Corbyn: Wow, that was fast!

| 37 Comments

An important lesson for citizens in all democracies is unfolding in Britain where Jeremy Corbyn, arguably the most left-wing leader in the history of the Labour Party, is not pretending to be anyone other than who he truly is. Polls are now showing what Britons think of this unrepentant Leftist:

This should be a good education for voters in Canada & America as to why NDP'ers, Liberals, and Democrats pretend to be moderates before elections. Then when they get into power, they claim a "clear mandate from the voters" and proceed to destroy economies and the lives of people within.


37 Comments

"..........as to why NDP'ers, Liberals, and Democrats pretend to be moderates before elections. Then when they get into power, they claim a "clear mandate from the voters" and proceed to destroy economies and the lives of people within."

Hear, Hear - This statement bares repeating, over and over and over.

I firmly believe Mulcair is lying through his clenched teeth about balancing any budget. The line "clear mandate from the voters" is very true.

when you vote for someone who promises to take something from someone else and give it to you, you have a problem.

The polls seem to confirm what I have always suspected about the happy-face fascism of lib/Prog/soc neo-communism - once you strip it of the deceptive emotional veneers (fallacious moral crusades against phantom evils), what you have left is aggressive, bigoted authoritarianism which people of rational self-concern will reflexively reject.

I see that in this popularity poll of an ambitious neo-com leader who shows the naked aggression of the fascist left. Of more interest to me are the minority who will cling to such a Fuehrer-like leader even when it is evident he is of malevolent intent. These are the type of hard core sociopaths, nation-haters and herd animal zombies who would give us another Hitler.

A reverse lesson can be learned as well for Conservatives. You can't be extreme and win. You can be bold and have some big ideas, but all these conservatives that claim candidates aren't conservative enough for their tastes need to think twice.

Exactly! The sad part of the disengaged, not interested LIV voter is that at the last minute they decide to vote and then believing the lies in the few sound bites, commercials, media reports that they actually pay attention to, cast a vote for the candidate that seems to most promise free stuff for them.

*
"cast a vote for the candidate that seems to most promise free stuff for them."

sometimes it's even simpler than that... they vote for the name they're most familiar with. you think corporations spend billions on television commercials because they don't work?

in canada, academia & the media are overwhelmingly pushing a leftist agenda. it speaks volumes that stephen harper has been in power despite this bias. the question is, have the sheeple been pushed passed tipping point this time?

*


-

If we know that socialist policies invariably destroy economies and the lives of so many people who fall victim to those bad policies ... and that they have been tried over and over with same results ... THEN ... why are there so many socialists still around who simply believe that they are right and all that is required is more tweaking more money?

Are they simply stupid? Too stupid to get it?
or
Is there a mental and/or emotional disorder?

I cannot understand why the well-known failure of socialist policies is ignored by so many .... the facts are real but are ignored ... why?

Anyone?


-

Re: Are they simply stupid? Too stupid to get it?

They don't see those as failures.

People know they are smarter now.

I wish e Harper Government would highlight their stewardship of the economy. I don't know if any one else noticed that silly little Trudeau going on and on about how lousy the economy is in one breath and then bleating that it was a good time to borrow money because the DEBT to GDP Ratio is low. I am no economist but I know that a Low DEPT to GDP Ratio is a good thing. That means lower borrowing cost which is a direct benefit to tax payers. So Justin you can't have it both ways.

I did a little research. I found this RBC report. The Harper have cut the DEPT to GDP Ratio by more than a %100. Under Chr├ętien at his peak the Debt to GDP Ratio was 67.1%. Today under Mr. Harper it is 30.7 %. That means that the economy has doubled in relation to the debt. Those are pretty impressive numbers to me.

If you look at the Provinces. Saskatchewan has had a dramatic improvement in their Debt to GDP (%6.7 from 33.6 under the NDP) Ratio under the stewardship of Premier Brad Wall who is a fiscal Conservative. The other 2 provinces that are in good enough shape to earn the highest rating are Alberta(-1.2% under progressives from %-15.2) and B.C. . I am confidant the NDP will probably take care of that good credit in Alberta in short order.

If you look at the other provinces ,especially Ontario, Manitoba and Quebec their numbers are startling . Ontario and Manitoba both had their credit rating down graded in 2015 which translated into a direct hit to the tax payers pockets.

If you want to see the report itself here is the link. It is understandable even to non finance people like me. The Debt to GDP Ratios are at the end of the report. You can track the destruction of the Progressives over time.

http://www.rbc.com/economics/economic-reports/pdf/provincial-forecasts/prov_fiscal.pdf

"If we know that socialist policies invariably destroy economies and the lives of so many people who fall victim to those bad policies ... and that they have been tried over and over with same results ... THEN ... why are there so many socialists still around who simply believe that they are right and all that is required is more tweaking more money?

Are they simply stupid? Too stupid to get it?"

Perhaps, but, its really more disassociative than that.

They blame evil big business for not co-operating with their "noble" platform, and other conspiracy theories that undermined their Great SOciety.

Therefore it comes full circle, big business and THE RICH are always evil for not succumbing to the "noble" wishes of the envious leftists

It's too bad Cameron hadn't been just re-elected. Would have been nice to have a gift like this in 5 years.

And why does Canada always think they need an election every 4 years when the Constitution says 5 years max?

Mulchair has cleverly sidetracked the campaign theme to that of personality. Harper loses on that score. The apparent inability of the CPC to counter this is inexcusable. They had to know it was coming.

Seriously, challenge the Mulchair record in the Quebec legislature. It is one of the worse ran governments in the country and yet this record is not challenged. Why? Harper has no friends in Quebec. Take the gloves off and start punching like you meant it. Press the Dippers on philosophy and they always chirp their drivel. If not Mulchair it will be someone within their party.

The CPC should be putting hard numbers up on their fiscal achievements and what that means to the average taxpayer. Harper has to recover that mantel. Mulchair cannot be seen as Harper with a heart and that is what he is getting away with.

Young Turdeau is a light way in intellect and policy. He talks over both Mulchair and Harper and gets away with it. A scary thought is what his handlers will do with this country if he was ever elected.

"If we know that socialist policies invariably destroy economies and the lives of so many people who fall victim to those bad policies ... and that they have been tried over and over with same results ... THEN ... why are there so many socialists still around who simply believe that they are right and all that is required is more tweaking more money?

Are they simply stupid? Too stupid to get it?"

Perhaps, but, its really more disassociative than that.

They blame evil big business for not co-operating with their "noble" platform, and other conspiracy theories that undermined their Great Society.

Therefore it comes full circle, big business and THE RICH are always evil for not succumbing to the "noble" wishes of the envious leftists

"when you vote for someone who promises to take something from someone else and give it to you, you have a problem"

"Every election is a sort of advance auction sale of stolen goods."

- H. L. Mencken

The election is in one month and I am sure the Conservatives have the largest media buys already set up for the final push.
Right now I think they are just letting Mulcair and Trudeau beat each other up.
Don't get in the way when your enemies are fighting.

Are they simply stupid? Too stupid to get it?"

I propose they are gnostics. That the realm of the narrative, the "spiritual" i.e. non empirical world is more "real" than the actual world. They basically hate their real bodies, the earth, and avoid pain and suffering of any kind. The narrative or story or words alone is enough to operationalize an act. I speak therefore I am.

Very few have had to make a living with their hands, have no connection to the earth, the growing seasons and are illiterate in history. There is no centre to their lives, and no interior life. They can't be left alone in silence for any length of time. They are pagans in truth, and have forgotten the lessons the Jews have taught us.

Just MHO

Anyone who thinks Mulcair would govern as a "moderate" and not raise taxes is not grounded in reality. He is perhaps not as ideological as Corbyn, but is as "etatiste" as Hollande and the French socialists, with whom he has an acknowledged affinity.

Anyone who thinks Mulcair would govern as a "moderate" and not raise taxes is not grounded in reality. He is perhaps not as ideological as Corbyn, but is as "etatiste" as Hollande and the French socialists, with whom he has an acknowledged affinity.

A year or so ago, when our Canadian press was besotted by Justin Trudeau, they characterized Mulcair as abrasive, arrogant and controlling. Now he's "prime ministerial." Whatever works for their agenda.

Re. the debate: Trudeau blustered for no good reason. He was clearly out of his depth.

There are several reasons why socialism has lasting appeal despite the certainty of bad and predictable outcomes:

Tribalism is a natural phenomenon while capitalism was and is a constant revolution against the historical norm of some form of serfdom. Freedom requires eternal vigilance.

Altruism is a strong emotional draw, reinforced by various theologies and one which dovetails with the politics of envy, hatred, and resentment - the pillars of socialism.

Socialism has found a new legitimacy shrouded by the green veil of pseudo-environmentalism where all solutions to mostly faith-based hysteria grow the state while shrinking economies, the people, and their liberties.

The mindless appeal to "moderation" or compromise on all things that attempts to blend virtue with evil while expecting an outcome not resembling evil, particularly when the progressive-dominated culture is continually moving the "centre" to the left. This results in the destruction of principles (and economies) leaving a fog of mush from which an electorate makes periodic choices. The result is (all) political parties vying for popularity by offering shiny "stolen" objects in the brain-dead zone of the mushy middle.

Conservatives (and libertarians) are a minority and only hold power within a context of operating in the mushy-middle and slow decay towards the majority.

The branch of the institutional left that masquerades as public education no longer teaches economics, history and critical thinking, instead parroting green and socialist narratives, leaving its unquestioning inmates defenseless against reality.

Just Google "leap manifesto" to see what the left is really thinking.

It has little to do with intelligence.

Most of the NDP supporters I have ever known in my long life have been civil servants and other Government employees. They are simply voting for the Party that panders to THEM.

It's self-interest,nothing more.

And they ARE smart enough to know we'd have to be in the midst of a 1930's type Depression before any government would lay off any of them,so they vote Dipper,always.

Buy the vote, dear J. Goodness, where have you been?

CT: The CPC should be putting hard numbers up on their fiscal achievements and what that means to the average taxpayer. Harper has to recover that mantel. Mulchair cannot be seen as Harper with a heart and that is what he is getting away with.

They will very soon and started that process with the latest debate, where Harper really zeroed in with factual substantiation for his ideas. Since the progressives use emotion and junk economics to back their case, they now have no choice but to shout him down, and they attempted, with some success, to do so on Thursday night. The problem is the voter soon notices this negativity, which they are sick of, and the non-partisans of them don't like what they see in Mulcair.

On one hand Mulcair wouldn't dare mount an intellectual challenge of Harper's ideas, preferring to use slogans and emotion, so afraid to properly rebut him he can't control his impulse to become offended by Harper's very point of view, so gives himself the right to shut up the incorrect offender, showing great disrespect to the PM.

But, that puts him in a bad light to the non Harper hatred deranged viewer. He's boxed in, don't discuss issues properly, but look bad in the effort to shut Harper's ideas. Sell, sell, sell emotion. It's playing very poorly for Mr Mulcair in my view.

John Chitick. I don't quite share your view that the progressives "outnumber" the conservatives and libertarians. Many Liberals are not progressives, but true Liberals (aka libertarians) and blue Liberals, and when many of them went to Harper in 2011; that will happen again, in higher numbers as Trudeau yanks the Grits even further left. Anyway, society is basically three elements: the producers, the bureaucrats and the babysat. If a party can take two of three they get power.

There's no evidence any progressive party has the capacity to do that at this time and there are few signs of any kind of a united leftist party forming soon. I don't think voters are going to go for it. We're OK, many commentators noted Mr Harper looked prime ministerial, not just because he is now, but also because his opponents didn't.

"... Altruism is a strong emotional draw ..."

Especially when you are presented the idea that your altruism will be paid for not with wealth that you created, but by confiscating someone else's ill-gotten gains."

Shamrock & Chitnick;
Some very interesting points.

Call me jaded but my experience is that the 'masses' really don't pay much attention to the conservative message unless they feel threatened economically. Not a mystery to me that both the Dippers and the Liebels have focussed their campaigns on the economy. Their focus is deliberately fuzzy to prevent close scrutiny on the details.

It takes some persistence and knowledge to understand the Harper message. Top that with a poor job of delivering the message and my concern goes up. The CPC message is top down and the populism of Reform is mostly gone. So who is delivering the conservative message at street level? There isn't even a campaign office in our town this time around. Campaigning should arguably never end between elections as the party tries to expand their base.

The CPC which is supposed to be the party of fiscal prudence doesn't even have a constituency development plan anymore. In Reform days the HO used to send out help to make sure all facets of running a good operation were covered off. That isn't happening anymore to my knowledge.

A perfect stereotype of the ratbag commie wanker. Good luck to you, Britain. Looks like you'll need it.

UK has a Conservative Party, a Liberal Party and a Labour Party. "Most left wing leader": nonsense, Labour was always left wing, except when hijacked by inner-city liberals like Tony Blair's "New Labour". They should have stuck with their own liberals but they wanted to be seen as 'leading the masses'. Now Labour has returned to its roots. Its support depends on how many working class there are. Maybe few now. Big deal. You should be asking why liberals have no support.

That is why the big civil service unions are spending so much to buy anti-Conservative ads and creating astroturf anti-Conservative organizations like the ABC Veterans, they know that there is one government that would cut the fat from the civil service.

I didn't realize that mulcair was such a chubby monkey till the debate. Years of civil servantry has kept him as well fed as alberta s health minister.
All the new broad ministers in Alberta are certainly broad

I didn't realize that mulcair was such a chubby monkey till the debate. Years of civil servantry has kept him as well fed as alberta s health minister.
All the new broad ministers in Alberta are certainly broad

The Lib Dems in Britain have been given a golden opportunity to resurrect themselves from the political graveyard. An appealing leader could viable challenge Cameron in a few years.

I've always attributed the persistence of leftist idealism to their being unable to accept human nature - the idea that we all act in our own self-interest. It's both universal and timeless. Always has been, always will be.

They prefer to believe that mankind is malleable and that with enough education, encouragement - and barring that - coercion, they will act collectively in the 'collective interest' rather than in a natural, individualistic fashion.

This is why the very idea of 'the commons' or things enjoyed by all but owned by none, can never succeed. A person fishing in their own pond will be sure to take only as many fish as will keep the pond 'fishable'. A pond held in common results in fishing as much as possible for themselves, fearing that other fishermen will take more than they should.

Ditto things in common being maintained. Unless someone is paid to do so, most people ultimately feel it's someone else's responsibility and the 'common' naturally declines

Well said.

Hold on a minute. First of all, this is a poll. We all know how reliable those can be.

Secondly, let's see what this is really saying:
* Only 63% of the already-low Labour vote, will be likely to vote for Corbyn.
* Only 27% of Liberal Democrat voters -- the rump left over after most of their voters left for SNP, Labour, and UKIP -- are thinking of voting for Corbyn. This in a party that may well collapse over the next four years.
* 20% of UKIP voters -- only the anti-EU party -- would think of voting for the only other major leader who has been advertised as anti-EU.
* 36% of SNP voters, being former Labour voters -- the SNP being quite to the left of 'New Labour' -- are thinking of voting for someone who shares their views.

I don't discount Corbyn's appeal. But this poll is hardly encouraging for him.

What may well happen is that the Conservatives move further left, effectively destroying the LibDems and allowing the UKIP to grow on their right. We could see a generational realignment of British politics where the Conservative occupy the mushy middle and Labour, UKIP, and SNP circle around them barking furiously. Much like the Canadian Liberal party of the mid-1900s, the Conservatives would become the "naturally governing party" of the UK. Possibly at the expense of losing Scotland, who would feel completely isolated in such an arrangement.

Leave a comment

Archives

November 2016

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30      

Recent Comments

  • antelope: Hold on a minute. First of all, this is a read more
  • otterdriver: Well said. read more
  • No Guff: I've always attributed the persistence of leftist idealism to their read more
  • Robert W.: The Lib Dems in Britain have been given a golden read more
  • cal2: I didn't realize that mulcair was such a chubby monkey read more
  • cal2: I didn't realize that mulcair was such a chubby monkey read more
  • reido: That is why the big civil service unions are spending read more
  • bruce: UK has a Conservative Party, a Liberal Party and a read more
  • mojo: A perfect stereotype of the ratbag commie wanker. Good luck read more
  • CT: Shamrock & Chitnick; Some very interesting points. Call me jaded read more