mathperson
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#1
I'm 30 years old, so I've lived through and can remember the reign of a Labour Party.
Like you, I've also lived through the reign of a Conservative Party.

I didn't vote for either at the general election.

My question is what has the Labour Party become?

The Labour Party isn't 'just' a political movement these days.
It is the bellwether of champagne socialists and hordes of screeching vegetarians and bat **** crazy teenagers rallying around an ill-defined idea of a brighter future, who can't handle the thought of somebody with a different opinion to themselves.

That's why the Labour Party lost more seats than the Titanic at the general election; because what people associate with the Labour Party is not a group of people able to lead a country, but a group of ultra-PC, sexually confused vegetarian snowflakes whose aim in life is a career at the BBC.
3
reply
rimstone
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 month ago
#2
how about people vote for policy rather than the ideas of who they think supports that party .......
Sadly most the populace is too dim-witted for that
1
reply
Rock Fan
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#3
Report 1 month ago
#3
I will tell you what the Labour Party are....


A laughing stock
2
reply
mathperson
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#4
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#4
(Original post by rimstone)
how about people vote for policy rather than the ideas of who they think supports that party .......
Sadly most the populace is too dim-witted for that
That would be a good idea in principle, but people aren't too dim-witted to actually believe that politicians will implement what they say in their manifestos.
0
reply
NotNotBatman
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#5
Report 1 month ago
#5
(Original post by mathperson)
who can't handle the thought of somebody with a different opinion to themselves.
-_-
0
reply
rimstone
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#6
Report 1 month ago
#6
(Original post by mathperson)
That would be a good idea in principle, but people aren't too dim-witted to actually believe that politicians will implement what they say in their manifestos.
then you look at the voting records and what they've managed to do in their time at office, to see if they just chatters ... I mean people knew that 80 years ago ....

5 more years of austerity is what these idiots voted for; while living off book banks and geting £50-£400 a week .....i hope they enjoy it., all for brexit .( which probably isnt gonna get the mussies or poles out like most of em want )
Last edited by rimstone; 1 month ago
0
reply
londonmyst
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#7
Report 1 month ago
#7
I reluctantly voted for the PM, have never voted for Labour and probably never will.
I think that you are being a bit harsh and too enthusiastic with the scornful stereotypes.
It is rather disingenuous to describe all of the Labour Party's current support base as loud vegetarians, champagne socialists and crazy young pc snowflakes.

I believe that the Labour Party are going through a similar electoral time in the wilderness to that endured by the Conservative Party during the leadership eras of Hague-Duncan Smith-Howard.
Poor leadership, core policies that attract little enthusiasm outside their own support base and a failure to recognise their own internal failings before it is too late.
Arguably this began under Gordon Brown, has continued under Ed Miliband and Jeremy Corbyn.
It was a similar situation during the Margaret Thatcher premiership years.
Last edited by londonmyst; 1 month ago
0
reply
mathperson
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#8
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#8
(Original post by londonmyst)
I reluctantly voted for the PM, have never voted for Labour and probably never will.
I think that you are being a bit harsh and too enthusiastic with the scornful stereotypes.
It is rather disingenuous to describe all of the Labour Party's current support base as loud vegetarians, champagne socialists and crazy young pc snowflakes.

I believe that the Labour Party are going through a similar electoral time in the wilderness to that endured by the Conservative Party during the leadership eras of Hague-Duncan Smith-Howard.
Poor leadership, core policies that attract little enthusiasm outside their own support base and a failure to recognise their own internal failings before it is too late.
Arguably this began under Gordon Brown, has continued under Ed Miliband and Jeremy Corbyn.
It was a similar situation during the Margaret Thatcher premiership years.
No no no, that's far too simplistic an explanation.

The real problem with the Labour Party can be seen on university campuses up and down the country.
It's the small-faced, fluorescent haired teenagers who claim moral superiority to everybody who disagrees with them that's the problem.
0
reply
DrivinRain
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#9
Report 1 month ago
#9
30 years old and this is how you talk? Have you learned no critical thinking skills at all?
I guess wisdom doesn't always come with age.
0
reply
mathperson
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#10
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#10
(Original post by DrivinRain)
30 years old and this is how you talk? Have you learned no critical thinking skills at all?
I guess wisdom doesn't always come with age.
I agree...I mean, how can you have wisdom and vote for something other than the Labour Party, right?
0
reply
Ambitious1999
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#11
Report 1 month ago
#11
(Original post by mathperson)
I'm 30 years old, so I've lived through and can remember the reign of a Labour Party.
Like you, I've also lived through the reign of a Conservative Party.

I didn't vote for either at the general election.

My question is what has the Labour Party become?

The Labour Party isn't 'just' a political movement these days.
It is the bellwether of champagne socialists and hordes of screeching vegetarians and bat **** crazy teenagers rallying around an ill-defined idea of a brighter future, who can't handle the thought of somebody with a different opinion to themselves.

That's why the Labour Party lost more seats than the Titanic at the general election; because what people associate with the Labour Party is not a group of people able to lead a country, but a group of ultra-PC, sexually confused vegetarian snowflakes whose aim in life is a career at the BBC.
(Original post by londonmyst)
I reluctantly voted for the PM, have never voted for Labour and probably never will.
I think that you are being a bit harsh and too enthusiastic with the scornful stereotypes.
It is rather disingenuous to describe all of the Labour Party's current support base as loud vegetarians, champagne socialists and crazy young pc snowflakes.

I believe that the Labour Party are going through a similar electoral time in the wilderness to that endured by the Conservative Party during the leadership eras of Hague-Duncan Smith-Howard.
Poor leadership, core policies that attract little enthusiasm outside their own support base and a failure to recognise their own internal failings before it is too late.
Arguably this began under Gordon Brown, has continued under Ed Miliband and Jeremy Corbyn.
It was a similar situation during the Margaret Thatcher premiership years.
After 10 of pure misery cuts and austerity you would think people would want change. A party can govern for too long and the tories well and truly fit that description so with that It’s totally devastating and unbelievable that labour not only failed to win but lost disastrously.

It once again comes down to Corbyn and his intention to bring labour back to grass roots and believe that nostalgia is some how more important for labour that winning elections.
Because of Corbyn putting victory second place over grass roots nostalgia he has condemned hundreds of thousands to 5 more years of pure misery.
People on benefits including the sick & disabled who fear having their money stopped each and every day. People being sanctioned, the homeless, etc. No thanks to Corbyn these people have 5 more years of pure Tory hell.

People want a Labour Party that appeals to the many not the few but instead they got a Labour Party that appeals to Corbyn and his few and NOT the many.
People don’t want grass roots nostalgia that failed in the early 1980s with Foot and failed this time.
In my opinion Labour needs to live in the real world and that starts with getting rid of Corbyn and his momentum crap.
0
reply
londonmyst
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#12
Report 1 month ago
#12
(Original post by Ambitious1999)
People want a Labour Party that appeals to the many not the few but instead they got a Labour Party that appeals to Corbyn and his few and NOT the many.
People don’t want grass roots nostalgia that failed in the early 1980s with Foot and failed this time.
In my opinion Labour needs to live in the real world and that starts with getting rid of Corbyn and his momentum crap.
Do you think that to improve its fortune Labour needs to shift its position away from the traditional trade unionism and socialism of the 70s?
More focused on the centre ground and friendlier towards businesses like the Blair era.
0
reply
adam271
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#13
Report 1 month ago
#13
We need to return to the blair based centre poltics.
But the loonies control the Asylum so I do not think it will happen.
1
reply
londonmyst
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#14
Report 1 month ago
#14
(Original post by adam271)
We need to return to the blair based centre poltics.
But the loonies control the Asylum so I do not think it will happen.
Did you hear Stephen Kinnock on the television this morning?
If he's a reflection of how the majority of re-elected Labour MPs are feeling, Corbyn and his closest advisers may swiftly come to the conclusion that Labour HQs is likely to constitute something of a hostile environment for the foreseeable future.
Doubt Milne and Landsman will stick around if they have any sense.
0
reply
adam271
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#15
Report 1 month ago
#15
(Original post by londonmyst)
Did you hear Stephen Kinnock on the television this morning?
If he's a reflection of how the majority of re-elected Labour MPs are feeling, Corbyn and his closest advisers may swiftly come to the conclusion that Labour HQs is likely to constitute something of a hostile environment for the foreseeable future.
Doubt Milne and Landsman will stick around if they have any sense.
Doesn't matter. The MPs have no control over who gets elected. Chances are another far left person will take over.
0
reply
londonmyst
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#16
Report 1 month ago
#16
(Original post by adam271)
Doesn't matter. The MPs have no control over who gets elected. Chances are another far left person will take over.
Don't all leadership candidates need to have a minimum number of Labour MPs willing to sign their nomination papers before they can even stand for Labour leadership?
0
reply
adam271
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#17
Report 1 month ago
#17
(Original post by londonmyst)
Don't all leadership candidates need to have a minimum number of Labour MPs willing to sign their nomination papers before they can even stand for Labour leadership?
Yep. But its not a lot. Something like 20 mps.
So it only takes 20 far left labour MPs to get another Corbyn on the ballot paper.
0
reply
mathperson
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#18
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#18
Here's an idea, how about political parties conduct research on what people want, then set out a plan to deliver it, rather than try to make people swallow a jumped up version of their own agenda.
0
reply
LawrieH
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#19
Report 1 month ago
#19
(Original post by mathperson)
I'm 30 years old, so I've lived through and can remember the reign of a Labour Party.
Like you, I've also lived through the reign of a Conservative Party.

I didn't vote for either at the general election.

My question is what has the Labour Party become?

The Labour Party isn't 'just' a political movement these days.
It is the bellwether of champagne socialists and hordes of screeching vegetarians and bat **** crazy teenagers rallying around an ill-defined idea of a brighter future, who can't handle the thought of somebody with a different opinion to themselves.

That's why the Labour Party lost more seats than the Titanic at the general election; because what people associate with the Labour Party is not a group of people able to lead a country, but a group of ultra-PC, sexually confused vegetarian snowflakes whose aim in life is a career at the BBC.
It's very ironic that you just criticised Labour voters by saying they "can't handle the thought of somebody with a different opinion to themselves" and then you go on and insult them in a multitude of ways. Over 10 million people voted for Labour this election, and if you think there are 10 million "ultra-PC, sexually confused vegetarian snowflakes" in this country then you're wrong and just proving you yourself cannot handle the thought of somebody with a different opinion to you.

There are many reasons why people voted Labour. They might have voted Labour because of moral reasons - they're the party with the strongest and most credible policies on climate change, they want to help tackle the homelessness crisis, they want to introduce many new policies to help animal welfare, etc etc. They also might have voted Labour for self-interest - for Labour's promise of a £10 minimum wage, a reduction in train fares and water bills, for a 5% public sector pay rise. They might have voted Labour tactically because they hate the Conservatives and Labour were best suited to beating the Tories in their constituency. It is not polite for you to generalise voters of one party in the way you have, these are all reasons why people who aren't "bat **** crazy teenagers" nor "champagne socialists" nor "sexually confused vegetarian snowflakes" might have voted Labour. I wish people today could accept that others have different views to them without insulting and generalising them.

As for your claim that this generalisation is the reason why Labour lost so many seats, this simply isn't true. Polls of voters who changed their minds at this election sighted Corbyn as a person as their biggest reason, followed by Labour's Brexit policy, then Labour's economic policy. If you think your generalisations of Labour supporters are true now, then surely you thought they were in 2017 too, where Labour actually gained seats and prevented a Tory majority - surely this shows that it is new and different reasons which caused the 2019 failure. In 2017, Labour did not support a people's vote, their manifesto promised half the amount of spending to their 2019 one, and Corbyn had not had years of vilification from the media. The membership and voter base of Labour, however, was broadly similar though, minus many Northern Leave voters.
Last edited by LawrieH; 1 month ago
0
reply
mathperson
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#20
Report Thread starter 4 weeks ago
#20
(Original post by LawrieH)
It's very ironic that you just criticised Labour voters by saying they "can't handle the thought of somebody with a different opinion to themselves" and then you go on and insult them in a multitude of ways. Over 10 million people voted for Labour this election, and if you think there are 10 million "ultra-PC, sexually confused vegetarian snowflakes" in this country then you're wrong and just proving you yourself cannot handle the thought of somebody with a different opinion to you.

There are many reasons why people voted Labour. They might have voted Labour because of moral reasons - they're the party with the strongest and most credible policies on climate change, they want to help tackle the homelessness crisis, they want to introduce many new policies to help animal welfare, etc etc. They also might have voted Labour for self-interest - for Labour's promise of a £10 minimum wage, a reduction in train fares and water bills, for a 5% public sector pay rise. They might have voted Labour tactically because they hate the Conservatives and Labour were best suited to beating the Tories in their constituency. It is not polite for you to generalise voters of one party in the way you have, these are all reasons why people who aren't "bat **** crazy teenagers" nor "champagne socialists" nor "sexually confused vegetarian snowflakes" might have voted Labour. I wish people today could accept that others have different views to them without insulting and generalising them.

As for your claim that this generalisation is the reason why Labour lost so many seats, this simply isn't true. Polls of voters who changed their minds at this election sighted Corbyn as a person as their biggest reason, followed by Labour's Brexit policy, then Labour's economic policy. If you think your generalisations of Labour supporters are true now, then surely you thought they were in 2017 too, where Labour actually gained seats and prevented a Tory majority - surely this shows that it is new and different reasons which caused the 2019 failure. In 2017, Labour did not support a people's vote, their manifesto promised half the amount of spending to their 2019 one, and Corbyn had not had years of vilification from the media. The membership and voter base of Labour, however, was broadly similar though, minus many Northern Leave voters.
Your views are far too simplistic.
The real reason that Labour lost is because people are fed up with small-faced, fluorescent haired 19 year olds telling other people that they're disgusting/stupid/idiotic because they voted for somebody that they themselves don't support.


No arguments please, you know I'm right
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

- Have you considered distance learning for any of your qualifications?

Yes! I'm on a distance learning course right now (12)
7.79%
Yes, I've thought about it but haven't signed up yet (17)
11.04%
No, but maybe I will look into it (45)
29.22%
No and I wouldn't consider it (80)
51.95%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise