith says anymore than I believe what Johnson spouts ? .

Why should I be encouraged to vote for someone who wanted a second referendum because he didn't much care for the result of the binding first one ? .

I could get on board with Rayner who isn't afraid of using a bit of class warfare to make her point and is extremely authentic as a Labour working class MP .

I can see a significant difference between Tory and Labour under Rayner and that's important to me .

Keith could sit at the side of Johnson and nobody would be surprised .

It's high time Labour elected a women as leader and with her fesitiness she'd connect today .

With her early life she'd attract the vote that feels excluded in politics .

I like her , it goes along way .

Tyke, if you continue to want what you want without being prepared to compromise then you'll NEVER get what you want, nor anything near to it.
 
There are things that I would like to change, that I accept will NEVER change, EVER.  There are things that I would like to change that I can see changing, even under Starmer.  When people see those changes and the benefits they bring to 'the man in the street' then the opportunity will be there for a press for further changes, again for the better.
 
But none of that will happen if people like you keep the Tories in power, EVER!

But I find Keith every bit as dishonest and untrustworthy as Johnson is .

I wouldn't expect anything less from Johnson but I expect far more from a Labour leader .

I find it abhorrent that you can break everyone of the pledges you made to get the Labour leadership .

I cannot support this man in any shape of form .

[Not Now Kato]

I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.

There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .

Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .

You own it now lock , stock and barrel .

It seems tribal positions are working both ways, heres a novel idea, how about meeting in the middle?

Done that most of my life Filo but not with the current leader , once bitten and all that .

Get a new leader in who isn't shyte scared of wanting real change in this country and I'll get on board .

Rayner could very well tempt me back .

And in the meantime you'd rather have the worst of the two evils?  Ah, the high price of principles!

Depends what your view of two evils is .

As far as principles are concerned it's simply a case of not supporting something I fundamentally disagree with .

If principles are to be judged by not giving Starmer a blank cheque then so be it .

If I support something that means I agree with it and I don't agree with the direction Starmer is taking the party .

'Evil' in this case is what is worst for the country as a whole. Can you seriously say that the county, as a whole, is better off under a Johnson led government than a Starmer led one?  If so then yes, your principles can be judged by you giving Johnson a blank check to lie, cheat and look after his 'mates' at the expense of what would be less worse for the country.  If not then..............
 
You don't like the way the Labour Party is going.  Tell you something, neither do I right now.  But you won't fix that by putting a Tory Government with 'populist policies', (which they don't actually put in place), in power who then openly lie and blame others to cover their mistakes  - particularly given the backing they get from an equally corrupt MSM.  No, you do that from within.  You do that through persuasive argument and discussion.
 
And you do it by accepting that, in the short term, things will not be as good as they should be; but they will be a site better than the alternative.
 
The above I know from personal practical experience.

My take is that supporting a Tory government is to vote for one at elections and something I've never done or will do .

The Labour Party will have to work for my vote and it's no longer a given .

I'm particularly keen to avoid what Mandelson described as " they haven't anywhere else to go " .

I simply refuse to give the Labour Party with the direction it's taking a blank cheque .

I'm comfortable in my skin with my stance .

If you understand democracy then you'll accept that an abstention effectively counts for the majority vote, not the minority.  If you abstain then you are giving a blank cheque to whoever wins.  In the case of the last election, that's the Tories; however, it equally could have been Labour, which kind of defeats your argument.
 
I'm not sure I'd be comfortable in MY skin being responsible for bestowing the current Tory government on the people of this country when you had the opportunity to do otherwise!

It's down to the Labour Party to attract me enough to vote for them .

They have absolutely no right to my vote otherwise .

No amount of guilt tripping will work on me .

And, by default, the Tories do?
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkZSeJ6-Gu4

To tell the truth I've seen no evidence Keith and his henchmen even want to defeat the Tories themselves .

They seem more focused on having total control of the party above everything else and even want to load the dice in choosing their successors .

The ex leader who changed the way the party elects it's leader now wants to return to the older model .

And you believe these people are a better option than the Tories ?

The very same people who would sooner throw its elected leader under a bus and plot against him rather than support him at a GE .

These people are supposed to be worth my vote ?

There's the width of a fag paper between Tory and the current Labour party when it comes to fit for government .

Yes, I believe they are better than the current gang of Tories, I'm surprised you don't.  And as I said earlier, the only way to bring about change is from within. Criticising from the outside will achieve nothing other than the continuation of the status quo.

But I see the Tories and the centre of the Labour Party as the status quo , do you see the problem I have here ?.

Keith has broken every promise he stood on to get elected which makes him no different to Johnson .

Why should I believe a word Keith says anymore than I believe what Johnson spouts ? .

Why should I be encouraged to vote for someone who wanted a second referendum because he didn't much care for the result of the binding first one ? .

I could get on board with Rayner who isn't afraid of using a bit of class warfare to make her point and is extremely authentic as a Labour working class MP .

I can see a significant difference between Tory and Labour under Rayner and that's important to me .

Keith could sit at the side of Johnson and nobody would be surprised .

It's high time Labour elected a women as leader and with her fesitiness she'd connect today .

With her early life she'd attract the vote that feels excluded in politics .

I like her , it goes along way .

Tyke, if you continue to want what you want without being prepared to compromise then you'll NEVER get what you want, nor anything near to it.
 
There are things that I would like to change, that I accept will NEVER change, EVER.  There are things that I would like to change that I can see changing, even under Starmer.  When people see those changes and the benefits they bring to 'the man in the street' then the opportunity will be there for a press for further changes, again for the better.
 
But none of that will happen if people like you keep the Tories in power, EVER!

But I find Keith every bit as dishonest and untrustworthy as Johnson is .

I wouldn't expect anything less from Johnson but I expect far more from a Labour leader .

I find it abhorrent that you can break everyone of the pledges you made to get the Labour leadership .

I cannot support this man in any shape of form .

In which case, you will continue to help keep the Tories in power to the detriment of the less well off in this country.  Also, you appear to be making your decision based on your personal dislike one person; the Labour Party is more than Sir Keir Starmer.

[ColinDouglasHandshake]

The inability of Labour to form a genuine opposition will be the reason why the Tories will stay in power, not due to voter apathy or voters taking their votes elsewhere.

Labour have had an open goal of Ronnie Rosenthal-esque proportions to take advantage of these past 18 months and they couldn't even hit the crossbar. Their shot was closer to the corner flag and they have become a complete irrelevance in politics.

[tyke1962]

There's a significant difference between compromise and selling out .

Selling out to gain power so the establishment can rubber stamp a Labour government doesn't work for me .

 " you've nowt to fear from us " well you better bloody well should if any Labour leader was worth his salt .

As far as the Labour Party is more than just Keith well that's not really how this is playing out is it right now is it .

If you aren't totally with Keith then you must be against him seems to be the current narrative so you are kicked out .

How can you compromise when compromise isn't on offer .

To support this requires me to sell out not compromise and that's a step too far for me .

Let's not forget Keith got the leadership because enough of the left voted for him .

This is treachery , that's  exactly what this is .

Treachery is non repairable in my book .

Get rid asap and Let's get behind someone we can all support with compromise back on the table .

[Filo]

There's a significant difference between compromise and selling out .

Selling out to gain power so the establishment can rubber stamp a Labour government doesn't work for me .

 " you've nowt to fear from us " well you better bloody well should if any Labour leader was worth his salt .

As far as the Labour Party is more than just Keith well that's not really how this is playing out is it right now is it .

If you aren't totally with Keith then you must be against him seems to be the current narrative so you are kicked out .

How can you compromise when compromise isn't on offer .

To support this requires me to sell out not compromise and that's a step too far for me .

Let's not forget Keith got the leadership because enough of the left voted for him .

This is treachery , that's  exactly what this is .

Treachery is non repairable in my book .

Get rid asap and Let's get behind someone we can all support with compromise back on the table .

Treachery is taking or not taking action in your case to enable another Tory Govt, something you claim you do not want, I don’t get why you refuse to see or accept that

[tyke1962]

There's a significant difference between compromise and selling out .

Selling out to gain power so the establishment can rubber stamp a Labour government doesn't work for me .

 " you've nowt to fear from us " well you better bloody well should if any Labour leader was worth his salt .

As far as the Labour Party is more than just Keith well that's not really how this is playing out is it right now is it .

If you aren't totally with Keith then you must be against him seems to be the current narrative so you are kicked out .

How can you compromise when compromise isn't on offer .

To support this requires me to sell out not compromise and that's a step too far for me .

Let's not forget Keith got the leadership because enough of the left voted for him .

This is treachery , that's  exactly what this is .

Treachery is non repairable in my book .

Get rid asap and Let's get behind someone we can all support with compromise back on the table .

Treachery is taking or not taking action in your case to enable another Tory Govt, something you claim you do not want, I don’t get why you refuse to see or accept that

It's fairly simple to see .

You believe the current Labour Party is  better than the Tories and I don't see enough evidence to suggest that's the case .

Or at least enough significant difference that allows me to support this current mob .

All I see is they are sacrificing their heart n soul on the alter of super capitalism for a whiff of power .

Show me some radical policies and the will to stand up and be counted and I'll walk the walk .

Until then .....................

[BillyStubbsTears]

You believe the current Labour Party is  better than the Tories and I don't see enough evidence to suggest that's the case .

Or at least enough significant difference that allows me to support this current mob .

The level of self indulgent bitterness that this statement implies is deeply depressing.

It reflects the idle "Red Tory" jibe from those on the Left who refused to vote Labour in 2010 and unleashed Cameron's Austerity.

[albie]

Good old Keith has reneged on the Labour commitment to public ownership of energy and utilities;
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/26/starmer-labour-would-not-nationalise-big-six-energy-firms
Open goal, and Keith knocks it out of the ground.

Incredible incompetence, or a strategy to merge Labour with the Tory narrative?
Existential crises for Labour now, Keith will kill Labour as a viable force before the next election.

Some think that is his aim!

[tyke1962]

You believe the current Labour Party is  better than the Tories and I don't see enough evidence to suggest that's the case .

Or at least enough significant difference that allows me to support this current mob .

The level of self indulgent bitterness that this statement implies is deeply depressing.

It reflects the idle "Red Tory" jibe from those on the Left who refused to vote Labour in 2010 and unleashed Cameron's Austerity.

Nowt to do with unregulated super capitalism on their watch then .

And still you attempt to blame the left .

Out of ideas in 2010 and nowt much has changed in 11 years .

Try owning it .

[drfchound]

A fuss about nothing.

[tyke1962]

Good old Keith has reneged on the Labour commitment to public ownership of energy and utilities;
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/26/starmer-labour-would-not-nationalise-big-six-energy-firms
Open goal, and Keith knocks it out of the ground.

Incredible incompetence, or a strategy to merge Labour with the Tory narrative?
Existential crises for Labour now, Keith will kill Labour as a viable force before the next election.

Some think that is his aim!

I understand even the right of the Labour Party hate his guts .

That centre ground has a bit of weight to bear .

Both the left and right are coming after him .

I'd sleep with one eye open if I was you Keith .