frankPodmore

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] frankPodmore@slrpnk.net 1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

The blog post does address that point!

I agree, there's some room for manoeuvre, but there are no options with no downsides. Chaminda Jayanetti had a good thread of (left-leaning) suggestions over on BlueSky. And he agrees with you about the triple lock, too.

[–] frankPodmore@slrpnk.net 4 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

They could draw level with Labour, sure. But hypothetical polls like this are pretty much worthless in terms of predictive value.

What this does show is that lots of people, especially young, left wing people, are angry at the government and want them to change direction.

[–] frankPodmore@slrpnk.net 2 points 18 hours ago (3 children)

Late reply to my own post, but I think an underappreciated point here is that people recognise things are really bad, but don't recognise that that means there's little room for manoeuvre.

[–] frankPodmore@slrpnk.net 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Again, I find myself having to explain sentences to you. He has nothing to say 'in this context, about this thing, which is the subject of our discussion' is not the kind of clarification I should have to append to my every utterance, I feel.

[–] frankPodmore@slrpnk.net 1 points 2 days ago (3 children)

The whole premise of our discussion is whether or not he is planning to co-lead a party with other politicians who oppose the Israel lobby! So, no! Manifestly not!

[–] frankPodmore@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Cheers. Obviously there's a case to be made that some people really are globalists (as in, they believe in globalisation) but there are... connotations.

[–] frankPodmore@slrpnk.net 2 points 3 days ago (3 children)

With my mod hat on: Can we be careful with conspiracy-adjacent language like globalists, please.

[–] frankPodmore@slrpnk.net 1 points 3 days ago

It depends how much it ends up involving the pro-Palestine independent MPs, I think.

 

My view on this, for whatever it's worth, is that Corbyn's too old-school to want a proper party that isn't 'a labour party', i.e., one funded and run by trade unions (which is something he and I have in common). If it's not some sort of trade union party, how will it be any different from a version of the Greens, except with no rural appeal at all?

[–] frankPodmore@slrpnk.net -1 points 4 days ago (5 children)

Again, the case is the exact opposite of the one you're making. 'When he starts assembling a new party he knows the news will leak' - so why did he not have a clear statement ready? Because he has nothing to say. He's 'playing open card' but he's incapable of even saying who is putting the party together, or confirming if he's in some sort of leadeship role. Why? Because he has nothing to say.

Frankly, I think Sultana knows that waiting for Corbyn to commit to anything will take forever. She was probably trying to bounce him into taking an actual position and, as most people have found, he just doesn't want to. Good for her for trying something big but, for her sake, I hope this shows her it's time to move on from the guy.

You have got to stop putting this dim, narcissistic man on a pedestal and taking your fanfic about him as reality. The reason he has said nothing concrete is that he has nothing to say.

[–] frankPodmore@slrpnk.net 0 points 5 days ago (7 children)

Again, I'm struggling here, because as in our previous discussions, you don't seem to be replying to the words I've written. I said: 'Corbyn is not co-leader', and you reply, 'Where does it say [Sultana] is not co-leader?'

As often with supporters of Corbyn, I find your willingness to read whatever you want into his sayings a source of frustration. If he is co-leading this new foundation, or party, or whatever it is, why did he not just say so? Why use the passive voice? I suspect the reason he writes these convoluted non-statements - who is 'us'? What is a 'new kind' of party? Who is shaping it? Amongst whom are discussions ongoing? - is precisely to avoid anyone pinning him down to anything concrete.

[–] frankPodmore@slrpnk.net 3 points 6 days ago

Yeah, they did what a lot of the LTNs did elsewhere, which was to rebrand but keep the policies the same. Our car culture remains ridiculous but we're moving against it every day!

[–] frankPodmore@slrpnk.net 16 points 6 days ago (6 children)

I love Voyager, but of all Treks it's the hardest to make a move of. Their whole thing was to get home and... they did! You can't have 'We need to reunite the old gang to get home from the Delta Quadrant one last time'.

 

I think it's probably inevitable that the government will proscribe the group given that they targeted the military (an RAF base, specifically) but I think it's at least worth making some noise about it.

 

Labour's plan to build lots more housing, especially social housing, set out in detail here. Pennycook also did a thread on BlueSky which provides a handy summary.

So, in summary (with links to relevant bits of the thread): £39bn for a 10-year plan, aiming for 300,000 homes of which 180,000 will be social housing. The £39bn includes skills training and low-interest loans for social housing providers.

They're going to reform (not abolish, unfortunately) Right to Buy, so that homes are less discounted, tenants will have to wait longer before they can buy the homes, and those in new homes will have an even longer wait - 35 years before any of those 180,000 projected new homes can be bought under right to buy.

 

Shout out to everyone who wrote to their MP about this. The pressure is working!

view more: next ›