Well we will have to disagree on the power bit but surely you wouldn’t disagree that either of those two as leader would have embraced wholeheartedly the Remain campaign and that would have swung it the other way.
The problem though is that it would require a united opposition. Sadly, the opposition is in greater turmoil than an advanced driving instructor on a BMW driving day.
As for Burnham, he’s labour’s only current chance. Starmer’s just a shit David Cameron. As for Milliband, that boat’s sailed way over the edge.
I disagree. I think Starmer is much smarter and principled than Cameron. The situation Starmer finds himself in is also much more challenging than that faced by Cameron when he was leading the Conservatives. No doubt Starmer has made some errors, but much of the criticism is unwarranted.
2 Likes
Bingo, a lot of the old working class are sadly very right wing about immigration.
My dad is an old headteacher in his 60s now voted Labour all his life… yet he nearly voted Brexit and me and him regularly have arguments about his views in immigration. I’d say he’s borderline racist, he won’t see it that way, but that’s his “era”… I’d expect similar views in their millions around the country.
The old man is a very clever chap, knows more about history and some subjects than I will never know… yet on certain topics he has right wing views, which are getting louder
Reads the Daily Mail as well.
Corbyn did campaign for remain. What he didn’t do was join Cameron’s remain campaign, which I think was a sensible decision given sharing a platform with Victorian Moon Face on the Scottish Ref totalled fucked his predecessor and probably lost the Labour Party 40 odd Scottish seats.
He’s lead the opposition backwards against a government that’s (in many people’s eyes) killed hundreds of thousands of people due to gross negligence and mismanagement. The criticism is not just warranted, is expected and demanded. Pretty much what the opposition MUST do.
I think I missed the point where Corbyn campaigned to remain? That was the stance on which BREXIT could have been decided by an election. As we discussed at length. He missed the best opportunity Labour will have in decades to win a GE. Starmer now following his lead in failing to kick the ball into open goals.
Is Ronny Rosenthal Labour’s main strategist?
He campaigned for remain about 12 months too late. Ultimate fence sitter and got what he deserved, which is to have his pants pulled down.
2 Likes
He “campaigned” for remain in the run up to the EU referendum. When was he supposed to have begun campaigning for remain? Before Cameron’s negotiations with the EU and before there was even a referendum? 
It’s true that his campaigning for Remain was pathetic in its lack of visibility and enthusiasm. For the leader of one of the two largest parties in the UK he made a risible number of public addresses in support of the remain campaign.
Engagement with the “democratic” process has been falling pretty much for the last 50 years. To a point where about a third of people do not vote at General Elections. This trend will doubtlessly continue as politics becomes more and more removed from the average person. Burnham is correct when he calls for greater decentralisation, which may offer a path to increased public engagement.
As I have banged on about before - “None of the Above” needs to be included on the ballot paper. This would allow for a political viewpoint to be expressed, would send a message to the parties to be more representative of their constituents and again hopefully re-engage those who feel abandoned by the current political system.
Drawing a set of cock and balls on your ballot paper may express your dissatisfaction but at present it is counted as a spoiled vote. “Spoiled votes” have the same weight in the public perception as an old lady putting too many crosses on her voting slip.
Yes, you’ve repeatedly suggested UK voters vote “none of the above” despite being repeatedly informed that isn’t currently an option in UK elections.
You’ve also previously said that alternatively you can spoil your ballot “they are counted and they do matter” but now say that doing so has “the same weight in the public perception as an old lady putting too many crosses on her voting slip”.
Any other pearls of wisdom for us?
You misunderstand or deliberately misinterpret. -
Spoiling your vote, at present, is the only option to express a certain political viewpoint. They are counted and at present it is the only way to express that viewpoint.
None of the above as a formalised option - which you rightly suggest in a previous post would express that viewpoint far more effectively.
The perception of spoilt votes is not the same as deliberately voting for None of the Above. And that is an important difference.
For instance
Conservatives 24,000
Labour 10,000
None of The Above 3,000
Is a lot more representative of public feeling than publishing say - “spoiled votes 225”.
You obviously dont like the idea then???
It is compolsury in Aus to vote, and the number of spoiled ballots is amazing.
I personally think if you make voting compolsury, you need to include the option for none of the candidates - make the politicians actually earn the votes.
4 Likes
Given the typically forthright Aussie manner, you’d have thought there’d be a box for “They’re all fucking useless” on the ballot paper.
3 Likes
I remember years back in a GC council election, the candidates for mayor were all so bad, Donald Duck ended up getting over 40% of the votes.
2 Likes
Don’t confuse ‘didn’t campaign’ with ‘media ignored him’.
His number of appearances was pathetic.
Number? Well, maybe that too 
Well done Bangor!