How pissed off with NL would you have to be...

[KeyboardJockey]

except, they havent gone to the right of the tories, as the tories are very keen to point out.

Some of the stuff that NL have done not even the tories at the hight of Thatcher would have dared do especially in the areas of individual rights and privacy.

 

[belboid]

oh come on, thatcher would have done exactly the same and more were they still in power. Anyone who thinks cameron is at all lovely and fluffy is an idiot. tories are fucking tories - ie right-wing scum. Anyone who votes for them is either a selfish oaf or an imbecile (or just rich)

 

[_angel_]

I wouldn't vote at all if that were my thinking - and I probably won't. Less something very exciting happens.

 

[KeyboardJockey]

oh come on, thatcher would have done exactly the same and more were they still in power. Anyone who thinks cameron is at all lovely and fluffy is an idiot. tories are fucking tories - ie right-wing scum. Anyone who votes for them is either a selfish oaf or an imbecile (or just rich)

Up to a point I agree with you. But the orignal question was at what point would (and this is in the absence of decent electable alternatives so some socialist groupuscule whos total membership could gather in a phone box doesn't count) you swallow pride and vote tory? Its something that a lot of people are considering. BTW I carry no torch for Cameron and trust him about the same as I trust Brown. When is the tipping point when you say ' I can't stand these nl scum anymore they just have to go and the consequences have to be dealt with but nl is damaging so much with pfi and other insidious policies that the only way to get rid of them might be a tory government that doesn't have a stonking majority like NL.

 

[belboid]

its not about 'pride' or any such nonsense - its about klnowing full well that the tories would be even worse.

'Oh no, my foots falling off! I know, if I shoot a hole in my head I wont notice anymore!'

 

[untethered]

The Tories can have my vote just as soon as they commit to withdrawing from the EU.

 

[Barking_Mad]

Can anyone point to civil liberties issues and show me that Cameron has said he will undo what Labour has done or not put through what they have promised? As far as I know he's all smoke and mirrors.

 

[KeyboardJockey]

its not about 'pride' or any such nonsense - its about klnowing full well that the tories would be even worse.

A lot of people voted for NL thinking that there would be positive change and there wasn't. I can't blame people who have been disillusioned by NL authoritarianism for thinking that the tories have changed from the past. After all Labour used to be for the british working man rather than the foreign billionaire.

'Oh no, my foots falling off! I know, if I shoot a hole in my head I wont notice anymore!'

Sounds like a new swappie policy to me.

 

[lights.out.london]

Something, somewhere would have to have gone badly, badly wrong for me to consider voting Tory. Ditto voting 'new' 'Labour'.

I don't know who is the worst - the middle class careerist enemies of the working class, dressed up as Labour; or the Tories?

 

[nino_savatte]

But there is a world of difference between going to the centre ground (I'm old enough to remember Foots electoral suicide note) and going to the right of the tories which is what the blairites have done.

Foot's manifesto was a classic piece of bad timing; a decade or so earlier and it might have been a goer. Having said that, when Kinnock became leader, he embarked on a reactionary binge of expulsions, which tore the some of the vital organs from the party. Blair completed the destruction by ripping its heart out.

 

[KeyboardJockey]

Foot's manifesto was a classic piece of bad timing; a decade or so earlier and it might have been a goer. Having said that, when Kinnock became leader, he embarked on a reactionary binge of expulsions, which tore the some of the vital organs from the party. Blair completed the destruction by ripping its heart out.

Agree that a lot of Foots manifesto would have gone down better in the 1950's rather than the 80's. Disagree with you about Kinnock on some points and agree on others.

1. Millitant / other extreme left groups HAD to be removed to make the party electable.

2. Kinnock did damage some of the democratic party structure which Blair exploited. Kinnocks main mistake was not putting in place structures that would keep the nutters from damaging the party but also not putting in safeguards against dictators like Blair.

 

[belboid]

A lot of people voted for NL thinking that there would be positive change and there wasn't. I can't blame people who have been disillusioned by NL authoritarianism for thinking that the tories have changed from the past. After all Labour used to be for the british working man rather than the foreign billionaire.



Sounds like a new swappie policy to me.

Maybe you cant blame such people, but that is no reason to join them.

Labour were never really for the british working man (or woman), they were always just for a slightly less unpleasant capitalism.

cutting off your nose to spite your face is precisley what you are recommending

 

[nino_savatte]

Agree that a lot of Foots manifesto would have gone down better in the 1950's rather than the 80's. Disagree with you about Kinnock on some points and agree on others.

1. Millitant / other extreme left groups HAD to be removed to make the party electable.

2. Kinnock did damage some of the democratic party structure which Blair exploited. Kinnocks main mistake was not putting in place structures that would keep the nutters from damaging the party but also not putting in safeguards against dictators like Blair.

I don't think Militant was that much of a "threat". Kinnock acted because he was getting stick from the Tories and their mouthpieces in the press. The phrase "loony left" still rings in my ears. Yet if you went to those places that had so-called "loony left" councils, the vast majority of the people living in those places saw them as anything but "loony".

I also thought that Dave Nellist was a damned good constituency MP.

Kinnock paved the way for the takeover of the party by careerists and "third way" types. After all, it was under Kinnock that Blair had his meteoric rise from obscurity to five portfolios in the space of as many years.

 

[In Bloom]

its not about 'pride' or any such nonsense - its about klnowing full well that the tories would be even worse.

In what way?

What would the Tories do that is "worse" than what Labour are doing?

 

[belboid]

hmm, well they do have a tendency towards cutting jobs and services - rather more then even NL do. There wouldnt even have been a debate about replacing trident, even smaller rises in the minimum wage etc etc.

 

[Das Uberdog]

You have an unhealthy obsession with the Respect Party KeyBee. Still, scabs stick with their own...

 

[_angel_]

hmm, well they do have a tendency towards cutting jobs and services - rather more then even NL do. There wouldnt even have been a debate about replacing trident, even smaller rises in the minimum wage etc etc.

Correction there wouldn't be a minimum wage.

 

[belboid]

they've said they'll keep it now - tho they obviously wouldnt have introduced it in the first place

 

[In Bloom]

hmm, well they do have a tendency towards cutting jobs and services - rather more then even NL do.

What are you basing this on? On what basis are you so sure that Cameron's Tory party would cut more jobs and services than Brown's Labour party?

There wouldnt even have been a debate about replacing trident

So fucking what? They went ahead and did it anyway, didn't they?

P.s. Take it from somebody who was on it until very recently, the minimum wage is shite.

 

[Das Uberdog]

Minimum wage killed wages for skilled workers and craftsmen. As it's not a living wage, it undercut any decent standards we had before.

 

[belboid]

What are you basing this on? On what basis are you so sure that Cameron's Tory party would cut more jobs and services than Brown's Labour party?


So fucking what? They went ahead and did it anyway, didn't they?

P.s. Take it from somebody who was on it until very recently, the minimum wage is shite.

ffs what a load of bollocks!

If you dont think the tories will implement bigger cuts then you havent paid any attention either to history or to Camerons announced plans.

And we know the minimum wage is shit, the point is under the torioes it would be even more shit.

saying that the tories are worse than labour doesnt mean that one is saying that labour are any good y'know

 

[JoePolitix]

ffs what a load of bollocks! And we know the minimum wage is shit, the point is under the torioes it would be even more shit.

It wouldn't even of existed.

Nor under the lib dems.

 

[KeyboardJockey]

First of all I'm not coming from this from any party political position let alone a tory one. The point is just how bad will NL in all ways not just HR and Iraq get and on how low a turnout will they get their majority from
before people have to think the unthinkable and vote tory just to get rid of them. The low turnout helps the blairites. We have blairism because of voter apathy. We've dropped nigh on 20% over the average turnout since 1959. Bearing in mind that the LD's are more slippery than tories when in local govt although
I've every support for their LGBT policies and I'm friends with a few DELGA people.

I don't think Militant was that much of a "threat". Kinnock acted because he was getting stick from the Tories and their mouthpieces in the press. The phrase "loony left" still rings in my ears. Yet if you went to those places that had so-called "loony left" councils, the vast majority of the people living in those places saw them as anything but "loony"

.


The Labour party was incredibly divided at the time. There were some utter wankstains on the right of the party like Bob Mellish etc and also a number of ultra leftists as well. I agree that Kinnock was getting stick but it was stick that he really had no alternative but to act upon to not have acted would have given the tory right a scalp. It is a shame that Kinnock
didn't deal with the rights as well they were also dragging down the party.


Re Loony Left. This was 90% a tabloid invention. Ironically a lot of the stuff that the majority of reasonable people accept as now as part of life like LGBT rights etc were seen as revolutionary at the time.

I also thought that Dave Nellist was a damned good constituency MP.

And so do I.

Kinnock paved the way for the takeover of the party by careerists and "third way" types. After all, it was under Kinnock that Blair had his meteoric rise from obscurity to five portfolios in the space of as many years.

I would say that Kinnocks biggest mistake was promoting Blair. The Labour party could have modernised under a different leader with out the excessive and moral vacuuity of New Labour. The more I think about it it was a crying shame John Smith died* he could have moved the party away from the disasters of the Foot years and tied up some of the loose ends in party structure and constitutional matters that Kinnock left open for the blairscum.













*<dons tinfoil hat> or was he murdered by blairs supporters / lizards / (insert conspiraloonery here)

 

[becky p]

Last election I had a choice of 5 parties: NL, Con, DimLeb or UKIP. Great menu.

So is that a choice of 5 as in 4 or a choice of 4 as in 5?

 

[TAE]

I'm afraid it's simply not possible for me to vote Tory. I'd rather eat the pen.

That's not a bad idea for a protest - you could eat your ballot paper in front of the polling officials !

 

[northernhord]

. ....to vote Tory?

I've never ever voted Tory, the whole idea sticks in my craw.

BUT, and this is a bit but. I'm so pissed off with NL and their authoritarianism, erosion of civil liberties, nanny state bollocks, licking billionaires arses that I really can't bring myself to vote for them even with a new leader. They are just tories witha a different badge on.

So why not just vote Tory at least you know what you are getting.

don't tell me to vote lib dem as they are scum as well.

With out an effective left opposition in the UK at which point or with what government action would you go 'fuck it I'm voting tory'. I'd vote tory to keep out a bnp candidate or a total careerist wankstain like Sir Robin Wales or a Respectdroid.

So what would your Tory tipping point be?

I,d never ever vote for Tories, I,d go for the Green Party or one of them little socialist parties.

 

[TAE]

Can anyone point to civil liberties issues and show me that Cameron has said he will undo what Labour has done or not put through what they have promised? As far as I know he's all smoke and mirrors.

Didn't they say they'd scrap ID cards?

 

[Azrael]

Tribalism in full bloom here.

"Tory" is simply a brand-name; the Conservative Party's manifesto has lurched about like Charles Kennedy. The party has advocated everything from Disraeli's "Tory Democracy" to Thatcher's bizarre 19th century liberal/puritanism hybrid. Disraeli even managed to shoe-horn increased trade union rights and public spending into his platform.

If the Tory Party advocated policies I liked, I'd vote for them. Simple as. Mr Blair and company have relied on tribal support: so long as it continues, there'll be no shortage of successors.

 

[In Bloom]

ffs what a load of bollocks!

If you dont think the tories will implement bigger cuts then you havent paid any attention either to history or to Camerons announced plans.

History is irrelevant here (and it's not often I say that ).

Labour is not the party it was thirty years ago, or even ten years ago. They're just as happy to implement cuts as the Tories, I'm not convinced by what you're saying at all. Unless you've got anything specific to back up your argument beyond "Well, you know, they're Tories, they're the baddies".

 

[Genghis Cohen]

Tribalism in full bloom here.

"Tory" is simply a brand-name; the Conservative Party's manifesto has lurched about like Charles Kennedy. The party has advocated everything from Disraeli's "Tory Democracy" to Thatcher's bizarre 19th century liberal/puritanism hybrid. Disraeli even managed to shoe-horn increased trade union rights and public spending into his platform.

If the Tory Party advocated policies I liked, I'd vote for them. Simple as. Mr Blair and company have relied on tribal support: so long as it continues, there'll be no shortage of successors.

There is no Conservative party in England, or certainly no party of Conservatives, I can only think of three in the tory party, two of which have lost leadership battles (more than once on both occasions) that party positively abhors Conservatism, they lack the mental dexterity for it.

A 'tory' is someone who only believes in what will benefit themselves at any given point, they're not guided by any principle or ideology, one day they'll support saddam hussein, the next they'll vote uniformly to attack him, whatever benefits them is the correct viewpoint.