DEM not gonna CON dis NATION: Rolling UK politics in the short-lived post-Murdoch era

Shitting on the unemployed is probably the single most popular thing the government is doing right now.

Presumably this both can and will be challenged?

The people who hate benefit claimants that much aren't going to vote labour anyway. Labour has nothing to gain, and much to lose if they support this.

Also getting flashbacks to that 'Thick of It' episode where Rebecca Front announces her support for some hardline government policy in order to show how tough and realistic she can be, when the same time the government abandons the policy because of its toxic unpopularity.

do you think people like this watch TTOI and if so are they oblivious to its central messages?

The people who hate benefit claimants that much aren't going to vote labour anyway

I doubt this very much

Labour voters are all delightful vegan anarcho-socialists who want their unemployed brothers and sisters to have a good standard of living, surely?

Oh no, not the... sarcasm.

your average Labour voter wd have no truck with dead-eyed right wing authoritarians like Frank Field or Jack Cunningham or Jack Straw or Yvette Cooper

Not sure what you're getting at there, but I don't remember any of those having much of a personal following tbh.

and yet they've all been elected to parliament by Labour voters

So was Robert Kilroy-Silk. What of it?

The people who hate benefit claimants that much are perfectly capable of voting labour anyway,

because the Labour vote in 2013 is primarily made up of idiots who vote for the red team because they always have, nostalgists, and over-sentimental Tory wets

idiots who vote for the red team because they always have

Doubt this is much of a factor nowadays.

nostalgists, and over-sentimental Tory wets

Fall into the category of not hating benefit claimants that much, I'd have thought.

I'm not saying everyone who votes labour is invulnerable to the widespread 'fuck the unemployed and disableds' tabloid talk, but I do think they can't be *that* obsessed by it. The only people who would be *actually impressed* by the government shamelessly trashing the rule of law in order to renege on the debts incurred through its own mendacity and incompetence... those are the true hayterz, and they aint going to vote labour.

Have you ever met Labour voters?

'Cos it sounds like you haven't

No, Tom D, I have never met a labour voter in my entire life. I concede that this may cast some doubt on the authority of my pronouncements.

Fucking xpost

That explains: "Doubt this is much of a factor nowadays."

Or maybe you haven't met anyone over 35

"Were you even at the same gig????"

Sure haven't met anyone as tiresome to talk politics with as you. The point, what seems like aeons ago, was that labour would stand to lose much more than it stands to gain from supporting this emergency-cos-we-fucked-up bill. Got a view on that, or you want to carry on with this intersting speculation about who I might or might not have met?

Labour will do a +/- on reaction to any Tory policy and choose between total support and surface opposition with no commitment to reverse. Supporting this law change will not move a single vote from Labour to the coalition so no real damage other than a few Labour voters moaning and voting Labour anyway.

Have you ever met Labour voters?

― Step not on a loose unforgiving stone on a pyramid to paradise (Tom D.), Friday, March 15, 2013 6:00 PM (3 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

'Cos it sounds like you haven't

― Step not on a loose unforgiving stone on a pyramid to paradise (Tom D.), Friday, March 15, 2013 6:01 PM (3 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

ha otm

Before I get drunker and make even less sense, wtf do we even do now? I don't like not voting but there is really nobody to vote for. I suppose my MP is at least on the left of Labour but what is the fucking point. Fuck this country.

Supporting this law change will not move a single vote from Labour to the coalition

True dat. But vice versa is also true.

so no real damage other than a few Labour voters moaning and voting Labour anyway.

Nah, I reckon this could do them small to medium damage at least, just from people staying home when they might have voted labour, or voting for, say greens or yr tusc people when... you get the idea. And just anecdotally, I think that might be a not negligible number of people, although obviously, that's just guesswork atm (and never mind how many fucking labour voters I've ever met lol)

Greens and SNP or Plaid tbf, tusc people not likely to benefit much.

Altho quite interested to hear about this heart of darkness to be found among labour voters that y'all have to share. Your serve, wiseacres.

I live in a Labour heartland and in my experience a vast number of Labour voters are, like their ConDem counterparts, bigoted Sun-reading racist anti-Muslim wankers.

I think there's a segment of labour voters who would on priniple be opposed to dole receivers getting a payout, would maybe even find it cool that it has been suddenly snatched away from them, and would not care about the dodginess of the process.

I live in a Labour heartland and in my experience a vast number of Labour voters are, like their ConDem counterparts, bigoted Sun-reading racist anti-Muslim wankers.

Some people know better than you it seems

tbf several Labour MPs are bigoted Sun-reading racist anti-Muslim wankers

All true but any marginal benefit of doing stuff like this, in terms of votes gained, might still be outweighed by the loss of good will. After the last election Labour's membership, particularly youth membership, rocketed. They've spent the last few years slowly sapping any energy, optimism and trust from people who could have potentially been a useful grass-roots resource when the next election comes.

Long term thinking, you mean? In the UK?

Anyone protesting the bedroom tax today?

Most of my bit of London is on the Save the Whittington hospital march.

The Labour Party has always had a tightrope to walk with regard to a significant section of its core vote that has tended to lean left on economic issues and right on social ones. Benefits, like immigration, are both an economic and a social issue and pretty tricky territory in purely tactical terms (I assume the Labour leadership know where they stand on the moral issue, and then ignore that when making policies).

Part of the problem is that a toxic hatred of people on benefits (particularly unemployment but also housing benefit as well) is becoming entrenched at all areas of British society, *even* among other people on benefits. What's weird in this particular case is that Labour has already drawn a line in the sand on welfare in voting against real-terms benefit cuts. Senior figures in the Labour Party, still think they will win the next election on welfare. I don't really understand this decision even from a tactical point of view, let alone a moral one.

My entirely uninformed guess is that maybe there's some sort of informal Westminster agreement to avoid massive retroactive legal payments wherever possible. See also multiple British Prime Ministers who have never apologised for slavery.

I agree that Labour has a lot to lose among a certain section of voters (in which I include myself) but it's also worth pointing out there aren't many places for those votes to go. The LibDems would have mopped up most of those votes in the past and that's obviously not going to happen now. The Greens aren't organised or big enough. The socialist parties even more so.

The Labour leadership will be more worried about losing support to right-wing parties like the BNP and (especially) UKIP than they will about leaking a bit to any of the above parties. The biggest problem is with core Labour voters just declining to vote at all, but I guess they're banking on enough of those people being so desperate to get rid of the coalition by 2015 that they turn out anyway.

This is not even mentioning the significant proportion of senior Labour MPs who STILL think that any concession to socialism-in-scare-quotes will see the voters rise up and overwhelmingly reject them. And so British politics moves that little bit further to the right...

(All of this is only the case in England admittedly, they could haemorrhage support in Scotland and Wales, but I'm not really sure what the workfare situation is in those places)

Most of my bit of London is on the Save the Whittington hospital march.

Was tempted by this until I saw it was crawling with SWP, not walking alongside those twats

I think a mate of mine's mum is one of the people that got that campaign going (nb not an swp twat)

http://ericjoyce.co.uk/2013/03/a-few-thoughts-re-events/

I have spent the past 12 months making a concerted effort to address the causes of that incident. I do not go into bars, nor drink in my office. Nor do I inject alcohol right into my eyeballs while crying.

http://m.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/16/activist-shocked-conviction-cameron-protest

Just checked this was in England not Bahrain, yes fuck this government.

Carrying on the good work of the last Labour government there I see

Sad but true yes. This lot still make my blood boil on a daily basis all the same.

This is.. beautiful:

http://i.imgur.com/AaLZ7pk.jpg

and the full story:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2013/mar/17/gavin-barwell-date-arab-girls-twitter

The people who hate benefit claimants that much aren't going to vote labour anyway.

You may be interested in this:

Who takes the harshest anti-welfare line? Those on state benefits

whilst i'm inclined to believe it, it'd be more interesting if it wasn't totally anecdotal

Well there's a feelgood story to start monday morning with. No mention of voting intentions there tbf, but who knows, maybe I'm just the king of wishful thinking here, and y'all are right. If that's the case, I don't understand why Labour would have opposed the benefit cap, yet supposedly be supporting this evasive action bill.

My entirely uninformed guess is that maybe there's some sort of informal Westminster agreement to avoid massive retroactive legal payments wherever possible.

Most plausible explanation I've yet seen.

Each placement gains the private company or charity who takes a workfare participant £400-£600. The workfare provider company (eg. A4e) gets a similar slice, too. Why not claw back the placement awards and reimburse the unemployed using this money?