hey yo what do the acronyms in red boxes mean: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CtI795mXYAAFEK3.jpg:large
Looks like the young people (18-24) have been shafted again.
Quote from: Pingu on September 25, 2016, 06:52:58 AMLooks like the young people (18-24) have been shafted again.Quote from: the idea of Harambe on September 25, 2016, 06:53:53 AMalso scotlandNot necessarily, no. That poll was of party members only; registered and affiliated supporters weren't included.
Yeah, one of the arguments the No campaign made was that staying in the Union was our best bet to make sure we stayed in the EU. That worked out well.
so many things are different about your electoral system that i can't really understand the arguments people are making. like, over here i really think the democratic mainstream would have rallied behind sanders (grudgingly) if he won the nomination, but that doesn't necessarily make them better than the labour people who want to leave and form their own party, it could just be the reality of our system where that course of action is basically insane. in britain it seems like an actual viable thing. and then what would this new party do if not coalition with the rump labour party? although i guess at that point they'd be the leader of the coalition and could choose the PM...?
Quote from: osmanthus on September 24, 2016, 08:14:25 PMIt means a minority of the electorate (ie: a majority of Labour party members) are in love with him, but most of the UK wouldn't touch him with a barge pole.ok but you also just posted something saying that a majority of his supporters think he's bad. that's what doesn't make sense, otherwise "the party base loves him but the nation at large doesn't" is a familiar concept.i also don't understand the significance of this when it comes to how shit will go down in parliament. as i understand it the PM is just the leader of whatever coalition has the most sitting legislators. so he doesn't actually have to "run for election" to the PM spot like a US presidential candidate.
It means a minority of the electorate (ie: a majority of Labour party members) are in love with him, but most of the UK wouldn't touch him with a barge pole.
so you think that the primary barrier to his policy getting enacted is his personal lack of ability as a politician and not the recalcitrance of the rest of the party to his policies? would a split by the 80% lead to a party that has mostly the same policies but a better leader?
Quote from: the idea of Harambe on September 25, 2016, 07:42:17 AMso you think that the primary barrier to his policy getting enacted is his personal lack of ability as a politician and not the recalcitrance of the rest of the party to his policies? would a split by the 80% lead to a party that has mostly the same policies but a better leader?Well, part of it is that he's surrounded himself with ideologically pure but functionally illiterate jackasses, and partly he's surrounded himself with people who are unpredictably racist, antisemitic, and xenophobic, and many have been embroiled in scandals and Corbyn is personally unwilling to throw these degenerates under a bus in order to enact the reforms people voted for. Like, I'm sure we could blame establishment politics for some of his failures, but you can't blame establishment politics for all of them. At some point you need to look around and say "yeah this guy is a crap politician"
Most MPs know that Corbyn's policies and arguments go down badly with their voters. If Corbyn could provide them with some really good arguments and really good, well costed policies, and could somehow manage to convince the country that he wasn't just a hairy lefty terrorist sympathiser, maybe they'd have a chance. But he is a hairy lefty terrorist sympathiser so that's a hard sell.