Join the Labour Party and save your country!

pinno

Is it really? Even DC said something along the lines of Corbyn being good for his (The Tory party) but not good for the nation.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36663181

ballysmate

Jez going nowhere soon. His boss says so.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... -mccluskey

rick_chasey

In a two party system you need two fairly decent functioning parties.

surrey_commuter

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

I see a lot of skeptcism towards Corbyn... I agree the British public will probably not vote him as PM, but that's to your loss, essentially because you are a bunch of shotheads... as he is the only Labour (or non labour) figure who stands for the poor people... who believes in better education for a better future... the other twits are just muppets only interested in their own political career. Give me a decent politician with a vision and I would ditch Corbyn, but at the moment I can't see any real contender

Under Corbyn it is OK for members of the Labour Party to hiss Jews. Do you know why ***** hiss jews? it is to replicate the noise of the gas chambers. Jeremy Corbyn obviously sees nothing wrong with this, maybe we are not such a bunch of shotheads.

Don't drag everything into the mud for the sake of it... maybe he is pro Palestine, so what? He's not the only one...

Saying that, cheer up, you have been so freaking intense over the past week, maybe you need a break from politics... it is not the end of the world... it could be better, but common sense will prevail

You can be pro-Palestine without condoning or mocking genocide

You are right about cheering up - got knocked off last Thursday, bike and shoulder fucked. So have been moping around spaced out on strong painkillers.

BelgianBeerGeek

Rick Chasey wrote:

In a two party system you need two fairly decent functioning parties.

Depends where you live. Labour maybe in some places, SNP in some. Or Plaid. Or even, until ther recent implosion, the Lib Dems. Politics in Britain is very local (I didn't even go there with NI).
Hence the problem with the last referendum. The great British public are not used to direct democracy, and for good reason. They quite often give you the answer you don't want.

Stevo_666

Ballysmate wrote:

Jez going nowhere soon. His boss says so.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... -mccluskey

A peace obviously means that Len's nominee stays in power. Can't see this working as if he stays either via some sort of compromise or by winning another vote, Labour are screwed. Hope I get to vote again...

Pross

McDonnell just agreed that he doesn't know which shadow ministerial positions are covered but that 'someone will cover any issues for those that aren't'. They're so desperate they are begging those who resigned to come back.

Stevo_666

Pross wrote:

McDonnell just agreed that he doesn't know which shadow ministerial positions are covered but that 'someone will cover any issues for those that aren't'. They're so desperate they are begging those who resigned to come back.

What a useless shower of s**t.

I'm surprise Len McLuskey hasn't offered to send some of his people to fill in.

ballysmate

Stevo 666 wrote:

Pross wrote:

McDonnell just agreed that he doesn't know which shadow ministerial positions are covered but that 'someone will cover any issues for those that aren't'. They're so desperate they are begging those who resigned to come back.

What a useless shower of s**t.

I'm surprise Len McLuskey hasn't offered to send some of his people to fill in.

Or perhaps, fill them in, according to the bullying and intimidation from Momentum.

DeVlaeminck

Seems to me the PLP are happy to risk destroying the whole party in their desire to destroy Corbyn. I'm not a particular fan of JG but I mean come on if they are going to oppose him do it on policy not ridiculous charges of anti-semitism or that he wasn't pro-EU enough when most of the lost Labour vote probably voted Out anyway.

What would be the harm in getting stuck into arguing over policy and then uniting behind a manifesto or if their conscience wont allow it leave the front benches or even the party. If Corbyn then bombed I'm sure he would then resign the membership would accept a more mainstream candidate next time - and of course any candidate would need the required backing to get on the ballot.

Is Corbyn really unelectable? Yes if the party spend the whole time briefing against him probably. If his policies are so impractical then let's hear it - persuade us that he is an extremist not that he is an anti semite or that he wasn't enough of a euro enthusiast.

Stevo_666

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Is Corbyn really unelectable?

I refer you back to (most of) the last 120 pages of this thread and why it was started...

pblakeney

DeVlaeminck wrote:

What would be the harm in getting stuck into arguing over policy and then uniting behind a manifesto or if their conscience wont allow it leave the front benches or even the party.

Don't be ridiculous!
You will be wanting M.P.s to have integrity next.

TheBigBean

rick_chasey

Funny how everyone says this and yet he doesn't change how he answers.

Getting his message across to the media is a huge part of his job. Arguably the biggest.

pblakeney

Rick Chasey wrote:

Funny how everyone says this and yet he doesn't change how he answers.

Getting his message across to the media is a huge part of his job. Arguably the biggest.

Would it be too much to expect the media to report what is said, instead of their agenda?
Oh, okay. Stupid question.

DeVlaeminck

Rick Chasey wrote:

Funny how everyone says this and yet he doesn't change how he answers.

Getting his message across to the media is a huge part of his job. Arguably the biggest.

But so many people complain about the way politicians act, then along comes one that doesn't act like a politician and everyone says what a fool he's completely unelectable at least in part because he doesn't play the game.

bobmcstuff

Catch-22

haydenm

And that's how we always end up with the government and media that we deserve. If we didn't lap it up then we wouldn't get treated like idiots...

TheBigBean

Rick Chasey wrote:

Funny how everyone says this and yet he doesn't change how he answers.

Getting his message across to the media is a huge part of his job. Arguably the biggest.

Rick Chasey says that Corbyn MUST talk rubbish or face censure

kingstongraham

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Funny how everyone says this and yet he doesn't change how he answers.

Getting his message across to the media is a huge part of his job. Arguably the biggest.

But so many people complain about the way politicians act, then along comes one that doesn't act like a politician and everyone says what a fool he's completely unelectable at least in part because he doesn't play the game.

To be fair, if he came out wearing massive shoes and a plastic red nose, driving a car that fell apart into the commons on a Wednesday afternoon - that would be unlike how a politician is expected to act, but equally not a great idea.

mrfpb

KingstonGraham wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Funny how everyone says this and yet he doesn't change how he answers.

Getting his message across to the media is a huge part of his job. Arguably the biggest.

But so many people complain about the way politicians act, then along comes one that doesn't act like a politician and everyone says what a fool he's completely unelectable at least in part because he doesn't play the game.

To be fair, if he came out wearing massive shoes and a plastic red nose, driving a car that fell apart into the commons on a Wednesday afternoon - that would be unlike how a politician is expected to act, but equally not a great idea.

But he would get more press coverage.

rick_chasey

TheBigBean wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Funny how everyone says this and yet he doesn't change how he answers.

Getting his message across to the media is a huge part of his job. Arguably the biggest.

Rick Chasey says that Corbyn MUST talk rubbish or face censure

I get that it doesn't appeal to Corbyn's socialist ideals - that the press fight for readership and therefore profits, but come on.

The skill is outwitting the journalist to report what you want to say via their petty medium.

I can't do it, but then I don't think I ought to run the Labour Party.

Stevo_666

A damming indictment of Corbyns Labour from a left wing rag.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/life-inside-jeremy-corbyns-paranoid-8349086

Note their approach to the EU referendum...

DeVlaeminck

I don't deny stories like that are harmful but whether they are actually true only those involved really know - does anyone here think our tabloid press is a reliable source ?

Even if there is truth to it is Corbyn not justified in being paranoid about opposition within the party. I still come back to us not knowing how electable Corbyn would be if his own party machinery actually backed him.

OK it could be argued that even if the PLP is acting appallingly that Corbyn should step down because there is no prospect of them backing him, but equally it could be argued they should back him because there is no prospect of him stepping down! If they want to oppose him do so within the rules of the party, do so on policy, don't undermine him by anonymous briefings to the press, leaked stories and staggering resignations to cause maximum impact because all that is the behaviour the public are sick of.

mrfpb

DeVlaeminck wrote:

I don't deny stories like that are harmful but whether they are actually true only those involved really know - does anyone here think our tabloid press is a reliable source ?

Even if there is truth to it is Corbyn not justified in being paranoid about opposition within the party. I still come back to us not knowing how electable Corbyn would be if his own party machinery actually backed him.

OK it could be argued that even if the PLP is acting appallingly that Corbyn should step down because there is no prospect of them backing him, but equally it could be argued they should back him because there is no prospect of him stepping down! If they want to oppose him do so within the rules of the party, do so on policy, don't undermine him by anonymous briefings to the press, leaked stories and staggering resignations to cause maximum impact because all that is the behaviour the public are sick of.

Corbyn has a 40 year habit of rebelling against his party and sticking to his own ideological lines no matter what. The Blairites and Brownites have pursued a path of compromise and bridge builidng in order to get into and maintain power (eg John Smith and Tony Blair both employed John Prescott to build bridges to the unions to get changes such as One Memeber One Vote and Clause 4 through conference). So I think past evidence points to Corbyn as the problem, not the PLP. The sacking of Hilary Benn is a sign of this - minister discusses lack of confidence with leader, leader sacks minister rather than dealing with issues. Tom Watson is elected by the party like Corbyn so Corbyn can't sack him, otherwise he would be long gone by now. However Corbyn is doing his best to ignore him.

Corbyn is either not capable of or not willing to build a united Labour movement to get through the opposition years and present a coherent manifesto to the public.

So he'll continue to get Stevo's vote.

pblakeney

mrfpb wrote:

Corbyn has a 40 year habit of rebelling against his party and sticking to his own ideological lines no matter what. The Blairites and Brownites have pursued a path of compromise and bridge builidng in order to get into and maintain power...

I suppose it depends on what you think is more important, ideology or getting into power. I vote based on manifestos so ideology is more important to me than a rosette doing whatever to get into power. You can vote against ideology, you can't vote against an ever changing wind.

mrfpb

PBlakeney wrote:

mrfpb wrote:

Corbyn has a 40 year habit of rebelling against his party and sticking to his own ideological lines no matter what. The Blairites and Brownites have pursued a path of compromise and bridge builidng in order to get into and maintain power...

I suppose it depends on what you think is more important, ideology or getting into power. I vote based on manifestos so ideology is more important to me than a rosette doing whatever to get into power. You can vote against ideology, you can't vote against an ever changing wind.

Hence my comment on presenting a coherent manifesto. The wider labour movement has issues that they think the electorate wants addressed but Corbyn isn't listening. If a leader is not willing to discuss a wider set of policy issues than his own pet projects then he won't present a manifesto that appeals to a wide voter base. The party has to present a manifesto that at least 1/3 of the electorate sees as better than the other parties. Anti-trident and anti-Isreal aren't going to be enough. But the other issue is that Corbyn is failing to convince the party of his own agenda, and sacking people rather than persuading them.

haydenm

PBlakeney wrote:

mrfpb wrote:

Corbyn has a 40 year habit of rebelling against his party and sticking to his own ideological lines no matter what. The Blairites and Brownites have pursued a path of compromise and bridge builidng in order to get into and maintain power...

I suppose it depends on what you think is more important, ideology or getting into power. I vote based on manifestos so ideology is more important to me than a rosette doing whatever to get into power. You can vote against ideology, you can't vote against an ever changing wind.

To some extent ideology is useless if you never get into power though. I would prefer to vote for a labour party with a chance of getting a majority government than one with no chance of getting in, no matter how admirable the man's principles are. I'm not completely convinced that JC would have been that un- electable if his party had supported him but it's his job to control them, if he can't do it then he was the wrong man for the job

pinno

JC failed to make enough noise in the EU referendum
I don't think he has the strength to unite Labour and I don't think he has the strength to lead a country through the EU exit mire.
He may have (some) admirable ideas and there is no doubt that he has had bad press but he lacks magnetism and leadership.

Stevo_666

mrfpb wrote:

So he'll continue to get Stevo's vote.

Uncanny....