Mailwatch(ed) Forum

More from the people who pulled an unfunded £58bn out of their arse in the general election campaign to bribe people who were never voting for them anyway.

The difference between McDonnell and Old Keir isn't that the latter is a rightwing sell out. It's that the latter can read a chart showing distributional effects. When you've got McDonnell in charge, you knock up populism that ends up being less progressive than Tim Farron on tax and spend (other McDonnell stuff on unions is good).

If Sunak gives a rise of, say, 5% instead of 8%, that's not a particularly painful "cut". He'll happily bank that one as "I take tough decisions, me".

Jess Barnard accusing the party of trying to silence her and Young Labour

That still delivers a message.

Couldn’t think why a leadership team that you have been working in opposition to since day one wouldn’t want to talk to you?

https://labourlist.org/2020/11/young-la ... st-one/Saw this by Jess Barnard. Mostly standard "we're socialist and young" stuff. This caught my eye though.

The Democratic Socialists of America over in the US showed what can be achieved when grassroots activism is taken seriously, with 26 out of the 30 candidates they endorsed elected to national office. They won with boots on the ground and because they took a clear, transformative stance on the biggest issues. They didn’t rely on their opponent’s incompetence or pander to the right-wing press.

I follow US politics a fair bit, and I thought that sounded a lot. National office? Lots of what we understand as national offices are appointed by the President, not elected at all. So do they mean people in the Senate and House?

I can only find 4 members in Congress. What does endorse actually mean? They liked the look of some people who were running anyway with broad enough support to win the Democratic Primary, many of them likely in safe districts?

The Democratic Socialists of America over in the US...

Erm... Where else are the Democratic Socialists of America likely to be, if not in the US?

She's had a spat with Oliver Kamm, who in my view took "From the River to the Sea" too literally, But equally, people who reject a two state solution for Israel-Palestine, as Young Labour seem to have done, are going to have to be honest that the implications of this may not be entirely peaceful. Why would the leadership spend its time on defending this?

And where's the libel? I take her point about how this sort of stuff could really affect a young person. But in my view, that's why they need to be kept at greater distance from high profile political arguments.

Mary Foy is supporting Young Labour v Kamm. How many other MPs are?

Put here as he was a Labour MP:

MPs told to smarten up their clothing ahead of Commons return

Glad to see you've got your priorities right, Hoyle - I mean, dealing with a Prime Minister that perpetually lies to the House is irrelevant, isn't it...?

Cyclist wrote: ↑Sat Sep 04, 2021 7:19 pm

The Democratic Socialists of America over in the US...

Erm... Where else are the Democratic Socialists of America likely to be, if not in the US?

As someone with a Brazilian Partner, there is a central and southern America

There are also Canada and Greenland which are in *checks Atlas* North America!

Yebbut Brazilians, Mexicans, Canadians, Nicaraguans and the like don't usually refer to themselves as Americans. The USAnians do. All the time.

That bloody Monroe doctrine, eh?

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Sat Sep 04, 2021 6:47 pm https://labourlist.org/2020/11/young-la ... st-one/Saw this by Jess Barnard. Mostly standard "we're socialist and young" stuff. This caught my eye though.

The Democratic Socialists of America over in the US showed what can be achieved when grassroots activism is taken seriously, with 26 out of the 30 candidates they endorsed elected to national office. They won with boots on the ground and because they took a clear, transformative stance on the biggest issues. They didn’t rely on their opponent’s incompetence or pander to the right-wing press.

I follow US politics a fair bit, and I thought that sounded a lot. National office? Lots of what we understand as national offices are appointed by the President, not elected at all. So do they mean people in the Senate and House?

I can only find 4 members in Congress. What does endorse actually mean? They liked the look of some people who were running anyway with broad enough support to win the Democratic Primary, many of them likely in safe districts?

Most of the Squad are based in safe districts that the Democrats usually win anyway.

Yeah, winning safe districts v Republicans doesn't really mean that much. Talib won her district in Detroit very handily, though underperforming Biden a bit (John Conyers previously underperformed Clinton and Obama, so maybe not remarkable) In fairness to her though, she won a very competitive primary when she first fought the seat in 2018 and easily won the one in 2020.

I'll take this, but sadly probably an outlier in putting Labour close and the Greens high. Lib Dems not great, but they might swing the odd Cheltenham into their column.

Just a thought.

Ed Miliband is getting a bit of rehabilitation these days. It isn't deserved. He is one of the major causes of the party's decline, from trashing the record of the party under Blair and Brown to introducing the ludicrous leadership election arrangements. You can blame him for the infighting and Corbyn, for encouraging the anti-New Labour tossers, for the failure of the party to move on. If anyone should be expelled in disgrace it is him, not rehabilitated as a good chap.

Malcolm Armsteen wrote: ↑Tue Sep 07, 2021 9:05 am Just a thought.

Ed Miliband is getting a bit of rehabilitation these days. It isn't deserved. He is one of the major causes of the party's decline, from trashing the record of the party under Blair and Brown to introducing the ludicrous leadership election arrangements. You can blame him for the infighting and Corbyn, for encouraging the anti-New Labour tossers, for the failure of the party to move on. If anyone should be expelled in disgrace it is him, not rehabilitated as a good chap.

You’re right, I’m afraid. I say so with regret because I like Miliband, E. quite a lot, and indeed put him second on my ballot paper for the leadership election in 2010 (Ed Balls got my first preference). I was slightly persuaded that there was a sort of, kind of, need to move the party slightly leftwards from the New Labour days. But I was wrong.

Abernathy wrote: I was slightly persuaded that there was a sort of, kind of, need to move the party slightly leftwards from the New Labour days. But I was wrong.

I wouldn't say you were wrong Abers. There may well have been a need to move slightly leftwards, and it may well have turned out to be a success, but we'll never know now. Instead of moving slightly leftwards under Balls or Milliband, what we got was full-on SWP from Allotment Jesus - and *THAT* was never going to be acceptable to the electorate.

New Labour with continued Keynsian spending would have worked. Milliband came up with bits of populism and austerity.