Join the Labour Party and save your country!

Stevo_666

Ballysmate wrote:

JC banging on about the miners strike 30 odd years ago. Who says he isn't stuck in a time warp?
Vote Corbyn for leader.

Nobody has asked me for another £25 so I reckon I get another go.

cycleclinic

he'll win again the left is eating itself again. The only thing that will stop the tories being reelected in a landside is a civil war in the tory party and the emergance on a new party. Feeling unrepresented all over again. nothing new in that though.

Giraffoto

The news today is that over 100,000 people have joined the Labour Party and handed over £25 for the privilege of voting (and I still can't express how un-left wing paying for your vote is). Do you think they've considered just piling some of that into a suitcase and offering it to Jeremy in return for resigning?

tangled_metal

You are kidding right? Every time there's a leadership contest in the Labour party with gc standing you get a huge increase in people paying to vote.

It's a money earner folks pure and simple. GC has turned the Labour party into a money making machine. They tested the water with £3 last time now they're charging £25 and still got more paying up than last time.

My only.concern is greed. Will they try to increase the £25 fee the next time they have a leadership contest.

Put it into context, more people have signed up and paid £25 than are registered members of the Tory party! It's just a shame with JC as leader that pot of money is a waste as a fighting fund for the GE.

One last question, are these new members/supporters representative of labour constituencies, especially those in northern England? Their last stronghold (apart from perhaps Wales) and I think these new supporters are a different breed so there may be some interesting times next GE in northern England.

ballysmate

Yes they may be a different breed. People from Momentum may have a different take on what constitutes electioneering.
But that is the problem for Labour, to win the country they have to win Middle England. Momentum and Jezza have no chance of that have they?

slowmart

JC is a protestor, not a politician.

However he's launched his campaign for the leadership contest today and I'm struggling to remember Jezza campaigning to stay in the referendum. Let's see if he puts more effort or creates more impact with his personal campaign.

Labour are unelectable which means no effective pressure on the Tories but they'll still implode at some point with a majority of 12. Far too many nutters and nasty little fucca's like leadsom, gove, Boris to disturb any new found equilibrium.

tangled_metal

The biggest problem I have with JC is Diane Abbott. They kind of come as a package.

Let me explain, every time anyone criticises JC he doesn't defend himself but out congress DA on any programme that'll have her to attack his detractors. She used to be quite reasonable and a good talking head with Portillo any the newspaper man Andrew Neill. Now I find her arguments and debates confusing or just wrong/wrong headed. Anything related to JC and she's completely blind to his negative points. She's really starting to annoy me not least because she's starting to get a bit nasty with it in a way I've not seen from her before.

Stevo_666

Tangled Metal wrote:

You are kidding right? Every time there's a leadership contest in the Labour party with gc standing you get a huge increase in people paying to vote.

It's a money earner folks pure and simple. GC has turned the Labour party into a money making machine. They tested the water with £3 last time now they're charging £25 and still got more paying up than last time.

My only.concern is greed. Will they try to increase the £25 fee the next time they have a leadership contest.

Put it into context, more people have signed up and paid £25 than are registered members of the Tory party! It's just a shame with JC as leader that pot of money is a waste as a fighting fund for the GE.

One last question, are these new members/supporters representative of labour constituencies, especially those in northern England? Their last stronghold (apart from perhaps Wales) and I think these new supporters are a different breed so there may be some interesting times next GE in northern England.

Apparently they have made around £4.5m from this little stunt.

£3 was OK but if they asked me for £25 then I wouldn't pay. More than they deserve tbh. Although I have heard that the party is in 'financial difficulties' so this might be a forced action.

tangled_metal

Still a nice little earner for them. Who will challenge him next time? I mean when they next need a cash injection. Cynical? Me or the Labour party? Both!

ballysmate

Tangled Metal wrote:

The biggest problem I have with JC is Diane Abbott. They kind of come as a package.

Let me explain, every time anyone criticises JC he doesn't defend himself but out congress DA on any programme that'll have her to attack his detractors. She used to be quite reasonable and a good talking head with Portillo any the newspaper man Andrew Neill. Now I find her arguments and debates confusing or just wrong/wrong headed. Anything related to JC and she's completely blind to his negative points. She's really starting to annoy me not least because she's starting to get a bit nasty with it in a way I've not seen from her before.

What???

tangled_metal

On that Andrew Neill programme with Portillo. Those 3 worked well, dynamics worked for a political chat show. I doubt politically we'd agree but at least Portillo and Neill kept her this side of wacko. P.S. I consider myself to be on the sane side of that scale, but I could be wrong.

mrfpb

Tangled Metal wrote:

Still a nice little earner for them. Who will challenge him next time? I mean when they next need a cash injection. Cynical? Me or the Labour party? Both!

What's so objectionable about charging a membership fee to be part of the organisation. And why would £25 be considered too much. It's only because they took the daft step of letting so many people vote for a £3 contribution. That policy attracted lots of half hearted supporters and mischief makers that the £25 fee would have put off.

On the subject of a split, apparently the party with the most MPs will be the official opposition and will get all the funding and civil service support that goes with that role. So the moderate Labour MPs could still have a decent shot at making a go of it if enough of them leave together. Which is inevitable if Corbyn wins and throws every seat open for selection - they won't hang around to be replaced by Momentum candidates.

tangled_metal

There is no problem with charging £25, my point was that this is the second leadership vote in about a year and one the is expected to result in no change at the top. This makes me wonder if they were so pleased with the take up last time they thought let's do it again and charge a decent fee. Lets make money!

Very.capitalist of the lefties! I once.heard an argument that the further along you go to one.side of the political spectrum the closer the policies get to those at the opposite end. Far left sound a little like the far right in actual policies. Not sure about that but the Labour party is making a decent pile out of this leadership vote. All to end up without any change, perhaps that's the plan.

bobmcstuff

Tangled Metal wrote:

There is no problem with charging £25, my point was that this is the second leadership vote in about a year and one the is expected to result in no change at the top. This makes me wonder if they were so pleased with the take up last time they thought let's do it again and charge a decent fee. Lets make money!

Very.capitalist of the lefties! I once.heard an argument that the further along you go to one.side of the political spectrum the closer the policies get to those at the opposite end. Far left sound a little like the far right in actual policies. Not sure about that but the Labour party is making a decent pile out of this leadership vote. All to end up without any change, perhaps that's the plan.

I think that's giving them way too much credit, myself...

tangled_metal

Turning nasty I think. Momentum or other Corbyn fans seem to be up to no.good. Plus I think something has happened in parliament too. Not got the full story but something about the parliamentary office of a Labour MP has been entered by someone without the right to do so. You cannot enter an MPs office without his/her permission or a search warrant. There's allegations been made about it but I don't one what. Heard some pundits talking about it based on newspaper article in one of tomorrow's papers but I didn't hear the actual story.

bobmcstuff

Tangled Metal wrote:

Turning nasty I think. Momentum or other Corbyn fans seem to be up to no.good. Plus I think something has happened in parliament too. Not got the full story but something about the parliamentary office of a Labour MP has been entered by someone without the right to do so. You cannot enter an MPs office without his/her permission or a search warrant. There's allegations been made about it but I don't one what. Heard some pundits talking about it based on newspaper article in one of tomorrow's papers but I didn't hear the actual story.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36877185

I'm not sure who to believe there, the other side of the story makes it sound like she has basically been squatting in the office since she resigned a month ago and the office manager went to check when she was going to actually leave, and she's using that to discredit Corbyn further.

Both could be true to be honest...

tangled_metal

Right. As I said I only heard half the story. Reading that BBC story it sounds like it's anti Corbyn side finding something to use against him. There's just no smoking gun. Interesting office managers for Corbyn and McDonnell. Surely if that room is meant for that shadow treasury position it would be McDonnell or one of his aides would check the office not Corbyn's. However don't they have names on doors to offices? Don't people lock their offices if nobody is home?

Then again on finding unauthorised entry surely you'd check nothing has been taken or planted then make it secure, lock when empty. Report it to the speaker by all means but press? Point scoring that's pathetic smear. Of course how did Corbyn's and McDonnell's aides get the keys to that office?

It's all rubbish going on. Toxic and a good sign Labour is broken as an opposition or serious contender for power.

Stevo_666

Tangled Metal wrote:

Right. As I said I only heard half the story. Reading that BBC story it sounds like it's anti Corbyn side finding something to use against him. There's just no smoking gun. Interesting office managers for Corbyn and McDonnell. Surely if that room is meant for that shadow treasury position it would be McDonnell or one of his aides would check the office not Corbyn's. However don't they have names on doors to offices? Don't people lock their offices if nobody is home?

Then again on finding unauthorised entry surely you'd check nothing has been taken or planted then make it secure, lock when empty. Report it to the speaker by all means but press? Point scoring that's pathetic smear. Of course how did Corbyn's and McDonnell's aides get the keys to that office?

It's all rubbish going on. Toxic and a good sign Labour is broken as an opposition or serious contender for power.

Yep, hard to know what to make of this last little spat.

Although I agree with your last sentence. We've made a lot of progress on that since this thread started

mamba80

The labour party at the mo is a joke, Tories on the run over the brexit vote, their eco policy in ruins, rich pickings for an opposition party you d think? and what do labour do?..... launch a leadership contest and a selection what ever for MP's, i couldnt even be bothered to find out what it is he is proposing.

they are not being an opposition, they arnt even being a protest party, they ve completely let down the millions of people who voted for them at the last election.

tangled_metal

There's been no progress to be had. You started with that so nowhere to go.from there! I'm not going back to the beginning to check that BTW. I want my life back and researching the history of this thread.really isn't worth the time.

Let's just say whether you're Tory or Labour your party will implode from time to time. I'm just.glad Labour has beaten the Tories to it this time.

P.S. I have to a theory that only one out of the Tories and and Labour can implode at one time. Whichever crashes first then protects the other. This theory came from the simple thought "why haven't the Tories started infighting and tearing themselves apart after the referendum?" How did they.change leaders so quickly and cleanly? I went on holiday thinking the new Tory leader was going to be decided in months then came back after 2 weeks to a new Tory PM and the Labour still to sort out their candidates! It's a strange thing indeed, no great Tory bloodletting!

tangled_metal

Didn't Corbyn say he'd use the constituency boundary changes and reduction in the number of standing MPs to put all Labour MPs up for re- selection? Basically back me or I'll use my.grassroots popularity to replace you for 2020 GE!

Tories should be on the ropes and out for a decade after Brexit. They're really a damaged party but Labour manages to gain defeat out of victory. It should be.any half decent MP could win for Labour with the state the Tories.should be in. Mean even Ed Miliband could win 2020 with the Tories Brexit disaster but I reckon we're Tory for the next 9 years.

Stevo_666

Tangled Metal wrote:

There's been no progress to be had. You started with that so nowhere to go.from there! I'm not going back to the beginning to check that BTW. I want my life back and researching the history of this thread.really isn't worth the time.

It's pretty simple. Labour were vaguely credible before Corbyn was elected and now they're not. That's progress given the thread title.

bobmcstuff

Stevo 666 wrote:

Tangled Metal wrote:

There's been no progress to be had. You started with that so nowhere to go.from there! I'm not going back to the beginning to check that BTW. I want my life back and researching the history of this thread.really isn't worth the time.

It's pretty simple. Labour were vaguely credible before Corbyn was elected and now they're not. That's progress given the thread title.

I don't think having one party ruling effectively without an opposition is a very good situation for anybody.

Stevo_666

Problem is, if they were credible enough to be decent opposition they'd be credible enough to potentially get elected. Don't want that.

bobmcstuff

Stevo 666 wrote:

Problem is, if they were credible enough to be decent opposition they'd be credible enough to potentially get elected. Don't want that.

Bring on the one party state!

That's a pretty un-democratic attitude for a freedom-loving Conservative such as yourself, no?

I don't really want them to get in either - I'd much rather the Lib Dems had any credibility ( :roll: ) - but I think this way is worse.

They won't stay in forever regardless, they'll create their own internal crisis and make themselves really unelectable at some point down the line, and if Labour ever put themselves back together (or the New SDP, or Old New Labour or whatever the breakaway would be called) they'll get in then.

Stevo_666

bobmcstuff wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Problem is, if they were credible enough to be decent opposition they'd be credible enough to potentially get elected. Don't want that.

Bring on the one party state!

That's a pretty un-democratic attitude for a freedom-loving Conservative such as yourself, no?

I don't really want them to get in either - I'd much rather the Lib Dems had any credibility ( :roll: ) - but I think this way is worse.

They won't stay in forever regardless, they'll create their own internal crisis and make themselves really unelectable at some point down the line, and if Labour ever put themselves back together (or the New SDP, or Old New Labour or whatever the breakaway would be called) they'll get in then.

Not undemocratic, I'm fine with them existing I just don't want them to be much good at getting into power

No party stays in forever, true.

yertez

Paddy Ashdown and chums are starting an interesting 'un-party'.

http://www.moreunited.uk/

Aims are to fund 'independents' to become MPs , but with a broad brush set of manifesto pledges...
It does address the fact most people are fed up with party politics.

mrfpb

P.S. I have to a theory that only one out of the Tories and and Labour can implode at one time. Whichever crashes first then protects the other. This theory came from the simple thought "why haven't the Tories started infighting and tearing themselves apart after the referendum?" How did they.change leaders so quickly and cleanly? I went on holiday thinking the new Tory leader was going to be decided in months then came back after 2 weeks to a new Tory PM and the Labour still to sort out their candidates! It's a strange thing indeed, no great Tory bloodletting!

The Tories have always been more effective (in my lifetime at least) at changing leader. Before Tony Blair went the Labour party did not have a system in place to unseat an unpopular leader. My guess is that a lot of Tory horsetrading goes on to get candidates to agree to give way. The Tories have always accepted the political reality that you need to be in power to get things done, and their leadership candidates tend to be amenable to accepting a guaranteed (small) portion of power over the risk of going through a leadership election they might lose.

Also the party of government tends to try and do things quickly, as the leadership election is a big distraction and undermines their credibility. Hence the Blair coup was eventually engineered so that Brown stood unopposed and government carried on.

John Major found himself in Corbyn's position of being undermined by his own ministers and chose to force a leadership election midterm just to shut everyone up - but he was sure he would have the support he needed to get on the ballot paper (Tories only require two nominations) and that the party machine would ensure continuity.

Corbyn knew he wouldn't get the nominations he needed (20% of MPs and MEPs) if he forced an election, so he let it drag on. He is relying on the membership not changing it's mind but, ultimately, is causing more damage to the party in the eyes of the wider electorate.

morstar

mrfpb wrote:

Corbyn knew he wouldn't get the nominations he needed (20% of MPs and MEPs) if he forced an election, so he let it drag on. He is relying on the membership not changing it's mind but, ultimately, is causing more damage to the party in the eyes of the wider electorate.

Agreed. But I think JC believes he is returning the Labour party to something the grass roots believes in. In that assessment, he is probably correct. Problem is, that a traditional socialist party is probably unelectable. The more centre leaning Labour MP's either need to convince the membership that what Labour had become is the best for the party or start a new centre party.
New Labour and Blair are considered toxic in many circles but Blairs failure was the Iraq war, not the centrist economic policies which were essentially popular with the electorate.

mrfpb

morstar wrote:

Agreed. But I think JC believes he is returning the Labour party to something the grass roots believes in. In that assessment, he is probably correct. Problem is, that a traditional socialist party is probably unelectable. The more centre leaning Labour MP's either need to convince the membership that what Labour had become is the best for the party or start a new centre party.

JC appears a reasonable fellow in TV interviews and on platforms, but he is the front man for a left wing clique that have wanted to get more influence in the party for decades and are too ideologically hardnosed to negotiate a settlement with the centre left. Threatening to make every MP face reselection isn't a reasonable act of leadership.