To wonder why MN is so left wing/liberal?

[cdvegan2023]

MN hates Brexit, the tories, pink toys, violent video games... you get the idea. But in real life most women don't mind buying gender specific toys/clothes and the election/brexit female vote was about 50/50. So what makes this place 90% lefty/lib when general society is either split or completely reversed?

Been a Labour voter all my life. Until JC. Don't therefore need to be convinced about the need for a Labour Government. Just not one with JC at its head or anywhere near anything important.

I'd be happy to consider voting Labour again should it rid itself of Mr Corbyn

Well he's no spring chicken. I think any discussion of Labour must have at least a measure of "post-Jeremy" talk.

Ageist, now? Nice.

Hey, he's a bit younger than me I think. I had to hold back from calling him a snowflake.

Ah, now, I don't think May is- a good person.

And I think that anyone voting against their principles because they don't like a party leader is a fool. Just like the people who voted either way in the EU referendum because they didn't like it the individuals campaigning. They were fools too. The picture is much bigger than that.

"Ageist, now? Nice"

Remember earlier when I talked about pragmatism in politics?

Foot was an old git but an decent intelligent man who, sadly couldn't lead.
Corbyn, young or old, is an intellectual lightweight and a poseur (that word again, look it up).

That's worrying, Bertrand, because although I often profoundly disagree with her, I think May at least tries to be a good person - but has dangerous flaws like not in her heart believing in democracy.

But even trying to be a good person marks her out from many of her senior party members. Don't really see Boris Johnson, Michael Gove, Priti Patel, Chris Grayling or Grant Shapps aspiring to goodness...

Johnson, Gove et al are just about themselves and their self aggrandisement. They should be easy to unseat in government. But the alternative is too ghastly to imagine unless Labour dumps JC and his followers from the front bench.

I was prepared to give May the benefit of the doubt on the good person thing, and accept that she was just a puppet sacrificial leader and it wasn't her fault. But I don't think a good person could have dealt with the Grenville Tower immediate aftermath the way she did.

She dealt with the dreadful events quite terribly.

Yes, but this "austerity" - and that word is misused - it has been pointed right straight at those in society least able to bear it. It is ideology. A stick with no carrot.

And the effects are real.

"But the alternative is too ghastly to imagine unless Labour dumps JC and his followers from the front bench"

What do you think will happen?

Who does everyone want to see leading the Labour party?

What I hope will happen is that the parliamentary party will find some way of unseating this person (tricky with the current arrangements) and replace him with more centrist leadership. Not beauties any of them but better than this crew.
But we are stuck with Brexit so I doubt anything can be settled until that omnishambles has played out and we are stuck in the cold with no mates.

Starmer, Cooper or Benn .

Was that comment aimed at me GoingIn?

Keir Starmer.

"But the alternative is too ghastly to imagine unless Labour dumps JC and his followers from the front bench

What do you think would happen?

What would happen is the emergence of a more centrist group. Unpalatable to a few, more palatable to the electorate. Instead of the other way around.

If Corbyn became Prime Minister it would be back to the seventies (which I am old enough to remember) for the economy, involvement of the state for the sake of state involvement, until he and his crew went off in a huff blaming everyone else.

involvement of the state for the sake of state involvement

Well considering the financial crash - could it be argued that just maybe those people need to be watched a little closer?

"involvement of the state for the sake of state involvement"

Instead of a rolling back of state involvement for the benefit of the rich?

Involvement of the state for the sake of state involvement - is the idea of democratic influence in the market place genuinely more terrifying than that of utterly unaccountable oligarchs?

I mean, Corbyn seems to be a well meaning puppet for a concerningly radical movement, but even he would be better than the leeches currently placing profit over justice.