If we had a labour government.

Of course it is.

It's not RV's fault that you don't like the answer.

 

Is it not?

Perhaps I don't understand the question. "Would we be better off under a labour government?". No, I'm pretty sure I answered that.

Also, how can you say you agree when a few posts up you say that we'd be in a worse position? Again, maybe this level of conversation is beyond me...

 

He does it every single time

 

Well that was the case before @Duntpasstome did his trademark thing of editing a poll after he created it to protect his mates

 

Out of interest, in terms of 'strong' opposition, what are you expecting to see?

 

Any of these chaps voting "worse" fancy elaborating?

You've all looked at the likes of Johnson, Patel, Gove, Dorries, Rees-Mogg and their attempts to grind the normal person into the dirt and gone "yep, we'd be worse off with a Labour govt". Why?

 

I think there's a certain element of what's been described as "footballification", ie "the blues are my team and no other team could do better".

 

I think you're probably right, certainly in more rural areas where you'd probably be seen as poor or of a lower class if not voting Tory.

The "no one could do better" argument just tells you everything you need to know about the low bar that person has set for themselves and for society. Apathy will keep these fkers in for years.

 

On the main points of the poll I'd be interested to hear from Corbyn fans on what you'd imagine he'd do on Brexit, Covid and Russia.

As I understand it the draw of Corbyn is that he is principled and he sticks to these strong beliefs on domestic policy. This is to be admired to a large extent however some flexibility is often needed to lead. However nuanced foreign policy and things like covid weren't exactly within Corbyn's wheelhouse.

I voted for Corbyn as I thought we needed a fundamemtal change socially within the UK and needed someone to undo a decade of Tory policy making the poor and vulnerable worse off. However on these three topics I don't think he'd have performed well at all.

Brexit: He was at best uninterested in Brexit and at worst pro-Brexit. The EU and it's regulations get in the way of radically changing a country as Corbyn wanted to do. I felt he was incredibly naive on this and especially didn't understand the economic benefits of the EU.

Covid: He is a big believer in personal freedoms, so imagine he would have been slow to lockdown as Boris was leading to the UK having the highest death rate per capita in Europe in 2020 and early 2021. Not sure his front bench would have had the economic nous to buy up vaccines as well as the Tories either. His brother would have been a national embarrassment.

Russia: Well he's anti-NATO, so a Russian dream from that standpoint. Nuclear deterents are one of the few reasons Putin hasn't attacked anywhere other than the Crimea yet. Corbyn was also against these.

Obviously there would also be upsides to Corbyn, especially on domestic issues and 'levelling up'. But he may have struggled on these big ticket issues.

Be interested to hear a Corbyn fans take on these topics?

 

I'm interested why people think things would be worse under a Labour government. Probably at the same time, I'm interested to understand what views those people hold of the current position? Is it deemed positive?

I'm not a fan of Starmer. But it would be the biggest no brainer to shoo him in instead of dePfeffel. I'd have Ed Davey as PM ahead of dePfeffel. Apart from the fascist parties, I'd have anybody in there instead of dePfeffel.

But I also understand (though I can't get my head to work that way) that some people like him. Some people like that he mocks women, muslims, poor people, liverpudlians etc. Some people like his infidelity. Some people like that he acts like an idiot and spouts nonsense in sometimes theatrical manner. Some people even like that he lies. They don't mind he's wasted billions of pounds. Or directed billions to donors and cronies. Or that he's overridden ethics and standards protocols to protect his sycophants who broke ministerial codes and should have been sacked (and under literally any other leader would have been). Some don't mind he broke the law himself. Or has suppressed information. Or misrepresented it. Or blatantly lied about information, from hospitals being built, to NHS funding, to borders, to police recruited, to crime figures. Some people don't mind how he's funding his lifestyle or who has made deals with. Some people don't mind any of that.

And there's so much more.

But some people don't mind that. And what's more, they think that a different MP, particularly of a different party... would be even worse.

 

I'm going to hazard a guess and say that you won't get a single coherent answer to that... If anyone answers at all.

 

On the Russia issue - Corbyn was a frontrunner in the GFA. The end of the Troubles was because of he and Mowlam.

 

People don’t like reality and real people. It’s hard work.

People like fantasy. They like heroic, mythical, swashbuckling figures, entertaining rogues, who bring freedom, slay the evil baddies for you, promise riches beyond belief. Why choose a boring politician when you’ve got someone like that? Even as painful reality bites and life crumbles around them, those people will cling harder to their fantasy hero. Because the dream has to come true.

 

Whilst I appreciate where you are coming from and the work Corbyn and especially Mowlam did then. I am Irish and the end of the Troubles cannot simply be attributed to 2 British MP's.

 

One that stops posturing and has the ability to tear the current incumbents apart. One I can identify with. One that is radically different to the clowns in power today. One that doesn't endorse further restrictions.

 

I don't know what you envisage as tearing incumbents apart. The incumbents have been shown to lie, deceive, deflect, evade and obfuscate by Starmer repeatedly. It's just the incumbent is a shameless liar propped up by sycophants who wouldn't get a cabinet position under anyone else, so pretend to show loyalty, shielding their true purpose of self preservation. They also have a big majority so an opposition has little at their disposal to apply significant pressure.

He's neither a Bryant, a Cooper, a Brown or a Blair. But he's done enough just about every week to show himself superior to the incumbent.

The only ones in a position to land a knockout punch are the Met Police, aided by the tory backbenchers.

 

I think the stance that Corbyn employs regarding actually talking to people before bombing the **** out of them has proved to be effective & would save lives. I don't think he ever wanted or expected to be the leader, but the way he's been villified by the media suggests he would have radically shaken this country up, to see the youth engaging in politics like they did also suggests that a charasmatic leader is required for Labour to even challenge these tw@ts, that aint Starmer.

 

Hes consistently and eloquently torn the PM apart over the last few months on just about every issue.

He is radically different to the clowns in power now. Yes, hes a Sir. But he earned that title because of his work rather than his upbringing or what school he went to. He was born into a working class parents (His Mum a Nurse and his Dad a tool maker). Both his parents were labour party members. He went onto Uni in Leeds and studied Law before graduating and moving on to Oxford. This should be celebrated rather than classed as one of the elite, he isn't, wasn't and has worked hard to get his title and the position he holds from modest beginnings.

I would concede that in terms of more restrictions it may feel like he would have, I think he battled for restrictions sooner, which this government did later, which meant deeper restrictions. I think maybe the last time when we came out of restrictions Labour didn't think it was the correct time, but lots of this is hindsight and guessing. For what its worth, I think the government completely screwed COVID, but their inadequacy at certain times have meant we have got to the end sooner, even though in the earlier stages they caused many needless deaths prior to the vaccine roll out.

 

He just makes me cringe if I'm being totally honest. Some people have it and some people don't. For me, Starmer is not the answer.