Labour Leadership 2016

It's hard to get behind, "let's just make sure them Tories don't get in" when essentially, "let's make some fucking money" involves fucking over the public in so many ways you can't include all of the opposition.

Which is a sad state of affairs when the country is fighting a seemingly never ending battle to stop itself becoming more and more right wing.

So, what you're saying here is, "death to Tories"?
I think I can get on board.

At the moment, I genuinely think if the Tory party just dissolved, instead of everyone whooping for joy there would just be a fucking fight over who's better at not being a massive cunt

This is where Proportional Representation would be a handy thing to have.

The mass deselection warning

Still looking for this quote.
This popped up on my facebook

I can't copy and paste from f.book on my mobile browser, but it looks like a spin off a quote on reselection due to boundary changes?

There's sometimes a lack of pragmatism in Leftism (and I say that as a Lefty) as clearly shown by Lexit... principles are nice, but if they result in a MORE right-wing UK, then why do you have them to begin with?

Q fighting about who is the holiest sometimes too. Of course every group has it's issue but as you say making money works damn well as a guidance.

realpolitik4lyf here obv.

Something which Corbyn et al enforced a whip against Caroline Lucas' electoral reform vote the other day.

The utter cunts.

really? A new kind of politics, but not that kind?

Yeah? Really?
FFS.

I think I'll go off and contemplate the futility of it all.

Really.

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/constitution/electoral-reform/news/77496/mps-reject-caroline-lucas-proportional

And specifically the Labour whip;

http://www.markpack.org.uk/142310/15-labour-mp-defy-party-whip-back-proportional-representation-house-commons/

Has Labour said why they imposed a whip on this?

John Harris @johnharris1969 The 15 Labour MPs who voted for
@CarolineLucas's Proportional Rep'n Bill. The whipped party line was
to abstain.

Why abstain? Could it be because they don't really want to change the status quo but don't want to be seen voting for the status quo?

Someone should ask Corbyn, like a decent journalist for instance.

My personal opinion, fwiw, is that if you're genuinely serious about a 'new way of politics' then electoral reform to a proportional representation system of some description is a must.

I'm not sure that the whip has any power over how the PLP votes right now. The reality is Labour's antipathy to electoral reform is based on the historical benefits FPTP has brought.

I was hugely disappointed there weren't more - from across the party - who were in support of it. There wasn't much press coverage, however, to answer questions as to why.

People should also ask their MPs (especially if Labour). Although I've been waiting weeks for a response from mine (John Cryer).

Yep.

There are some issues that can come from STV and so on, but I doubt it can be worse than FPTP and there's data from Northern Ireland to see how it pans out in the UK.

Further to deselection ^^^+

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/21/chief-whip-calms-reselection-fears-of-labour-mps-who-oppose-jeremy-corbyn

If the review comes into force before a general election is called, “there will be a full selection process with every constituency”, adding: “But the sitting MP will have an opportunity to put their name forward so there will be a full and open selection process for every constituency Labour party throughout the whole of the UK.”

Sparking a "OMG did he just threaten me" and so on...

yup

Ah, it's all MI5's fault
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/22/intelligence-services-using-dark-practices-against-jeremy-corbyn

Asked again if he believed that classified documents would eventually reveal the involvement of security forces in Corbyn’s leadership difficulties, McCluskey said: “Well I tell you what, anybody who thinks that that isn’t happening doesn’t live in the same world that I live in.

John's not as good as Stella when it comes to social media..

Enter your text here...

Email isn't social media.

I'm sorry, but you've set up a straw man and knocked it down again here.

No, I haven't. I'm merely saying that evidence of something like that there is much money involved or that Lansman is benefiting personally would be needed to give the article any substance. I'm not saying that neither of these are the case or that the possibility doesn't exist, just that there's no real information in the article.

A strawman argument would be something like 'the author says/seems to be saying that [insert strawman], but this is obviously nonsense because [rebuttal of strawman]'.

Because to have any hope of removing Corbyn there has to be only one candidate, otherwise the vote will be split.

Which is presumably why some people then also want the party to split in the event of a Corbyn victory, as it would give both parties the new party the old party either party a better chance of winning against the Tories in the next election, whenever it comes?

Sound logic.

There would be little benefit for Labour to vote for PR. It would a boon to UKIP though, and previously the BNP, who you'll remember used to have a place at the London assembly.

but the article wasn't really about Lansman personally gaining, it was about the lack of transparency, decision making etc. I also think the article was limited and just raised some questions I expect to be easily answered.

You have tho attempted to make it about the amount of money or Lansman personally gaining then suggested without these the article has no substance. Which is a strawman as the original article wasn't about that.