Jeremy Corbyn

Leo

Well-known member
but if people don't want to vote for someone, they shouldn't be chastised for it

if Dems/Labour wanna win they should have better candidates and run better campaigns

easier said than done, but that's politics. and life.

not advocating people be chastised, stating the choice at hand for splintered voting blocks: at the moment of truth, either set differences aside and coalesce as a way to potentially get some or maybe even most of what you want, or remain unmoved and probably get none of it. to be clear, that's not a starting point, it's an end point, once a debate or campaign has played out and it's become clear which side has advanced.

there are also cases where people who take the my-way-or-the-highway approach aren't directly affected by the bad shit that can come as a result of a GOP/Tory administration, they have the luxury of not having to compromise because it ultimately won't impact their lives. they'll still be able to afford quality healthcare come what may, so they don't feel compelled to put differences aside and do what it takes in the homestretch to defeat a GOP legislature that's trying to eliminate Obamacare/coverage of pre-existing conditions, etc. some call it "coming from a place of privilege", a notion I know you're a big fan of. /s

sure, dems/labour should run better candidates/campaigns. my point is in cases where they don't, some compromises among voters once the process has played out can result in a not-ideal-but-best-possible outcome.
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
it's an end point
yeah I mean, I understood you. it's not a complicated point.

it's politics, of course people are going to have to make decisions about what to compromise on

I disagree about the degree to which voters should be expected to suck it up and support/vote for candidates they don't want to support

the blaming (chastisement) of voters is implicit in placing the onus on them for not compromising enough

there's no single right answer, it's a matter of belief

pawning it off on affluence is an unequivocally bad look, though
 

Leo

Well-known member
I disagree about the degree to which voters should be expected to suck it up and support/vote for candidates they don't want to support

pawning it off on affluence is an unequivocally bad look, though

like I said, the GOP has a track record of expecting that to happen and it often does, to the party's benefit. I'm just referring to the choice and consequences. some people don't consider or care about the ramifications. if someone was a genuine Jill stein fan, then more power to 'em for voting for her in 2016. but anyone in, say, Wisconsin or Michigan who cast a protest vote for her last time clearly didn't consider or care about the ramifications.

And i said there are also cases where affluence is a factor, didn't think I needed to spell out further that it's not all or even a majority. I'm surely not the only one who's experienced it in conversations or social posting.
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
anyone in, say, Wisconsin or Michigan who cast a protest vote for her last time clearly didn't consider or care about the ramifications
but you don't know that. you're just assuming. that's the point.

it's possible to know and care about things and still make a decision not to compromise.

the whole point of voting is individual agency (limited tho it may be). you don't get to tell people they were wrong. no one does.
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
I'm not denying that sometimes people vote against their own interests, or communal interests. of course they do.

but you think at the ultimate moment of truth voters are obligated to compromise. I don't think they are.
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
that the right is usually more cohesive than the left I wouldn't deny. that's true anywhere. there are plenty of reasons for it.

it's easier to coalesce around the anger and fear than hope and empathy. the right is less concerned (or not concerned) with the ethics of power. etc.

it's not like that's going to change

especially here as the GOP is so completely tied to the wrong side of demographics, its base will only become more cohesive
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leo

Leo

Well-known member
sorry I'm not being clear, we're more in agreement than it seems. except I never said voters are obligated to compromise. I said at the end of a race. compromising or not compromising at the ballot box can have profound ramifications in some elections.
 

luka

Well-known member
Still blows my mind people didnt support this guy. greatest englishman of all time including king arthur. he will come back to rule us in our time of need. people dont trust what they see anymore.
 

subvert47

I don't fight, I run away
I was filling in a party poll yesterday and one of the questions was pick your top three members of the Shadow Cabinet. So I went through the entire list and... fuck. I hadn't realized quite how much Starmer had sidelined the left. There are a few leftish people in marginal positions, but the rest is absolutely chock full of centrist careerist change nothing arseholes. We really are heading back to New fucking Labour. And not even Tony Blair's New Labour. This is New Labour with fucking Jack Straw as leader. Just fuck the membership, eh Keir. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
 

DannyL

Wild Horses
Who would you like to see in there, out of current crop of MPs? Honest question.
(fwiw I don't think he's as a right wing as Blair, look at what he's done on his career. V different trajectory. YMMV.)
 

subvert47

I don't fight, I run away
Who would you like to see in there, out of current crop of MPs? Honest question.

Hmmm... a few names (in alphabetical order):

Richard Burgon
Dawn Butler
Barry Gardiner
Clive Lewis
Rebecca Long-Bailey – who should never have been sacked
Nadia Whittome – as soon as she's ready for a bigger job
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
Whatever you think of RLB and the article she shared, Starmer sacked her after she was asked to delete the tweet and refused. He can't very well promise zero tolerance on antisemitism and then behave in a way that could be seen as tolerant of antisemitism.
 

DannyL

Wild Horses
Don't really know Whittmore. I like some of the stuff Lewis has said. Burgon seems to me not the full loaf but I'm sure to some degree this is a product of reading social media that's biased against him, rather than for him.
 

subvert47

I don't fight, I run away
You'd need a heart of stone not to laugh at this:

It's a politician saying they're going to win an election. You could make thousands upon thousands of videos like that. And a video of David Steel would top them all. Just thinking about that one still makes me chuckle 😁
 
Top