Should I vote Labour

Oh dear me, another potentially interesting discussion polarised.
thatbags - thanks for your contributions here.

Beameupscottie - I dislike the phrase Reds because it conjures up the old Reds under the Beds phrase from the USA in the 50's, where perfectly reasonable people were seen as threats to the good old USA or even Hollywood. Having said that - I'm with you in agreeing some folks need to 'ease off the throttle and remember there are six weeks to go'.
I've already said I'll vote Labour to support our sitting (very good) MP. If I didn't live in this constituency I'd be very tempted to vote LibDem - aargh. How could that happen when that party in coalition voted in support of the Bedroom Tax. Sometimes, we have to vote least worst. If I lived in a Tory - Lib Dem marginal, I would not vote Labour at the upcoming election, I'd hold my nose, hope for the best and vote LibDem.
I have friends who vote tory - they aren't horrible people, they are what used to be known as compassionate conservatives. I have many friends who vote Labour, Lib Dem or Green. Surely, we want to live in a society where our social and political beliefs are free. I could not vote for this government because of its assault on public services, it's general belief system. However, I know some perfectly pleasant, compassionate people who would. I'd hate to lose our relationships by rejecting their right to reach their own conclusions. Fence sitting? or wot???

No, not fence sitting Ism, it's having respect for people and accepting their vote is their choice.

The title of the thread is "Should I Vote Labour". The wording is a device to stimulate debate and is intended to elicit meaningful political responses. It was, I think, intended to evoke responses such as "Yes, you should vote Labour because ...." or "No, you shouldn't vote Labour because ..."

If someone comes on and says "it's a stupid thread", or "nobody tell me what to do" then it seems to me perfectly natural to respond that they need not contribute.

I would say that most people on both "sides" of the debate have tried to provide reasons for their political stance. However, a few seem unable to do this and prefer to use lazy stereotypes, such as "Reds", or to call those with whom they disagree aggressive and pitful.

anniebach I don't see your contributions as "debating" because all you do is continually attack Corbyn, saying he is dishonest, hypocrital, etc., and say how brave, honest and courageous you are, unlike - it is implied - those who disagree with your analysis.

Ana What do you mean, "nobody is allowed to disagree with you" [*durhamjen*]. Many people have disagreed with her and are perfectly able to make the same number of contributions to the debate as she does.

No roses, your comment was general but I can only reply for myself.

All these why should I vote blah blah started by ww will just all become a way for the left wing on GN to state their reasons why they hate the Tories ( which I have already heard on here, many many, wearying times).

Oh, you know very well what I meant Eloethan. It's an expression, not necessarily to be taken literally.

Ana No, I don't know what you meant. durhamjen has been told she is monopolising the debate but she can only do that if nobody else is contributing to it - that's not her fault.

Plenty of people have posted since this thread started. But as usual durhamjen takes over.

Eleothan, I have said nothing of Corbyn which is untrue. There is such hypocrisy on these political threads, the fsr left group can say what ever they choose about leaders of Tories, UKIP, Libs but post truths about Corbyn and out come the firing squad. Right. Corbyn has lied, betrayed and is the worse leader the Labour Party has had in living memory . He ignored the EJ referendum and now ignores Brexit

Indeed he is ab ( the worse Leader the Labour Party has had in living memory)
And that will shortly be demonstrated at the GE.Unfortunately not much the LP can do about it unless he does the honourable thing and steps down, which doesn't seem likely.

I have said nothing of Corbyn which is untrue.

The problem is it is what you believe to be true - an opinion not a fact - AB. Others have a different opinions or an open mind but you believe only you know the truth. That is not an argument.

Yes, Petra, but it does no good just tory-bashing. They need to consider cause and effect.
If the tories win it will be in part because of the mess Labour has got itself into by allowing the Unions to dictate who runs the Party thereby turning it sharply to the left and installing a useless man as leader (if you want to talk coup, there's your subject).
They need to take this to account and find someone who can win the trust of the voters.

Not easy Beam as the members of the LP have been infiltrated by the far left who will only choose far left candidates.The MP's would have to get together to try and defuse any far left candidate from standing.A problem!

Another thing. Russia repudiated Communism; the French left has been defeated in their Election; and just the word Socialist drives terror into the hearts of Americans. So Britain is just following the trend - Socialism is not popular at the moment and I believe it is down to the fear of mass migration to the Western World. Saw a car with two stickers yesterday - one said "Let in all refugees" and the other placed alongside said "vote Labour".

Truth I have said about Corbyn

He did run a campaign from his home to get expelled militants back into the party and at the same time grassroots members were fighting back from the disasterous defeat of 1983, caused by the fears of voters of the unions and the growth of the far left,

He did lie about having to sit on the floor of the train because there was no seat

He made a mockery of the anti semitism enquiry by appointing a very new party member to carry out the enquiry and once she announced her findings she was moved to the Lords .

He did support the IRA and he did invite sin fenn leaders to Westminster shortly after the Brighton bombing,p, no regard that there were grieving members of the house,

He did call .hamas his friends but when questioned in this by the select committee he said - with hindsight I was wrong,

He did refuse to appear in tv debates during the referendum and .jen confirmed this was because he was against Camerons policies, yet no problem with the IRA or Hamas yet he claims to be a pacifist

I have never posted a lie about him

So
Eleothan, you may not like this posted , you are free to ignore it just as I am free to post what is true

Momentum is getting their members into the NEC. They hope to do this so they change the voting rules for leader and reduce the number of labour MP's who can vote , this will enable Corbyn to remain leader or pass the leadership to another militant. Not forgetting he has the full support of McClusky

skwawkbox.org/2017/04/29/labour-slashes-tory-lead-by-a-further-five-points-in-two-days/

Found a nice, accurate, and beautifully piss-taking description of what happens on GN political threads. They are subjected to the "suffocating 'tolerance', stifling certitude, implacable self-righteousness, totalitarian 'liberality', and mimsy authoritariansim" of a very few posters who seem to think themselves the 'real' left-wing of life and, of anyone who disagrees with them in a the smallest degree, as right-wing, unreasonable and ignorant.

I think you should get out more Anniebach. It can't be good for you sitting round convincing yourself that Corbyn is spawn of the devil.
Most "Labour supporters" are focussing on the need to prevent Theresa May from turning this country into one with a mediocre NHS, little support for vulnerable people and ever decreasing support for state schools. Whether they voted for the current leader or not they are focussing on the much worse scenario of five years of right wing austerity, combined with the prospect of leaping off an economic cliff in a couple of years time.

Brilliant thatbags Don't know where you found it but it's spot on!

But it's just insults really isn't it rosesarered - it's not debate. When you have nothing of any substance to say, just call people names.

Very insulting, personal and rude and, I would have thought not helpful to a discussion on policies and parties.

Very much like May - just keep saying, over and over again, "Strong and Stable", "Coalition of Chaos", A red white and blue Brexit" - and, when questioned about how current policies are affecting the country and what your future planning is - hurl abuse at your political opponents.

To say that education, the NHS, care for the elderly, etc., etc., have always been in a terrible state and is not the result of Conservative policies is just not correct. All the research and figures indicate otherwise.

Debate?

Telling posters to piss off, shut up, leave this thread, change the record, etc is debate?

Surely, very insulting , personal and rude ?

Reading the posts of the far left group here is getting so like reading George Galloway comments

The description given by thatbags is not from GN or any GN posters.Probably about social media as a whole.So, it's not personal at all.

I have put a challenge on the "Should I vote Conservative" thread and thatbags comment just confirms it is something the Tory supporters could not manage.

How about this T May supporters - write a short post defending the endlessly repeated "strong and stable leader" right-wing propaganda. Make it one focussing on Theresa May's character and abilities, not on deflecting.

*If you mention Jeremy Corbyn or any other politician you disqualify yourself.