That's certainly also my experience of the views of many British people living in areas of high immigration.

It's an ever increasing problem for Labour that many of their 'natural' voters feel betrayed by the party, exacerbated by the invasion of Iraq and the lack of a strong credible leader able to convince voters that they can trust the party again.

"Strong credible leader"=corporate dick-sucker.

Fyp.

It's my understanding that those views are highly inversely correlated with with the amount of immigrants in a particular area. Could be wrong though.

Yes and no.

In the small number of areas of London where one nationality is overrepresented at the expense of diversity, the indigenous (and now minority) community tends to be quite vocal in its expression of dissatisfaction, but in my experience this rarely happens in areas with a high density of immigrants of different nationalities (which is your point).

FYP.

You should explain what you mean by 'even Jews'.
The absurd accusation of anti-semitism in Labour has 2 purposes: one is to protect the pro-Israel lobby in Labour by confusing opposition to the state of Israel with hating Jews, which are obviously 2 entirely different things. The argument doesn't stand up to even the most lightweight challenge (eg. Do I hate Christians because I think Britain is wrong to bomb Syria? Etc..) but that of course isn't the point, the point is to shut down debate so the world can continue to ignore the immoral crimes of Israel against the Palestinians, and Western (led by the US) support for these crimes.
The second reason is to undermine Jeremy Corbyn 'from the left' by associating him with racism. The whole thing is perverse.

So perhaps you should explain your view on the matter fully.

http://www.labour.org.uk/page/-/part...rtiInquiry.pdf

lol anyone who genuinely believes the Labour party is more racist than the Tory party.

Quite the goalpost shift. All political parties have issues with prejudice against particular groups, whether that be Jews, Muslims or homosexuals.

Therefore, attempting to plant a flag in the moral high ground by suggesting any of the major parties are better/worse than any other is lol*, and suggests a severe lack of critical thinking and cognitive bias.

This re-inforces what I am saying. The Israeli lobby in the Labour party conflates criticism of Isreal with being anti-semitic. And these voices are represented in the report. There is no reference by the way to any anti-semitic language or behaviour, except the term 'zio' which is neither anti-semitic or offensive.
There are long standing Jewish activists in Labour on both sides of the fence (apartheid wall...), those who support Israel claim there is anti-semitism in Labour, those who support the Palestinians claim otherwise. Which shows that regardless of who is right or wrong, the debate is about the politics of Israel-Palestine and has nothing to do with hating Jewish people.

You're wrong. The Tories are historically racist and homophobic, eg. 'vote Labour, get a ****** neighbour', section 28 banning discussion of homosexuality in schools. Labour is historically anti-racist, eg. Jewish Labour MPs, fighting Mosley's fascists.

Are you twelve or something? Maybe you should go back to posting memes and one-word posts if this is the sort of horse**** you come out with.

I think this is largely right (though obviously a huge generalisation) & it’s clearly not just a UK phenomenon. I think it’s largely a response to the economic crisis ( to a lesser extent terrorism and refugees) I think there could be a counter to this if Labour was able to focus the debate on the economic situation and the fact that people are getting poorer.

Its extraordinary how austerity and cuts are barely on the agenda

I agree that the level of antisemitism in Labour is exaggerated by political opponents - but I think there's a tendency on the left to be careless about using offensive language which just gives opponents ammunition - It's the "we know we're not racist so no-one should question us " attitude - which comes across as arrogant.

So for instance unless you're someone who is being called a "zio" it's not for you to say whether or not it's offensive

Actually just assuming the bolded suggests a vacuum of critical thinking.

Also I was not shifting any goal posts, just making a tangential throw away observation.

Fair points. However, for instance imo it was wrong for the Labour leadership to distance themselves from Ken Livingstone. I understand why they did it and this is a good example of their pragmatism, rather than ideological purity.

The word 'zio' was mixed in with 'paki' though. This is why racism and racist language has to be considered in context. Otherwise you end up drawing ridiculous conclusions like 'you're being racist against white people', which removes racist language from actual racist practices such as economic inequality, educational disadvantage etc.

If there is to be an inquest into oppressive language and behaviours on the left, it should be around sexism. This of course doesn't fit with a political aim so the right don't care to make an issue of it.

They don't need to distance themselves, he's never been a loyalist. He did stand for Mayor as an independent against the official Labour candidate remember.

This election is so ****ing depressing. Do something, entertain me.

howsabout:

Tony Blair: "Labour can win at any point..."

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...rexit-election

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7709961.html

It is very difficult to see what could have changed public opinion that much given the wall-to-wall sycophancy exhibited towards the government by every major media outlet. I suspect that the 20-point leads were simply due to poor over-corrections in methodology from 2015 and the polls now reflect the actual situation.

In the absence of any other significant event I'd expect the actual poll to be roughly where it was in 2015 with a small but significant improvement for the tories. The tories and the LD's should gain seats from what seems to be a collapse in the UKIP vote.

Struggling to see how the Lib Dems could ever benefit from a collapse in the UKIP vote

Because a significant share of the vote these parties receive is a "none-of-the-above" type protest vote or a rejection of the incumbent MP. In my constituency UKIP received the exact same share of the vote (22%) that the LD's achieved in 2010 simply because they displaced them as the the anti-labour party.

Despite what you may read on this forum most people do not know or care what a party's policies are, they are mostly just driven by visceral hatred and a pathetic and impotent desire to throw a spanner in the works.